New Theoretical Considerations For The Black Hole System

[Shustaire]

Then how does it remove temperature then dubbel without interaction to the interior of the BH. If there is no mediator allowing the exchange.

 

one particle of being the anti particle falls into the BH EH thus causing loss of mass. It doesn't originate inside the EH but just on the exterior.

[Vmedvil2]

Remove temperature? As a black hole get's smaller, it gets hotter so your question doesn't make sense. 

 

Yes,  the BH with smaller radius has higher temperature because of more mass within the BH that is moving against the gravity and more gravitation energy pressing upon it. I am talking about as temperature is removed from the BH gradually causing evaporation mass is slowly bleeding away from the singularity over billions of years as photons something is mediating this mass loss into photons evolving the BH into a large singularity having a lower temperature.

Edited July 10, 2018 by VictorMedvil

[Shustaire]

It gets hotter because the rate of radiation increases. The question of the ground state is different, it is a question of a stable black hole analogue of the hydrogen atom. My conclusion so far is that they don't make sense.

 

how are you defining the ground state ? the ground state of the EH or the ground state of the harmonic oscillator. ?

[Super Polymath]

It gets hotter because the rate of radiation increases. The question of the ground state is different, it is a question of a stable black hole analogue of the hydrogen atom. My conclusion so far is that they don't make sense.

A hydrogen atom has no singularity at the heart of it's nucleic quasar, what we call the proton, which is post-evaporation. It's stuck in that high-thermal radiation state because of the negative charge offered by the electrons surrounding it, if you're a positive charge in the middle of a bunch of negative charges that's like a continuous influx of additional positive charge. So you have - 1/2 (electron) + 1 (proton) - 1/2 (electron) = 0 stuck in a white hole state. That's why there's so many anti protons in the vacuum just outside our atmosphere, that is the solar winds crossing paths in the most visible spectrum where positrons & anti protons invert into electrons & protons annihilating one another. 

Edited July 10, 2018 by Super Polymath

[Shustaire]

Ok so how do you propose to adjust for that when the wavelength of the emitted photons rely upon the surface area of the BH?

[Shustaire]

So you feel the following is incorrect ?

 

[math] E=h\frac{c}{\lambda}=\frac{hc^3}{2GM}[/math]

Edited July 10, 2018 by Shustaire

[Super Polymath]

If you want to make it uneven (matter dominant) put some planck particles or macro black in that vacuum radiation to fuse with the anti protons leaving some remaining electrons that fall in to fuse with the macro black holes at a slower rate than the anti protons because they're smaller can cancel out more positrons than anti protons can cancel out protons because they're falling into to the bh's too fast. 

[Shustaire]

Well as this is your own article let me go through this

[Shustaire]

The dimensions are right, you have an inverse gravitational radius coupled with [math]\hbar c[/math]. This didn't have an implication in my own derivations. 

 

It should be correct as its part of the derivative for Hawking radiation.

[Shustaire]

Now you just have to intrduce k for the Boltzmann constant [math]E=kt[/math] apply the surface area and connect the three to arrive at the Hawking formula.

ie intermediate step

 

[math]T=\frac{hc^3}{2kGM}[/math]

sorry had E instead of T

Edited July 10, 2018 by Shustaire

[Shustaire]

forget last on this post, in case you read it before edit. Mistake

 

However further side note with regards to a BH you are dealing with a blackbody temperature. There is a very key aspect you need to understand called luminosity.

 

See the Stephen Boltzmann section on luminosity for applicable formulas here

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminosity

 

[math]L=\sigma AT^4[/math] and relevant formulas following.

 

A friendly reminder in case you were aware or not or didn't consider the term blackbody and its implications.

Edited July 10, 2018 by Shustaire

[Shustaire]

excellent

 

I see a good scalar temperature field with a gradient under metric of choice. As your dealing with photons as the mediator you can apply the creation and annihilator operators for particle number density for a boson spin 1 field. From the operators develop a probability density function again under QFT, with regards to the Feymann path integrals.

 

QFT obviously has your Dirac relations for Lorentz invariance.

Edited July 10, 2018 by Shustaire

[Vmedvil2]

excellent

 

I see a good scalar temperature field with a gradient under metric of choice. As your dealing with photons as the mediator you can apply the creation and annihilator operators for particle number density for a boson spin 1 field. From the operators develop a probability density function again under QFT, with regards to the Feymann path integrals.

 

QFT obviously has your Dirac relations for Lorentz invariance.

 

I agree, fix it Dubbel, you need to put it in a bosonic field of some sort. Shustaire is right in this respect along with me. Also, a solution to the Kerr Metric and not just a Schwarzchild Metric would be acceptable too with rotating BH's put into some sort of respect.

Edited July 10, 2018 by VictorMedvil

[Shustaire]

The problem under Kerr is the two inner and two outer EH's. Schwartzchild will help find the symmetries later on under Kerr.

[Vmedvil2]

The problem under Kerr is the two inner and two outer EH's. Schwartzchild will help find the symmetries later on under Kerr.

Indeed, it will I have done all four solutions for BH, the Schwarzchild Metric greatly helps with the others. It is always the first solution, the Hardest one is the Kerr-Newmann Metric.

Edited July 10, 2018 by VictorMedvil

[Shustaire]

I know about luminosity, but for a black hole in the ground state, its a theoretical impossibility, for it to either radiate or have a luminosity, leading to me believing they are fundamentally not possible. 

 

Why would you think this? Have you noticed that your describing the ground state of the applicable field ? ie spin 1.... Ths field also lies outside the EH with the EH itself being a boundary. Ie infinite redshift....

 

I also hope your looking at information loss as per degrees of freedom...

Edited July 10, 2018 by Shustaire

[Vmedvil2]

Why would you think this? Have you noticed that your describing the ground state of the applicable field ? ie spin 1.... Ths field also lies outside the EH with the EH itself being a boundary. Ie infinite redshift....

 

Shustaire it would even be Spin 2 under String Fields, it could get much more complex than that =).

 

 

Dubbel if you want to use it this could save you some time, here is the String Matrix for a Bosonic field with spin structures.

Edited July 10, 2018 by VictorMedvil