Comments
MissCarriage-a t1_je17gx6 wrote
...and its very small in magnitude.
ElDruinsMight t1_je12mep wrote
No. But if you’re interested in how black holes and dark energy can be related, here’s a link to a recently published paper that you will find very interesting:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/acb704
TLDR: black holes, above class 3 size, don’t need to eat matter to grow. They grow with the expansion of the universe and may account for some of the dark energy in the universe.
Hateitwhenbdbdsj t1_je1lihj wrote
I’m very sus of that paper to be honest. Watch the PBS space time episode about it, they are obviously way more articulate and definitive in their analysis than I could ever be
MichiganMisc t1_je13yk4 wrote
PBS Space Time did a segment on this sort of subject recently.
wanted_to_upvote t1_je12l42 wrote
There is nothing really special about radiation itself in Hawking radiation. Is is just photons like other forms of electromagnetic radiation. It is only unique in the way it is produced at the event horizon of a black hole. It arises from the steady conversion of quantum vacuum fluctuations into pairs of particles, one of which escaping at infinity while the other is trapped inside the black hole horizon.
Anonymous-USA t1_je1g5vx wrote
The radiation is actually produced throughout the ergosphere, wherever space is warped.
outtyn1nja t1_je0wd9d wrote
Can you explain why you think that it might be?
[deleted] t1_je0wras wrote
[removed]
DropKickDougie t1_je1bhgh wrote
Dark matter and dark energy is called dark because we literally know nothing about it. It's like a place-holder moniker until we can observe the phenomenon.
We have a better idea of what Hawking radiation is because its effects have been observed and measured.
raishak t1_je1hk83 wrote
Unless there's some news, I missed I don't think we've measured Hawking Radiation (certainly not from a black hole). However, it is well defined mathematically and appears independently through several different approaches. I don't think anyone credible is disputing hawking radiation regardless.
DropKickDougie t1_je1knu7 wrote
It's still theoretical but that theory came from observation. The result of these effects is what we call Hawking radiation.
KilgoreTroutPfc t1_je1hnhi wrote
There was a recent paper suggesting black holes contribute to dark energy, but there is dark energy even in the deepest voids of space hundreds of millions of light years from any black hole. It’s not the primary cause.
3SquirrelsinaCoat t1_je0xlzh wrote
If black holes (of any size) are local "objects" (in as much as they are in one spot, not all spots), then logically unknown energy that causes expansion in all places at the same time at the same rate (to our knowledge) cannot come from an astrological body that only exists in one place.
Plus, as u/Chadmartigan says, we actually understand Hawking radiation. Dark energy we do not understand at all.
plasticproducts t1_je1334s wrote
The expansion of space is not accelerating. We are just looking further back in time when we observe far distant objects. It makes sense that they are moving faster because they have been slowing down since the inflationary epoch.
[deleted] t1_je1gcpb wrote
[removed]
Zmemestonk t1_je19crf wrote
Checkout the recent spacetime on that article about black holes
SavemebabyK t1_je1gu3h wrote
I am happy to see this question. I have not read what Hawking radiation is exactly. I think that the universe has infinite possibilities including other ones already in existence. Time can perhaps measure and I wonder how, I say this because time is just that a measurement. So, why not? Thanks.
261846 t1_je18mce wrote
Hawking radiation is in the form of photons, and there is nowhere near enough to accelerate the universe’s expansion
space-ModTeam t1_je1nvvj wrote
Hello u/Rskingen, your submission "Could Hawking radiation coming from black holes be the same as the dark energy accelerating expansion of the universe?" has been removed from r/space because:
- Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.
Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.
Joethebassplayer t1_je1wib8 wrote
No, There is not enough mass in all the Blackholes in the known Universe to account for the amount Black matter we are looking for... Hawking radiation is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the mass of even one black hole.
YourWiseOldFriend t1_je1at86 wrote
Hawking radiation IS dark matter. If you calculate all the Hawking radiation you reach a total that's -precisely- the amount predicted by the Standard Model.
insomniacjezz t1_je1cyg8 wrote
Citation needed?
Shrike99 t1_je1lpfi wrote
OP was talking about dark energy, not dark matter. Given that Hawking radiation is in the form of photons which have no rest mass, it's already a poor candidate for dark matter.
Then there's the minor detail that the combined Hawking radiation output of every black hole in the observable universe is less than than the power consumption of the tablet I'm typing this on. Indeed, black holes absorb far more energy than that just from cosmic microwave background radiation, so they're net energy absorbers even without actively feeding on matter.
Even if we ignore that, the the upper limit on thier total energy emited as hawking radiation since the big bang is on the order of a few joules, or less than a picogram of mass equivalence. Ignoring primordial black holes anyway, since we've got no solid evidence for thier existence.
Even if it was a signifcant amount it wouldn't matter since any amount of 'hawking-equivalent-matter' emited by a black hole will reduce the black hole's mass by that same amount.
Since the combined mass of all black holes theoreized to exist is insuffcient to explain dark matter, then so too will be any amount of hawking radiation emited by them.
Anonymous-USA t1_je1gh01 wrote
Radiation isn’t matter, it’s energy. And hawking radiation is not dark energy either.
YourWiseOldFriend t1_je1ha4t wrote
I totally disagree. I refer to the wave/particle duality of light.
Anonymous-USA t1_je1v40n wrote
Duality aside, photons have no mass and cannot be dark matter.
As for duality, they act as energy waves except when interacting with other particles as they absorb or emit radiation. EM and photons are well understood and not related to dark matter.
YourWiseOldFriend t1_je6qrqa wrote
>photons have no mass
How then are they redirected when in the proximity of a stellar gravity field? How does that happen when they have no mass?
>EM and photons are well understood
And here I was, thinking they call it black matter and black energy precisely because they don't understand what it is.
Anonymous-USA t1_je6vujf wrote
They aren’t redirected. They travel in a strait line. It’s the space that is warped and the light curves with the space.
In fact, the escape velocity of any gravity well is dictated by the mass of that first body, not the second, because it’s a function of warped space. That’s true whether it’s the Earth, the Sun or a black hole. And the second body, whether it has the mass of a moon or a massless photon, isn’t a factor.
Dark Matter and Dark Energy are called “dark” for two reasons, they are both not directly observable and are poorly understood. So it’s apropos. But electromagnetic energy (EM), light and photons are neither dark nor misunderstood. There are full quantum particle and wave and field descriptions for them.
TheBounceSpotter t1_je1luxs wrote
How could you possibly think we would be able to calculate the hawking radiation of the universe. There are probably a trillion different variables in determining the amount of matter in black holes. How many there are, and what size they are also affects the emanation rate of Hawking radiation. Even an estimate trying to get within an order of magnitude would be highly suspect.
Nemo_Shadows t1_je10ac0 wrote
Partly YES, I think it is a release valve of sorts the higher the output the closer the Black Hole is getting to that tipping point of becoming a galaxy, which can be any size depending on the amounts of energy contained within, as the universe is like a heartbeat where energy is always wrapping and unwrapping so it is Space that is actually expanding because space is energy and that energy is everything else unwrapping into it and then it gets rewrapped via Black Holes.
Endless Energy System A.K.A Perpetual Energy, as energy cannot be created or destroyed only changed and I also think we know or see only a small part of something that is truly endless and infinite in size however the internal workings of the Universe across the entire spectrum of it are definable and knowable and therefore understandable by any and all willing to see it as it is rather than what they would wish it to be.
N. Shadows
[deleted] t1_je128st wrote
[removed]
Chadmartigan t1_je0uywc wrote
No. Hawking radiation is pretty well-understood. It's just regular ol' photons.