| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
30 Mar 2005 05:58:55 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Question regarding Hawking radiation |
Zippy wrote:
Hawking says that a black hole will eventually evaporate.
I think that in the present Universe Hawking's radiation DOES
NOT EXIST, but I'am not sure did it exist or did it not exist
in the primordial Universe "before" when those mass exchage
places (two per "radiation periphery") started to work ?
Hannu
.
|
|
| User: "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \dlzc\ N: dlzc1 D:cox" |
|
| Title: Re: Question regarding Hawking radiation |
30 Mar 2005 07:21:32 AM |
|
|
Dear h.poropudas:
<h.poropudas@luukku.com> wrote in message
news:1112183935.897060.313530@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Zippy wrote:
Hawking says that a black hole will eventually
evaporate.
I think that in the present Universe Hawking's
radiation DOES NOT EXIST, but I'am not sure
did it exist or did it not exist in the primordial
Universe "before" when those mass exchage
places (two per "radiation periphery") started
to work ?
There was a thread in sci.astro earlier (less than a week), where
"dual black holes" (not exactly the same as a classical BH), was
created, did absorb particles, and did evaporate via EM (Hawking)
radiation. Hawking radiation appears to be a vaild,
experimentally reproducable mechanism for BH evaporation. Think
again.
David A. Smith
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Question regarding Hawking radiation |
31 Mar 2005 05:31:07 AM |
|
|
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:
Dear h.poropudas:
<h.poropudas@luukku.com> wrote in message
news:1112183935.897060.313530@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Zippy wrote:
Hawking says that a black hole will eventually
evaporate.
I think that in the present Universe Hawking's
radiation DOES NOT EXIST, but I'am not sure
did it exist or did it not exist in the primordial
Universe "before" when those mass exchage
places (two per "radiation periphery") started
to work ?
There was a thread in sci.astro earlier (less than a week), where
"dual black holes" (not exactly the same as a classical BH), was
created, did absorb particles, and did evaporate via EM (Hawking)
radiation. Hawking radiation appears to be a vaild,
experimentally reproducable mechanism for BH evaporation. Think
again.
David A. Smith
I took a look about that thread you mentioned. I think that
it has nothing to do with Hawking's radiation.
Hannu
.
|
|
|
| User: "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \dlzc\ N: dlzc1 D:cox" |
|
| Title: Re: Question regarding Hawking radiation |
31 Mar 2005 07:11:55 AM |
|
|
Dear
<h.poropudas@luukku.com> wrote in message
news:1112268667.315080.183140@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:
Dear h.poropudas:
<h.poropudas@luukku.com> wrote in message
news:1112183935.897060.313530@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Zippy wrote:
Hawking says that a black hole will eventually
evaporate.
I think that in the present Universe Hawking's
radiation DOES NOT EXIST, but I'am not sure
did it exist or did it not exist in the primordial
Universe "before" when those mass exchage
places (two per "radiation periphery") started
to work ?
There was a thread in sci.astro earlier (less
than a week), where "dual black holes" (not
exactly the same as a classical BH), was
created, did absorb particles, and did
evaporate via EM (Hawking) radiation.
Hawking radiation appears to be a vaild,
experimentally reproducable mechanism for
BH evaporation. Think again.
I took a look about that thread you mentioned.
I think that it has nothing to do with Hawking's
radiation.
Let's see... "like a black hole"
<QUOTE>
This fireball, which lasts just 10 million, billion, billionths
of a second, can be detected because it absorbs jets of particles
produced by the beam collisions.
<END QUOTE>
Gold nucleii have been slammed together before, and the
characteristic particles are well known. Once the energy is
increased to this level, those particles are reduced by a factor
of 10.
"like Hawking radiation"
<QUOTE>
The Brown researcher thinks the particles are disappearing into
the fireball's core and reappearing as thermal radiation, just as
matter is thought to fall into a black hole and come out as
"Hawking" radiation.
<END QUOTE>
I do note they don't discuss (in that article) about measuring or
observing an anomalous temperature increase.
URL:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4357613.stm
Not much more salient to this point in:
URL:http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0501068
.... or the underlying paper.
You are entitled to your opinion.
David A. Smith
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
