Mass in black holes (split from Mass)

[MigL]

Absolutely right BeeCee.
The lifetime of a stellar sized BH would be many, many times that of the universe.

However, smaller BHs would be much 'hotter', and radiate mass away much quicker.
Just before their final moment, they would be radiating away mass/energy at extreme rates, ie gamma ray bursts of a specifically increasing kind.
It is only in their final moment, when they have radiated away enough mass, that they shed their event horizon, since they no longer have the required mass and density to remain a BH.
At this point all the mechanisms we know about ( that resist stellar collapse, such as radiation pressure and the particular degeneracy pressures ) become dominant and instantaneously ( ? ) 'de-collapse' the mass/energy in a huge GRB.

 

edit
Itoero, in GR mass, charge and angular momentum is 'conserved' by a BH. IE this information is not lost.
It is other information, of quantum nature, that are 'lost', only because we don't have an encompassing theory of quantum gravity.
Hawking radiation is a first step in that direction since it takes QM considerations into account to assign another conserved quantity to BHs, that of entropy, resultant temperature, and therefore black body radiation.

Edited September 12, 2017 by MigL

[Itoero]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

Itoero, in GR mass, charge and angular momentum is 'conserved' by a BH. IE this information is not lost.

The no-hair theorem is about the forming of Black Holes. It states that Black Holes  can be completely characterized by only three externally observable classical parameters: mass, electric charge, and angular momentum. It's not known what happens with matter that enters a black hole.

[Strange]

12 minutes ago, Itoero said:

It's not known what happens with matter that enters a black hole.

It is known that it doesn't disappear.

[Itoero]

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

It is known that it doesn't disappear.

That's not known. Or do you have anything to back that up?

[Strange]

16 minutes ago, Itoero said:

That's not known. Or do you have anything to back that up?

Yep. General relativity. Do you have anything to back up your claims?

[beecee]

7 hours ago, Itoero said:

Why not? They don't know what happens with info that enters a black hole. This info is energy or mass.

 

GR tells us that once the Schwarzchild radius of a mass is reached, further collapse is compulsory. But we also know GR fails at the quantum/Planck level. For that reason most physicists do not believe that the mathematical point singularity and the associated infinite quantities is ever reached. Rather a surface of sorts should exist at or just below this quantum/Planck level, of the mass/energy from whence the BH was formed.

[Handy andy]

What causes the Gamma Ray Bursts from a black hole. Is it antimatter combining with matter and converting into gamma rays, or is some form of nuclear reaction initiated inside of or around the edge of a black hole.  ?

[Strange]

I don't think the cause of gamma-ray bursts is completely understood. Some come from the formation of black holes by a collapsing star. Others may be from the merging of neutron stars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-ray_burst

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19681-most-powerful-gamma-ray-bursts-linked-to-black-holes/

[MigL]

While matter ingested by a BH might 'disappear', its mass/energy, charge and angular momentum certainly don't.
We know this because a BH acts gravitationally, as if it contains all of its constituent mass/energy.
Ans as Strange pointed out, Gr predicts that its cumulative charge and rotation will have an effect on its magnetic field and surrounding space/time ( frame dragging ).

Hawking radiation arises because, as it turns out, the entropy of a BH is 'encoded' in its event horizon ( more specifically, the area ). See J Berkenstein and S Hawking. The calculation involved the statistical interpretation of a large number of micro-states on the surface of the EH, with entropy. The previous 'no hair' theorem assumes only a single microstate.
as a matter of fact, it turns out that in LQG, the quantum geometries of the EH are associated with these micro-states. Using this method ( the spinfoam covariant formulation ) we can derive the 1st law of BHs ( relating change in energy to  the sum of changes in area, electric charge and angular momentum ), the Unruh temperature and the Hawking entropy.

AS for gamma ray bursts...
When  BH loses enough mass through Hawking radiation such that it doesn't satisfy the mass/volume conditions to remain a BH. It must then shed its event horizon.
Do you think a fully formed neutron star ( or white dwarf ) will reappear ?
Or do you think the 'de-collapse' will involve mostly high energy radiation ( ie a GRB ) and some high energy particles ?

[Handy andy]

Gamma rays are normally caused by some event causing matter to decay. Protons decay into positrons and other bits n bobs, when subjected to heat and pressure as in lightning plasmas. Unstable radio active elements could be being created inside a black hole, that could also decay giving off gamma rays possibly due to electron positron annihilation. This would result in gamma rays of a specific frequency, other processes would result in higher or lower energy gamma rays. What frequency of gamma rays is normally detected, are they across the spectrum or focused?

I would expect once enough matter is lost through hawking radiation, mass ejection or other mechanism, the remaining contents of the black hole are going to be a very hot volatile plasma of matter and antimatter particles, which are more likely to result in lots of very high energy radiation and some high energy particles. Multiple explosions and implosions may take place, like repeated super novae, eventually resulting in a neutron star. Talvez

 

Edited September 13, 2017 by Handy andy

[MigL]

Do you think that behind the curtain that is the event horizon, all the matter that was ingested by the BH is just waiting to 'pop' back out ?
The cannot be any particles inside the EH, so once the curtain drops, these particles don't simply re-appear.
The remaining mass/energy of the former BH is converted to radiation as it must escape immediately at the speed of light, and this radiation , being 'hot' enough, will convert to some energetic particles.

