Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

WittyUnwittingly t1_j27ffpk wrote

Reply to comment by Fallacy_Spotted in Black hole question by Impossible_Pop620

I don't claim to be an authority on relativistic physics, so I may be making some incorrect assumptions here, but being "able to reach the singularity that much faster" only applies to the perspective of the person doing the accelerating. From our perspective (outside of the black hole), all of the material that "falls in" to a black hole builds upon itself infinitely AT the event horizon. So sure, your camera could accerlate towards the singularity and reach it really fast, but that's not an outcome that you would be able to observe from any other reference frame - it would never get there. We're in agreement about what would happen from the perspective of the object doing the accelerating.

If Hawking Radiation was as simplistic as you described, how would it cause your BH to lose mass? (You use the term "leaches" - I don't think that's a real science word) As far as I know, mainstream science agrees that Hawking Radiation is a tunneling process. (Source: https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9907001, https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5042)

2

Fallacy_Spotted t1_j27nfra wrote

It is a simplified explaination. Mass is energy and the escaping particle has the same mass as the particle that fell in plus the energy used to escape. The only place this energy can come from is the blackhole itself. It is not strictly correct in all aspects but it is close. If you want something deeper I recommend this video from PBS spacetime. They even briefly mention that paper near the end. The whole channel is golden.

2