Observe Hawking Rad. in Black Hole?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the theoretical possibility of an observer inside a black hole perceiving Hawking radiation as a "black hole within a black hole." Participants clarify that this concept lacks scientific validity, as there is no mechanism for such perception due to the nature of Hawking radiation, which moves away from the black hole. The conversation emphasizes that speculation is not permitted in the forum, and the importance of mathematical understanding in discussing physics is highlighted. Ultimately, the thread concludes with the assertion that the original question has been answered, and further speculation is unwelcome.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hawking radiation and its implications
  • Familiarity with black hole physics and event horizons
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical concepts in physics
  • Awareness of scientific discourse and forum etiquette
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical foundations of black hole thermodynamics
  • Explore the implications of Hawking radiation on information conservation
  • Read the paper "Hawking Radiation and Black Hole Thermodynamics" available at arXiv
  • Investigate the role of mathematics in theoretical physics discussions
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, astrophysicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the complexities of black hole phenomena and the nature of Hawking radiation.

Matthew-Champion
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
Theoretically could an observer in a black hole perceive hawking radiation escaping the black hole they were in as a black hole within the black hole.
Theoretically could an observer in a black hole perceive hawking radiation escaping the black hole as a black hole within the black hole? Also if so maybe that black hole could produce a radiation similar to or related to hawking radiation (Making a strange entangled system for conservation of information.) I do realize this is a bit off the wall.
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
(1) The phrase "a black hole within the black hole" does not even make any sense, as there is no such thing nor can there be.

(2) Since Hawking Radiation moves AWAY from the BH, it would not be visible from inside the event horizon
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Matthew-Champion
Matthew-Champion said:
Theoretically could an observer in a black hole perceive hawking radiation escaping the black hole as a black hole within the black hole?

There is no such thing as "a black hole within a black hole".

I believe that a black hole that is emitting Hawking radiation outward will also be sending some form of radiation inward, so it might be possible for an observer inside the hole to detect that ingoing radiation. But I have not seen any detailed analysis of this in what I have read on Hawking radiation.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Matthew-Champion and phinds
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Matthew-Champion, PeroK, Orodruin and 4 others
Several speculative posts based on misunderstandings of Hawking radiation and meaning of the phrase “thought experiment” have been removed from this thread.

All posters are asked to limit the discussion to the question in the thread title.
 
Matthew-Champion said:
I realize the limitations of what we can observe so this situation I am proposing is more of a base for speculation.
And speculation can be fun but it is specifically forbidden on this forum. Please read the rules you agreed to when you signed up.

Note that Peter corrected me and pointed out that part of Hawking Radiation DOES fall back into the hole. I knew that but forgot.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Matthew-Champion
Matthew-Champion said:
I will do that sorry i just want to get a better understanding of the elements at work in the system so i have edited my post to remove the word speculation. i sincerely want to engage in this topic respectfully and want would like others input in helping me better understand what is possible and what is not in the context of how best I can understand things that relate to how i think.
To be honest, what you're writing is not physics - it's just playing with words. For example:

Matthew-Champion said:
Logically or mathematically I cannot come up with a way of defining an internal barrier from within the Event horizon.

Has no well-defined meaning. There's no physics there to discuss.
 
I understand you point. obviously there a language barrier for me that i cannot cross
PeroK said:
To be honest, what you're writing is not physics - it's just playing with words. For example:
Has no well-defined meaning. There's no physics there to discuss.
I see your point. yes i agree. obviously there is a language barrier I am not able to cross. if you are willing to listen bare with me and i will post the physics that lead me to this assertion. unfortunately for us both my ability to correctly implement and understand maths is pretty bad due to the education i received and i prefer logic. If you don't think this is a good use of your or the forums time i fully understand and appreciate that.
 
Matthew-Champion said:
if you are willing to listen bare with me and i will post the physics that lead me to this assertion

As has already been noted, personal speculation is off limits here. The fact that you think your speculations are "physics" does not change that.

Matthew-Champion said:
my ability to correctly implement and understand maths is pretty bad due to the education i received and i prefer logic

"Logic" without math, at least as far as physics is concerned, is not useful; physics is expressed in math, so if you want to usefully discuss physics, you need to learn the math. Even if the education you received up to now did not give you a good grasp of math, you can still fix that; education is not a process that stops once you leave school, you can always educate yourself further.

The title question of the thread has been answered. Thread closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K