Notices
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Black Hole-Particles-Speed of light

  1. #1 Black Hole-Particles-Speed of light 
    Newbie Scientist
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    3
    So has anyone seen Hawking's paper on black holes and things that are escaping from the gravity waves?
    I would like to know if im understanding this right, Since he said that microscopic particles are leaving the hole and light inst since the light is unable to move fast enough. Does this mean that those microscopic particles are moving faster than light and if that is true wouldn't Albert Einstein be wrong since most of his work was around the fact that there is nothing faster than light?
    I hope that i am just misunderstanding this paper since both Albert and Steven are my idols so if someone could clear things up for me I would be grateful

    Thanks,
    Redic


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Redic View Post
    Does this mean that those microscopic particles are moving faster than light and if that is true wouldn't Albert Einstein be wrong since most of his work was around the fact that there is nothing faster than light?
    I hope that i am just misunderstanding this paper since both Albert and Steven are my idols so if someone could clear things up for me I would be grateful
    Nope.
    And yes, you're misunderstanding it.
    Nothing is escaping from the black hole itself.
    What's happening (at least according to Hawking - it's not been observed yet) is that a particle-antiparticle pair are formed just outside the event horizon (i.e. just "before" the no-escape zone).
    One of the pair falls into the hole, the other moves away.
    A high velocity is required (because the gravitational pull is strong), but certainly not faster than light.

    PS it's spelt "Stephen".


    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Newbie Scientist
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    3
    Oh, Ok thanks alot makes more sense now
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor river_rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,497
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    What's happening (at least according to Hawking - it's not been observed yet) is that a particle-antiparticle pair are formed just outside the event horizon (i.e. just "before" the no-escape zone).
    Surprisingly that is the pop-sci version of Hawking radiation but is no way related to what the physics says (not that we really know the correct physics here). Its more a result about smooth pasting QM and GR and then creating a justification post hoc - welcome to modern Physics I guess.
    As is often the case with technical subjects we are presented with an unfortunate choice: an explanation that is accurate but incomprehensible, or comprehensible but wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    895
    Quote Originally Posted by river_rat View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    What's happening (at least according to Hawking - it's not been observed yet) is that a particle-antiparticle pair are formed just outside the event horizon (i.e. just "before" the no-escape zone).
    Surprisingly that is the pop-sci version of Hawking radiation but is no way related to what the physics says (not that we really know the correct physics here). Its more a result about smooth pasting QM and GR and then creating a justification post hoc - welcome to modern Physics I guess.
    I suppose that often the "pop-sci" version, of other parts, of modern science bears no relation to the real facts.
    That is not encouraging when many of us can only understand explanations designed for the layperson.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Halliday View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by river_rat View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    What's happening (at least according to Hawking - it's not been observed yet) is that a particle-antiparticle pair are formed just outside the event horizon (i.e. just "before" the no-escape zone).
    Surprisingly that is the pop-sci version of Hawking radiation but is no way related to what the physics says (not that we really know the correct physics here). Its more a result about smooth pasting QM and GR and then creating a justification post hoc - welcome to modern Physics I guess.
    I suppose that often the "pop-sci" version, of other parts, of modern science bears no relation to the real facts.
    That is not encouraging when many of us can only understand explanations designed for the layperson.
    Are you guys sure? What the Duck said is a pretty direct paraphrase in one of Hawkings books or another. The most recent version of brief history, maybe, or something else but I'm fairly sure I've read it from Hawking himself.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    I am not quite clear about this myself but I understand there are a few models dealing with Hawking radiation and quantum tunneling is involved in one of them.
    The idea is that quantum uncertainty allows particle pairs from inside the event horizon to appear outside of it instead of just from quantum vacuum effects.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    200
    I want to know whether all stars above the Chandrashekhar Limit form black holes. Just a minute back I read that stars which formed just after the Big Bang were massive and exploded in a supernova eventually. These stars were about 150-300 times massive than our Sun. I am doubtful of the fate of stars as per theory.
    believer in ahimsa
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by parag29081973 View Post
    I want to know whether all stars above the Chandrashekhar Limit form black holes. Just a minute back I read that stars which formed just after the Big Bang were massive and exploded in a supernova eventually. These stars were about 150-300 times massive than our Sun. I am doubtful of the fate of stars as per theory.
    What about stars are you doubtful of? Not all of the first stars were that massive. Some were so big that the black holes they formed were huge, but some weren't quite big enough to become a black hole and seeded other stars.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor astromark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,014
    ~ Before you go much deeper into the ' What of Stars. ' You ought to be aquipped with some information of type's and sizes of mass of Stars.. From the Black Hole through to Neutron Stars, Fast rotating Pulsars and Red Dwarfs.. White Dwarfs... Research..
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Can Black hole increase the speed of light?
    By TheGoneCase in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 11th, 2014, 07:21 AM
  2. Black Hole at near-light speed?
    By Daecon in forum Physics
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: August 25th, 2013, 09:46 PM
  3. light emerging from the Sun (or a black hole)
    By whizkid in forum Physics
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: January 9th, 2013, 04:06 AM
  4. Speed of a light photon in a black hole singularity
    By John Steele in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: September 26th, 2012, 08:41 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •