How is Hawking Radiation Derived Using the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the derivation of the Hawking Radiation equation using the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. It begins by establishing the energy of radiation in terms of virtual photons, gravitational acceleration, and distance. The relationship between energy and time is derived from the uncertainty principle, leading to a reformulation of energy equations. The average energy of a photon is linked to black body radiation, and adjustments are made to account for all directions of virtual photons near the black hole. Ultimately, the final equation for Hawking radiation incorporates the surface gravity of the black hole, demonstrating a close approximation to Hawking's original derivation.
stevebd1
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
747
Reaction score
41
I'm not quite sure how reliable http://library.thinkquest.org/C007571/english/advance/core4.htm" as a source but I thought it provided a good derivation for the Hawking Radiation equation relative to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle-

First the energy of the radiation is established-

E=m\cdot a \cdot d

where m (in this case) represents the energy of the virtual photons, a is gravitational acceleration and d is distance covered by the virtual photons.d=c \cdot \Delta t

\Delta t is derived from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle-

\Delta E \Delta t=\frac{h}{4 \pi}\ \Rightarrow\ \Delta t=\frac{h}{4\pi \cdot \Delta E}

energy of one photon is E=hf where h is Planck's constant and f is frequency, for two photons- E=2 \cdot hf and the equation for \Delta t can be rewritten-

\Delta t=\frac{h}{4\pi \cdot \Delta E}=\frac{h}{4\pi \cdot 2 \cdot hf}=\frac{1}{8 \pi \cdot f}

and d can be rewritten-

d=c \cdot \Delta t=\frac{c}{8\pi \cdot f}E=mc^2\ \Rightarrow\ m=\frac{E}{c^2}

as previously established, E=2 \cdot hf so m can be rewritten-

m= \frac{2\cdot hf}{c^2}

and the equation for energy can be rewritten-

E=\frac{2\cdot hf}{c^2}\cdot a \cdot \frac{c}{8 \pi \cdot f}= \frac{ha}{4\pi c}The average energy of a photon of black body radiation is-

E_{photon}\ \approx 2.821 \cdot k_B \cdot T

where 2.821 relates to Wein's law for frequency of maximal spectral emittance, kB is the Boltzmann constant and T is the temperature of the black body.

'..this only calculate(s) the energy for virtual photons that are aligned radially to the black hole and that are originated at the event horizon. But all directions have to be considered and all pairs of virtual photons of which one reaches the Schwarzschild radius within it's lifetime can submit to the radiation...' based on this, the quantity of 2.821 is replaced with \pi and the equation is rewritten-

E= \pi \cdot k_B \cdot T\ \Rightarrow\ T=\frac{E}{\pi k_B}

substituting E from above and replacing h with Planck's reduced constant (\hbar=h/2\pi) we get-

T=\frac{E}{\pi k_B}=\frac{ah}{4\pi^2 k_B c}=\frac{a \hbar}{2 \pi k_B c}

which is the equation for Hawking radiation where a would be replaced with \kappa, the killing surface gravity of the BH as observed from infinity-

T_H=\frac{\hbar \kappa}{2 \pi k_B c}Source-
http://library.thinkquest.org/C007571/english/advance/core4.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Hawking's derivation is a little more rigorous, but, this is close enough.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top