Question about relativistic quantum hawking radiation.

  • #26
Nugatory
Mentor
12,987
5,697
Alright so what about the uncertainty of the thermal radiation? Wasn't it postulated that black holes have a temperature?
And also, what's making those particles appear in the first place? I keep asking that.
And I gave you an answer (although probably not a helpful one, I fear) back in #13 of this thread.
 
  • #27
Yes you keep asking that. I guess you didn't like my answers :( .Basically, some of what starts as part of the virtual particle sea that is present everywhere all the time turns into thermal radiation near a B-hole, just because it can.
Hmm, alright well that model makes more sense now so thanks for clearing that up. But what about the other thing I brought up? I still could have sworn there was some theory that described the uncertainty in the manner that I was describing as well as a physicist I talked to who seemed to imply that the thermal energy of a black hole can work like that, that hitting the event horizon is in a way like hitting a window and having the probability get split 50/50, but instead of creating the exact tunneling effect that you see with electrons, they said it actually does create two completely different particles, suggesting maybe the original photon was destroyed.

And I gave you an answer (although probably not a helpful one, I fear) back in #13 of this thread.
So you're saying that the temperature measured of a black hole in Hawking Radiation is the sea of real particles created from the anti-virtual-particle-pair.
So, what does that mean for what I guess is apparently a new hypothesis that arose out of my misunderstanding? I guess it comes down to, can you have quantum tunneling at the event horizon? Can something that passes through the event horizon still be so delocalized that it can still be measured as being outside of the event horizon even though the bulk of it's probability is already inside the black hole?
 
Last edited:
  • #28
1,948
200
Hmm, alright well that model makes more sense now so thanks for clearing that up. But what about the other thing I brought up? I still could have sworn there was some theory that described the uncertainty in the manner that I was describing as well as a physicist I talked to who seemed to imply that the thermal energy of a black hole can work like that, that hitting the event horizon is in a way like hitting a window and having the probability get split 50/50, but instead of creating the exact tunneling effect that you see with electrons, they said it actually does create two completely different particles, suggesting maybe the original photon was destroyed.
I never heard of that. Some citation would be helpful.
 
  • #29
I never heard of that. Some citation would be helpful.
Technically I guess I never heard of it either, I just somehow made it up from misunderstanding the mechanism for how Hawking Radiation occurred.
I guess you can quantum tunnel through a solid wall, why not an infinitely thin event horizon?
 
  • #30
1,948
200
Technically I guess I never heard of it either, I just somehow made it up from misunderstanding the mechanism for how Hawking Radiation occurred.
I guess you can quantum tunnel through a solid wall, why not an infinitely thin event horizon?
Because a particle would have to travel faster than the speed of light to even reach the horizon coming from the inside.
 
  • #31
Vanadium 50
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
2019 Award
25,393
8,564
Time to stick a fork in this one.
 

Related Threads on Question about relativistic quantum hawking radiation.

  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
870
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
31K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
15
Views
3K
Top