And I really don't understand your reasoning for explosions and 'implosions' ( ? like repeated super-novae ? ) as there is not enough mass, nor the right make-up, for the novae mechanism.

[Handy andy]

I think you twisteth my speculation.

I think that what went behind the event horizon becomes very hot. This will result most likely in a hot plasma, which like what plasma does in lightning converts some of the protons to positrons and other matter, which will inevitably interact with electrons, and cause the release of gamma rays at specific frequencies, compressing plasma can be a dangerous thing I understand. I also take the view that some fusion reaction is turning lighter elements into heavier elements inside the BH, which may decay, again causing the release of gamma rays. I assume you are referring to matter apparently ejected from some black holes at almost light speed, which may be the result of radiation that converts to energetic particles and now has been observed.

Completely speculating I reckon matter inside a black hole is converted into a explosive mixture of matter and antimatter which is compressed together and explodes releasing gamma rays, if these cant escape the event horizon they will further add to the heating effect and cause more matter to be converted.

Not completely agreeing with the big bang as the source of all matter in the universe and more minded to think that fundamental particles appears out of the vacuum of space before perhaps big banging and being converted into heavier elements in suns and Super Novae, before eventually winding up in black holes where they die before being reborn. Simply matter and space is born ages and then is destroyed. 

When I talk of implosions and explosions, yes I am partly thinking supernovae type things, but not necessarily escaping the event horizon, on each explosion. etc

Folk talk of Hawking radiation as if it is fact, has Hawking radiation ever been detected? I think not.

Dark energy what is it? does dark energy also get pulled into black holes? What effect would dark energy have inside a black hole, would it moderate the black holes behaviour?

Is Dark energy a negative energy source that absorbs any other form of energy. See Quantum entanglement thread for what I am getting at.

 

[swansont]

32 minutes ago, Handy andy said:

I think you twisteth my speculation.

!

Moderator Note

This isn't your thread. It is inappropriate for you to be speculating here.

 

[beecee]

4 minutes ago, Handy andy said:

II think that what went behind the event horizon becomes very hot. This will result most likely in a hot plasma, which like what plasma does in lightning converts some of the protons to positrons and other matter,

What gets swallowed by a BH, has a one way trip to the singularity and where the mass in some unknown form should reside. In the process of falling towards the singularity, the tidal gravitational effects, would spaghettifi  any  massive object, and it would be broken down into its most basic constituents as gravity overcomes the EM and strong nuclear force.

Essentially the BH is mainly just critically curved spacetime, with the mass residing at the core/singularity in some unknown state. That's why it isn't really smart to talk of a BHs density. 

Quote

 I assume you are referring to matter apparently ejected from some black holes at almost light speed, which may be the result of radiation that converts to energetic particles and now has been observed.

Nothing is ever ejected from inside a BHs EH.

Quote

Completely speculating I reckon matter inside a black hole is converted into a explosive mixture of matter and antimatter which is compressed together and explodes releasing gamma rays, if these cant escape the event horizon they will further add to the heating effect and cause more matter to be converted.

Matter inside a BH has no choice but to collapse to the singularity/core in accordance with GR.

Quote

Not completely agreeing with the big bang as the source of all matter in the universe and more minded to think that fundamental particles appears out of the vacuum of space before perhaps big banging and being converted into heavier elements in suns and Super Novae, before eventually winding up in black holes where they die before being reborn. Simply matter and space is born ages and then is destroyed.

The BB is overwhelmingly accepted as to the evolution of space, time and matter/energy.      That process can be reasonably explained from t+10-43 seconds up to the present time.

Quote

Folk talk of Hawking radiation as if it is fact, has Hawking radiation ever been detected? I think not

Hawking radiation while obviously never being observed, is a reasonable explanatory process as to what could happen to virtual particle pairs created near the EH. With all due respect, I would study up on cosmological mainstream theories before you even attempt to write them off without anymore then "I think not."

Quote

Dark energy what is it? does dark energy also get pulled into black holes? What effect would dark energy have inside a black hole, would it moderate the black holes behaviour?

Another example of not understanding current mainstream cosmology: The nature of DE, is certainly unknown, [ that's why it's called DE ] but is evidenced in the data from WMAP probe. It is a "property"of spacetime itself and can't be swallowed like normal energy by a BH. Some cosmologists believe it could be the cosmological constant of Einstein fame.

[Handy andy]

53 minutes ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

This isn't your thread. It is inappropriate for you to be speculating here.

 

Ok Swan Im done, ban me and have done with it, I have proved my point, and had my fun.  I have also learned a thing or two, for my next novel Thanks.

