# Vaporized black holes?

1. Jan 14, 2006

### varsha

does this mean they really 'stop'. vaporize means 'decrease rapidly and disappear'. i know that. but i just want to be sure. please tell me if a BH really vaporizes. oh,and can you tell me what this means---'A 3 Msun black hole would require about 1063(10 raised to 63) years to completely evaporate'. what does M stand for in Msun?

2. Jan 14, 2006

### franznietzsche

Black holes vaporize when they lose all their mass through hawking radiation. They 'evaporate' so to speak. As they get smaller, the evaporate faster.

$$M_{sun}$$ stands for the mass of the sun, usually in kilograms. In place of the word sun there will sometimes be a circle with a dot in the center, means the same thing.

3. Jan 14, 2006

### varsha

thanks for that info!

4. Jan 21, 2006

### ubavontuba

Is this an absolutely for sure thing? Is there any possibility of error in this hypothesis/theory?

5. Jan 21, 2006

### SpaceTiger

Staff Emeritus
Hawking radiation from black holes has not be observationally confirmed, if that's what you're getting at. However, we have good reasons to think it's correct. Also, some folks think black holes will radiate until they reach the Planck mass, leaving behind a tiny relic. This is uncertain, though, and should depend on our theory of quantum gravity.

6. Jan 21, 2006

### Labguy

Do we have one yet? And/or, where do I find the "most recent" developments? (links?)

7. Jan 21, 2006

### SpaceTiger

Staff Emeritus
I suggest a perusing of the Strings, Branes, & LQG forum. There are a lot of discussions and links on the topic. I'm afraid I know very little about the subject.

8. Jan 21, 2006

### ubavontuba

No, I'm not really getting at observational evidence (that's supposed to come when the LHC comes on line). I'm more inclined to read opinions on the soundness of the hypothesis itself. Is there room for error? Is this room significant? That is to say; if black holes exist, must they evaporate?

I've seen lots of information in support of the hypothesis, but little to refute it. It seems that in the interest of good science, scientists would seek plausible alternatives in order to better verify the hypothesis.

As I recall, Brain Greene had hypothesized that electrons might be nano black holes. Here's an article. According to my information though, this concept isn't taken very seriously.

Here's an article with lots of links to information on this, and here's the official Cambridge Universitiy site.

Last edited: Jan 21, 2006
9. Jan 21, 2006

### Labguy

I'll go there (haven't yet) but I really don't want to have to read any more about Brian Greene and String Theory...:yuck:
I have about everything he (Greene) has published and I wish I could get 15 cents on the dollar for what I spent for them.