Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: talanum1 on 11/11/2020 09:10:32
-
Here is the proof:
Line number Statement Reason
1. Assume a Black Hole has a matter density singularity. Assumption.
2. We know that a Black Hole has a temperature. Empirical knowledge.
3. Having a temperature implies the Black Hole has
particles with an average Kinetic Energy. 2.
4. This contradicts 1, since there is no space for them to
move in. 1, 3.
-
We know that a Black Hole has a temperature.
The temperature of a black hole is due to the Hawking radiation at the event horizon, not the singularity. Your "proof" is no proof at all.
-
Here is the proof:
Line number Statement Reason
1. Assume a Black Hole has a matter density singularity. Assumption.
2. We know that a Black Hole has a temperature. Empirical knowledge.
3. Having a temperature implies the Black Hole has
particles with an average Kinetic Energy. 2.
4. This contradicts 1, since there is no space for them to
move in. 1, 3.
2 is dubious; 3 is wrong.
The temperature of the radiation from a black hole is the temperature of that radiation, not the temperature of the BH itself.
Since - so far as it has a meaning- the temperature concerns particles which are outside the EH of the BH (and potentially indefinitely far from the BH itself, you can't justify those statements.
If you had a BH the mass of the Earth then the radiation of which you were measuring the temperature would be coming from the EH. That's about 88 mm from the BH itself.
Now, I accept that 88mm isn't very far, but the point remains it's not zero.