08 Aug 22
I watched Nova on PBS about black holes. Hawking came up with an equation measuring the temperature of a black hole. I wondered if a vacuum could have a temperature so I looked into it.
https://www.scienceabc.com/nature/universe/what-is-the-temperature-of-space.html
A perfect vacuum has no temperature, as there is nothing in a vacuum whose temperature could be measured. So, in essence, you cannot technically measure the temperature of outer space.
So what does Hawking mean by "temperature"?
08 Aug 22
@Metal-Brain
This might shed some light on your question
https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/bh/hawk.html#:~:text=Hawking%20radiation%20has%20a%20blackbody,the%20horizon%2C%20the%20Schwarzschild%20radius
08 Aug 22
@ponderable saidHe seemed to have meant radiation, not temperature.
@Metal-Brain
This might shed some light on your question
https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/bh/hawk.html#:~:text=Hawking%20radiation%20has%20a%20blackbody,the%20horizon%2C%20the%20Schwarzschild%20radius
@metal-brain saidA black hole is not a vacuum.
I watched Nova on PBS about black holes. Hawking came up with an equation measuring the temperature of a black hole. I wondered if a vacuum could have a temperature so I looked into it.
https://www.scienceabc.com/nature/universe/what-is-the-temperature-of-space.html
A perfect vacuum has no temperature, as there is nothing in a vacuum whose temperature could be mea ...[text shortened]... not technically measure the temperature of outer space.
So what does Hawking mean by "temperature"?
Well, it is in the "Hoover" sense of a vacuum, but when you're speaking of the vacuum of space, black holes do not qualify.
@Metal-Brain
Tell that to Stephan Hawking. Ever hear of Hawking radiation? No I guess not, since all you watch is Newsmax and Fox news.
@metal-brain saidIn fact a vacuum is defined as a volume with "no" contents. And there is Quantum fluctuation as @Soothfast explained.
You are wrong. There is nothing that can escape a black hole so it is a vacuum.
You are such a retard.
And if you want to define a black hole as "vacuum" then in the "Hoover" sense @Suzianne appreciated before.
It is more a sign of a "retard" not to use the generally accepted definition of words and concepts than otherwise. In scientific discussions we normally try to avoid calling our esteemed colleagues names, even if we are of the opinon that they should see things more like we do.
Edits because of being too lazy to reread before posting 🙁
09 Aug 22
@ponderable saidI never said a black hole was a vacuum.
In fact a vacuum is defined as a volume with "no" contents. And there is Quantum fluctuation as @Soothfast explained.
And if you want to define a black hole as "vacuum" then in the "Hoover" sense @Suzianne appreciated before.
It is more a sign of a "retard" not to use the generally accepted definition of words and concepts than otherwise. In scientific discussions we n ...[text shortened]... ey should see things more like we do.
Edits because of being too lazy to reread before posting 🙁
Stop listening to suzi's lies.
I was talking about the space around a black hole. Space is a vacuum.
Black holes emit radiation into space. That is what Hawking's equation is all about. suzi is a science illiterate person. She should not even be posting on this forum. She is just here to troll nonsense.
09 Aug 22
@metal-brain saidI quote your own post (which I quoted in my last post):
I never said a black hole was a vacuum.
There is nothing that can escape a black hole so it is a vacuum.
Read the sentence slowly, especially the last seven words.
09 Aug 22
@sonhouse saidWhat the hell do you think this whole thread is about? Hawking radiation!
@Metal-Brain
Tell that to Stephan Hawking. Ever hear of Hawking radiation? No I guess not, since all you watch is Newsmax and Fox news.
His equation has "T" for temperature and there is no temperature in the vacuum of space, that is my whole point. Don't you think Hawking should have put an "R" there for radiation instead?
From now on I am just going to ignore suzi's trolling. it will be up to you to figure out her trolling is a useless distraction not worthy of comment.
09 Aug 22
@ponderable saidIt is a vacuum for matter, not radiation.
I quote your own post (which I quoted in my last post):There is nothing that can escape a black hole so it is a vacuum.
Read the sentence slowly, especially the last seven words.
Is that better?
This whole thread is about radiation from a black hole. I should not have to explain the obvious to simpletons like suzi.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12469
09 Aug 22
@metal-brain saidNo - now you're going from "wrong" to "not even wrong".
It is a vacuum for matter, not radiation.
Is that better?