On Sat, 2025-06-07 at 14:05 -0400, Lee Winter wrote: > An example of that kind of dislocation is Steven Hawking. > > Clearly he was quite brilliant. But just as clearly (according to > me) he was quite WRONG about what is now known as "Hawking > radiation". > > The issue is that he predicted the "evaporation" of black holes by > some quantum events near the event horizon. But if you look at it > carefully you have some quantum recipe for depositing some exotic > (negative mass) objects into the black hole. It doesn't have to be > matter it could be radiation. But that concept has it's own issues: > are we talking about negative frequency or negative wavelength or > both?
He didn't attribute black hole radiation to negative mass. Virtual particle pairs are always being created out of vacuum energy. They almost always recombine instantly. But when a pair is created at the black-hole horizon, one might fall in and the other one escape. > Negative frequency is nonsense. Negative wavelength needs several > extra dimensions, which gets complicated pretty quick! If you believe Dick Feynman and John Archibald Wheeler, or John Cramer, or Carver Mead, negative frequency makes sense as an explanation of "spooky action at a distance" and quantum entanglement. It was predicted, and we have observed, that if two entangled particles are launched in opposite direction, and the state (for example polarization) of one is collapsed by interaction, its partner is instantly collapsed to the conjugate state. Feynman and Wheeler described what they called "absorber theory." Cramer calls it "the quantum handshake." Mead doesn't give it a name but describes it in "Collective Electrodynamics" — a beautiful little book. The proposition is that both solutions of Dirac's wave equation — one with positive frequency, moving forward in time, and one with negative frequency, moving backward in time — are equally real. The relationship between two entangled particles consists of both waves traveling between both particles. BTW, Schrödinger's equation isn't a "wave equation" (because it's a first-order equation), and it's not relativistically invariant. Dirac corrected that. > So what is negative mass? Just what are the higgs bosons doing to > cause negative mass? There could be some kind of VERY exotic stuff > that has negative mass which would reduce the black hole mass, but it > would be hard to predict! I suspect it would have a negative decay > time/rate/(extra dimensions again). > > There is (a lot) more to learn...
