Who can solve this problem

[abhinavkumar_iitr05]

Hello!Friends.<br />Here a very bright challange for u all.Can anyone answer that whether a Black Hole radiate energy?<br />The two contradicting views r as follows<br />1.If it radiate energy then something might have velocity greater than light & it would be wrong to say that anything falling in the Black Hole lost its existance from Universe.<br /><br />2.If it don't radiate then what happen to the energy falling in the form of light & in the form of particle?It increases the energy thus making them unstable.Then what happens to its future.......?<br /><br />

 

[nacnud]

Black holes might emit Hawking radiation. The frequency and ammount of which depends on the BHs size. The speed of light does not get broken in this example.<br /><br /><br />

 

[abhinavkumar_iitr05]

Its true but then the same old question arises and that is that why can't we know about the interior of Black Hole by analysing the radiation emitted by them?Why it is said that the particle lost its past once it fall in the Black hole?How can we account for that?

 

[kmarinas86]

In the same way gravity dilates time (rate of time is relative), gravity also affects the relative temperature. For an object in the strongest gravity just next to the black hole's surface, the temperature is hot, whereas for an outside observer, this object appears to be of a low temperature.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">2.If it don't radiate then what happen to the energy falling in the form of light & in the form of particle?It increases the energy thus making them unstable.Then what happens to its future.......?</font><br /><br />A photon going down to a gravitational well increases in energy according to an observer at the bottom of a well. If this well is deep enough and long enough, the photon may obtain more energy than the observer itself has at the bottom of this well, and if so, if the observer decided to go the opposite way of that photon, it too would have so little energy that it would contain no more energy than that photon at the same place the photon started.<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oh-My-God_particle<br /><br /><font color="yellow">On the evening of October 15, 1991, an ultra-high energy cosmic particle was observed over Salt Lake City, Utah. Dubbed the "Oh-My-God particle" (a play on the nickname "God particle" for the Higgs boson), it was estimated to have an energy of approximately 3 × 1020 electronvolts, equivalent to about 50 joules—in other words, it was a subatomic particle with macroscopic kinetic energy comparable to that of a fastball, or to the mass-energy of a microbe. It was most likely a proton travelling with velocity almost equal to the speed of light (if it was a proton, its speed would have been approximately (1 - 4.9 × 10-24)c – after traveling one light year the particle would be only 46 nanometres behind a photon that left at the same time) and its observation was a shock to astrophysicists.</font><br /><br />So it i

 

[yevaud]

<i>So it is possible for relatively low energies to increase in energies as they approach the bottom of a gravitational well.</i><br /><br />Actually, wrt that high-energy event, it already possessed those kind of energies upon it's arrival here. The brief passage into our gravity well won't add much.<br /><br />The rest is fairly accurate though. Carry on. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>