Stephen hawkings black hole evaporation theory assumes evaporation of black holes by losing mass through virtual particle radiation. As far as i know, the theory isn't based on mathematical foundations, assumes evaporation to take uncomprehensible number of years, no comment on the information lost to black hole and no comment on what happens inside. Despite all these, why people treat it like a Law of nature? Why black holes canNOT evaporate? Any counter argument/comment against stephen hawkings theory is especially welcome.
Asked
Active
Viewed 143 times
1 Answers
2
Hawking radiation is theorized through the mathematical formalism of Quantum Field theory in Curved spacetime.
What is interesting about Hawking radiation is that it's a kinematic effect of General Relativity, not a dynamical one. This means that you don't need to have a full theory of a back-reacting quantum field and Einstein's Equations to derive Hawking radiation-a quantum field on a fixed Schwartzchild background is sufficient.
In fact, when you put a quantum (eg. phonon) field on a fluid background (eg. Bose-Einstein Condensate in certain regimes) with an event horizon (i.e. fluid flow faster than speed of sound), you get thermal radiation coming off the event horizon (Reference: 1809.00913). What this means is that the idea of Hawking radiation isn't unique to Quantum Field theory in Curved spacetime, but also shows up anytime there is an effective metric, as in certain hydrodynamic systems.
Pabetism
- 115