Nostr Web Client

Black holes are primarily objects defined by General Relativity (i.e. gravity). QM comes into play once you get very, very close to the event horizon. Beyone the event horizon we are blind so we don't know what really happens in there.

Very near the event horizon we believe that QM effects cause the black hole to radiate and evaporate. We don't know that they do this; we've never seen any of the so-called Hawking radiation coming from a black hole. But our math says this should be happening.

If that is true then the ultimate fate of a black hole is dominated by QM, it will gradually evaporate until it has radiated all it's mass back out into the universe. However, in time-frames of a few billion years this effect is so negligible as to be irrelevant.

iefan 🕊️ 2y ago

It's fun😅

So, "Primarily" depends on what aspect you're defining.

The laws of gravity and matter govern the formation and some behavior of black holes, except objects with near Schwarzschild radius, we all know that.

but the creation of antimatter inside a black hole is a quantum mechanical phenomenon that cannot be explained solely by the laws of classical physics. That is the whole context here. If you read the first note.

QM governs the production of virtual particle-antiparticle pairs near the event horizon, which leads to the formation of Hawking radiation and the eventual evaporation of black holes.

Last any object collapsing near Schwarzschild radius is primarily governed by QM, that is one of main characteristics of black hole. Isn't it.

Am I missing something here😂, correct me a if I'm wrong

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

iefan 🕊️ 2y ago

unclebobmartin 2y ago

>From: iefan1<-cameri at 02/20/23 12:20:12 on wss://relay.damus.io

>---------------

>It's fun😅

Absolutely!

>The laws of gravity and matter govern the formation and some behavior of black holes, except objects with near Schwarzschild radius, we all know that.

True; but you have to get very close indeed (10^-16cm or so) for QM to become a factor.

>but the creation of antimatter inside a black hole is a quantum mechanical phenomenon that cannot be explained solely by the laws of classical physics. That is the whole context here. If you read the first note.

We don't really know if antimatter gets "created" within the EH. The GR math suggests a space-time reversal within the EH, and QM sees an anti-particle as the normal particle moving backwards in time. SO...???

>QM governs the production of virtual particle-antiparticle pairs near the event horizon, which leads to the formation of Hawking radiation and the eventual evaporation of black holes.

Well, sort of. The virtual particle story is one that physicists like to tell laymen to describe HR. The reality is a bit stranger and has to do with the way the EH distorts the quantum fields. PBS Spacetime did a good episode on this. It's fun and very educational: https://www.pbs.org/video/hawking-radiation-joztzy/

>Last any object collapsing near Schwarzschild radius is primarily governed by QM, that is one of main characteristics of black hole. Isn't it.

From the point of view of a distant observer, GR dominates the behavior of objects in the vicinity of a BH. Very, very near the EH QM effect might become important; but our theories of GR and QM disagree too much for us to be able to predict much about it. As the PBS episode said, even HR is based on a hack.

>Am I missing something here😂, correct me a if I'm wrong

I'm sure we are both wrong; but it's still fun.

iefan 🕊️ 2y ago

Those are fair points. While we may not agree on everything, particularly regarding the overall role of quantum mechanics in black holes and antimatter as a whole but at the end of the day that's the beauty of science. It's fascinating how our brains were not designed to fully comprehend the universe that make these conversations more interesting. In any case, I enjoyed our conversation. I’m following you to have more discussions like this in future.