Thanks beecee for the reply, it is appreciated. I dont however accept the universal big bang as the beginning of time, the beginning of time to me is nonsense. I am a little more interested in where the matter pre BB came from, or time Before Big Bang or BBB.

 

[Itoero]

On ‎12‎-‎9‎-‎2017 at 8:18 PM, Strange said:

Yep. General relativity. Do you have anything to back up your claims?

Seriously? General Relativity implies the formation of Black Holes.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-hair_theorem It doesn't state anything about info that passes the Black Hole Event Horizon.https://arxiv.org/pdf/0805.3880.pdf

[Strange]

53 minutes ago, Itoero said:

Seriously? General Relativity implies the formation of Black Holes.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-hair_theorem It doesn't state anything about info that passes the Black Hole Event Horizon.https://arxiv.org/pdf/0805.3880.pdf

So nothing to support your claim that information = mass? What a surprise. Please stop making stuff up. 

[beecee]

On 9/13/2017 at 0:02 AM, Itoero said:

Why not? They don't know what happens with info that enters a black hole. This info is energy or mass.

While a region that we call the singularity exists at the center of BHs, (where GR breaks down) most physicists do not believe that any mathematical singularity that may lead to infinite quantities exist. GR also tells us that once the Schwarzchild radius is reached, further collapse is compulsory, so we can I believe logically assume that any BH is mostly just critically curved spacetime, with the mass (all the mass) at the core/singularity, in an unknown state. (which is at the quantum/Planck level.

[DeoxyRiboRobert]

20 hours ago, Itoero said:

Seriously? General Relativity implies the formation of Black Holes.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-hair_theorem It doesn't state anything about info that passes the Black Hole Event Horizon.https://arxiv.org/pdf/0805.3880.pdf

Why are you so hell bent on calling mass and energy, "information"? 

[Itoero]

2 hours ago, DeoxyRiboRobert said:

Why are you so hell bent on calling mass and energy, "information"? 

Physical information refers generally to the information that is contained in a physical system. Info is basically "that which can distinguish one thing from another".You can call a lot of things info, depending on the context they are in. I'm not hell bent, I'm not posting my idea's

22 hours ago, Strange said:

So nothing to support your claim that information = mass? What a surprise. Please stop making stuff up. 

Get a grip. Info is basically "that which can distinguish one thing from another". Mass is a property of physical body. You can measure this mass. Everything you can measure is info.

[Strange]

7 minutes ago, Itoero said:

 I'm not posting my idea's

Yes you are. And, as usual when you make stuff up, you are wrong. 

13 minutes ago, Itoero said:

You can call a lot of things info, depending on the context they are in.

But that doesn't include mass. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_theory

[Itoero]

19 hours ago, beecee said:

While a region that we call the singularity exists at the center of BHs, (where GR breaks down) most physicists do not believe that any mathematical singularity that may lead to infinite quantities exist. GR also tells us that once the Schwarzchild radius is reached, further collapse is compulsory, so we can I believe logically assume that any BH is mostly just critically curved spacetime, with the mass (all the mass) at the core/singularity, in an unknown state. (which is at the quantum/Planck level.

But why does the singularity only exists in the center of BH's? Why not at the event horizon?

[Strange]

3 minutes ago, Itoero said:

But why does the singularity only exists in the center of BH's? Why not at the event horizon?

For the same reason that everything falls towards the centre of the earth. 

[DeoxyRiboRobert]

3 hours ago, Itoero said:

But why does the singularity only exists in the center of BH's? Why not at the event horizon?

Due to the inverse square law for distance being applicable to gravity. The centre of the black hole is the point of greatest mass, therefore the greatest gravitational field. The event horizon is defined as the area at which light cannot escape.

The bigger the black hole, the bigger the event horizon. If a singularity were to appear all of a sudden at the event horizon, the gravitational field of the singularity would actually extend the area in which light cannot escape. This therefore prevents the concept of a singularity being the event horizon.

To be honest it doesn't have to be a singularity for this statement, it just has to be matter compressed to such a degree that it has a swarchzchild radius. 

 

3 hours ago, Itoero said:

Physical information refers generally to the information that is contained in a physical system. Info is basically "that which can distinguish one thing from another".You can call a lot of things info, depending on the context they are in. I'm not hell bent, I'm not posting my idea's

Get a grip. Info is basically "that which can distinguish one thing from another". Mass is a property of physical body. You can measure this mass. Everything you can measure is info.

Where are you getting this definition of "information"

Edited September 17, 2017 by DeoxyRiboRobert

[beecee]

3 hours ago, Itoero said:

But why does the singularity only exists in the center of BH's? Why not at the event horizon?

As I said.....

"GR also tells us that once the Schwarzchild radius is reached, further collapse is compulsory, so we can I believe logically assume that any BH is mostly just critically curved spacetime, with the mass (all the mass) at the core/singularity, in an unknown state. (which is at the quantum/Planck level". so we can I believe logically assume that any BH is mostly just critically curved spacetime, with the mass (all the mass) at the core/singularity, in an unknown state. (which is at the quantum/Planck level.