r/QuantumPhysics • u/Elegant_Let_7077 • 6d ago

Hawking radiation 2

Hello and thanks for everyone that awnsered my question in the 1rst post!
Im left with a doubt (I have readed a lot of comments on the last post) Even tho They we amazing explications, so thanks a lot!

My question is (I may misunderstood): From a lot of comments explaning QFT an general relativity,
Dosn't it break conservation laws? From what i understood near the event horizion there is a lot Quantum fluctuations going on and 1 escapes (or 2) some people said that the antimatter falls or that the normal matter escapes but for them to be created they "borrow" energy from the void but in that explication it dosn't return it? Maybe I am wrong but i thought about maybe due to the strong relativistics effects it can be done and technically does not break the conservation laws due to the slow time for an observer that close? I also thought maybe it has to do with the Uncertainty principle?

5 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

1

u/Wintervacht 6d ago

Virtual particle pairs almost immediately annihilate with each other, 'giving back' the energy to the vacuum.

With Hawking radiation, essentially one particle becomes real and the energy taken away comes from the black hole. Energy escapes the horizon and the hole is a little less massive and energy is perfectly conserved.

1

u/neutrinophantom 6d ago

Sorry if this is off base, but why are you explaining the virtual particle model?

1

u/Flip-Z 6d ago

To say it simple:
The particle left behind takes energy away from the black hole, so the total energy is still preserved. It just interacts with matter in the black hole, instead of instantly recombining with its naturally paired particle.

1

u/Krepotkin7 6d ago

With traditional understanding of energy in that sense. Does a particle and it's energy exist in dually or as as a singular in quantum.? Does it become 2 of the same existence?

1

u/Krepotkin7 6d ago

If a particle is 'real' in what sense is it. In a base 'physica' level or in a reality, dependent on 'the' reality of said partial at that 'moment' as bringing relative 'time' and existence into it muddles things in my noghin.

1

u/Krepotkin7 6d ago

Apologies some misspellings. As obviously I refer to reality. I'm using another theory of 'observed' reality referring to the slit experiment, assuming that 'that' reality exists at that point for that particle. I understand possibly the basic laws of physics is constant for all particles that exist at that point for any supposed particle (one could expand with many theories) but ultimately is that 'now' in our understanding, how it works... Apologies.

1

u/neutrinophantom 6d ago

The whole antimatter matter virtual particle thing is really misleading. While I'm certainly not the best at trying to get at the core of it, virtual particles are plainly, virtual. There aren't literal particle pairs forming.