Quantum Physics, CERN and Hawking radiation

MatthewBaker

http://lifeboat.com/blog/2011/06/dear-dr-hawking

Hey guys, my quantum physics is not powerful enough to understand this guy... Can anyone help me out with this one?

Thanks LW

http://lifeboat.com/blog/2011/06/dear-dr-hawking

Hey guys, my quantum physics is not powerful enough to understand this guy... Can anyone help me out with this one?

Thanks LW

Black holes not being able to lose mass would violate reversibility. If something can fall into a black hole, other things must be able to come out again - since physics exhibits microscopic reversibility, and the known laws of physics are symmetrical under T=-T.

That a time-inverted process doesn't contradict the fundamental laws doesn't mean that we could observe it with frequency basically comparable to that of the uninverted process. Think of thermodynamical irreversibility, for an example of class of processes which practically don't have inverted counterparts, even if these are perfectly compatible with microscopic physics.

Also, losing mass is not clearly defined process. If by mass of a BH one means the mass included below the horizon (or calculated from the diameter of the horizon) observed from constant di... (read more)

5RolfAndreassen15y

This is probably not correct. We know that CP symmetry is broken. There are good theoretical reasons to believe that CPT symmetry holds. Consequently T symmetry must be broken.