Hawking Radiation from All Gravitational Sources?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between Hawking radiation and the Unruh effect, clarifying that while both phenomena involve acceleration, they are not physically equivalent. The "g" in the Unruh effect represents proper acceleration, whereas in Hawking radiation, it denotes the surface gravity of a black hole's horizon. The conversation concludes that Hawking radiation is not a property of all gravitational sources, as it specifically applies to black holes with horizons. The interplay of infinite temperature and redshifted photon energy near the horizon results in a finite observable temperature for distant observers.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hawking radiation and its implications.
  • Familiarity with the Unruh effect and its temperature concept.
  • Knowledge of black hole physics, particularly surface gravity.
  • Basic grasp of redshift phenomena in astrophysics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical derivation of Hawking radiation.
  • Explore the implications of the Unruh effect in quantum field theory.
  • Investigate the concept of surface gravity in different gravitational contexts.
  • Read about the relationship between black holes and thermodynamics.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, astrophysicists, and students of theoretical physics interested in the nuances of black hole thermodynamics and quantum field theory.

bcrelling
Messages
69
Reaction score
2
I see that the formula for hawking radiation is related the the formula for unruh radiation. The accelleration experienced by a body yields an unruh temperature equivalent to a black holes hawking temperature with an equivalent value of g. The unruh effect happens at all accelerations, therefore is hawking radiation a property of all gravitation sources(not just black holes?)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Matterwave and PAllen
Physics news on Phys.org
bcrelling said:
The accelleration experienced by a body yields an unruh temperature equivalent to a black holes hawking temperature with an equivalent value of g.

This doesn't mean quite what you think it means. The "g" in the Unruh case is the actual proper acceleration of the body. The "g" in the Hawking case is not; it's the "surface gravity" of the black hole, which is the "redshifted proper acceleration" at the hole's horizon. This is not a direct observable the way the proper acceleration of the body in the Unruh case is. So, although the two formulas are related, they are not physically equivalent.

bcrelling said:
The unruh effect happens at all accelerations, therefore is hawking radiation a property of all gravitation sources(not just black holes?)

No. "All accelerations" in the Unruh case corresponds (with the caveats given above) to "all black hole masses" in the Hawking case. As noted above, the "g" in the Hawking formula is the surface gravity of the horizon, so the formula doesn't apply to gravitating bodies that don't have a horizon.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bcrelling
PeterDonis said:
No. "All accelerations" in the Unruh case corresponds (with the caveats given above) to "all black hole masses" in the Hawking case. As noted above, the "g" in the Hawking formula is the surface gravity of the horizon, so the formula doesn't apply to gravitating bodies that don't have a horizon.

What does the "surface gravity of the horizon" mean? If it means the proper acceleration of an object hovering at the horizon, then doesn't that diverge?

Okay, according to Wikipedia, there's sort of a "cancelling infinities" effect going on here. The temperature goes to infinity near the horizon, but also photons emerging from near the horizon and escaping to infinity undergo an infinite red shift. The two effects combine to give a finite photon energy, corresponding to a finite temperature, as measured by an observer far from the black hole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
 
stevendaryl said:
What does the "surface gravity of the horizon" mean?

It means the "redshifted proper acceleration" of an object at the horizon. The easiest way I know of to physically interpret what that means is to imagine an object being held at a constant altitude above the horizon by a rope, with the other end of the rope being held by an observer at infinity. The observer has to exert a force on the rope to hold the object static, and this force increases as the altitude at which the object is held approaches the horizon; but it does not diverge because the force required at infinity is "redshifted", relative to the force required at the object itself. So the limit of this force as the altitude of the object approaches the horizon is finite, and therefore so is the limit of the force at infinity divided by the invariant mass of the object, which is the "redshifted proper acceleration" of the object. The latter limit is the surface gravity of the horizon.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K