Why does the horizon area of a black hole never decrease?

M. next
Messages
380
Reaction score
0
Hawking said that the horizon area of a black hole never decreases and illustrated that in his Hawking Are Theorem:

dA/dt ≥ 0

Does anyone know why is it like that. Why doesn't the area decrease?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
M. next said:
Hawking said that the horizon area of a black hole never decreases and illustrated that in his Hawking Are Theorem:

dA/dt ≥ 0

Does anyone know why is it like that. Why doesn't the area decrease?


According to the Second Law of BH Thermodynamics, in any classical process, the area of the event horizon does not decrease

dA\geq 0

nor does the black hole's entropy, S_{bh} (the BH's event horizon area can remain stable in classical mechanics but will increase 1) if mass is added or 2) if spin or charge are reduced). The second law of black hole mechanics can, however, be violated if the quantum effect is taken into account, namely that the area of the event horizon can be reduced via Hawking radiation.


BH thermodynamics-

http://www.fysik.su.se/~narit/bh.pdf pages 9-13

http://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/6024/1/Deeg_Dorothea.pdf pages 11-13
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you a lot for your reply. I now know why does it increase. You are saying if mass is added or if spin or charge is reduced. How was it known? If this is difficult to answer, then I ask why doesn't it decrease? What will happen if you took the other option IF THE AREA DECREASED what will happen? Will this violate something conventional or what do you say?
 
M. next said:
What will happen if you took the other option IF THE AREA DECREASED what will happen? Will this violate something conventional or what do you say?

Hawking proved the area theorem for a classical black hole (i.e., one in which no quantum effects like Hawking radiation are operating) by a geometric argument which requires considerable groundwork to understand. But the gist of it is that the horizon is made up of outgoing light rays that just barely fail to escape to infinity, and the area of the horizon, roughly speaking, counts the "number" of such light rays that make up the horizon, assuming that they don't converge. Since nothing can escape from a classical black hole, the number of the light rays can't decrease; and Hawking's geometric argument showed that they can't converge. Putting those two things together establishes that the horizon area can't decrease.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thank you very much for putting this in a simple way!
 
stevebd1 said:
the BH's event horizon area can remain stable in classical mechanics but will increase 1) if mass is added or 2) if spin or charge are reduced)

Or if spin or charge are *increased*. (The mass of a classical BH can't be reduced, so we don't have to consider that option.)
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...

Similar threads

Back
Top