Redshift and time dilatation of Hawking radiation

timmdeeg
Gold Member
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
340
Micro black holes should in principle be observable by emitting Hawking radiation. However, as this takes place extremely close to the event horizon, shouldn't one expect then extreme redshifting (z = 1/(1-Rs/R)^-1/2 -1, Rs = Schwarzschildradius, R = Radius of Emission) and time dilatation?
In other words, shouldn't see the far away observer the Hawking radiation almost 'frozen'? How long does it take to reach him in far away coordinates?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
timmdeeg, It's important to remember that Hawking radiation is fundamentally a quantum process, and therefore one shouldn't try to take a view of it which is purely mechanistic. All one can say is that the vacuum "in" state contains near future null infinity a thermal bath of outward-going particles. For example where are the particles created? In the vicinity of the hole. You can't say whether it occurs on the surface or near the surface - it is a global effect. And in fact the predominant wavelength of the created particles is about as large as the hole itself.
 
Bill_K said:
All one can say is that the vacuum "in" state contains near future null infinity a thermal bath of outward-going particles. For example where are the particles created? In the vicinity of the hole. You can't say whether it occurs on the surface or near the surface - it is a global effect. And in fact the predominant wavelength of the created particles is about as large as the hole itself.
Thank you, Bill, your answer is very helpful. So, if the wavelenght is in the order of the black hole, the redshift is much less significant than I was anticipating it. But there should still be some redshift, as the photon climbs out of the gravity well of the hole, right? Are there any calculations?

You mentioned the thermal bath. Could you kindly explain, whether there is any physical difference between Unruh radiation and Hawking radiation near the horizon?
 
the Hawking radiation is already expressed for an asymptotic observer, so there's no additional redshift
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Ok, thanks for clarifying.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top