3
$\begingroup$

Hawking radiation which is the result of virtual particles, which are always created in pairs,(particle/antiparticle) near enough to the event horizon of a black hole, that one of the pair falls in allowing its partner to escape. Why doesn't this phenomenon add mass to the black hole?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I have presented this argument on Quora a number of times, and the answers are creative attempts to allow the particle that falls in to have negative energy; but the reasoning behind the negative mass particle always being the one that falls in, never made sense. $\endgroup$ – Steven Flowers Aug 22 '19 at 5:14
  • $\begingroup$ The particle that doesn't fall in is observable, so it can't have negative energy. $\endgroup$ – J.G. Aug 22 '19 at 5:15
  • $\begingroup$ Do either of the pair of virtual particles actually have negative mass? Or do they just both receive energy enough to exist for a brief moment, as a quantum fluctuation? $\endgroup$ – Steven Flowers Aug 22 '19 at 5:20
  • $\begingroup$ The outgoing radiation persists. The outgoing virtual particle becomes real due to four-momentum from the gravitational field, just like the energy used to make W/Z bosons, Higgs bosons etc. visible in particle accelerators. $\endgroup$ – J.G. Aug 22 '19 at 6:23
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Related: An explanation of Hawking Radiation. The popular picture of Hawking radiation recited in the OP is just a popular picture. It is not how Hawking radiation is actually derived. The answers to the linked question give a taste of how it is actually derived and of where the popular picture comes from. Some popular pictures have at least a little bit of explanatory power, but this one seems to have mostly confusatory power. $\endgroup$ – Chiral Anomaly Aug 22 '19 at 13:30

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.