Hawking radiation; black holes losing mass?

According to my limited understanding: In the virtual-partical pair formation, one of the particles has "negative energy." In Hawking radiation, the "positive-energy" half of the pair escapes, while the "negative-energy" particle falls in (this is a very over-simplified explanation). The negative-energy particle cancels out some of the positive energy inside the black hole, reducing its total energy, and thus (by mass-energy equivalence) reducing its total mass.

That's simply because of energy conservation. The particle which escapes is created and given an escape velocity at the expense of the bh energy (or mass, as you like) which is therefore reduced.

There is a very simple intuitive answer to the interesting question posed by Deltafan', which needs no SCiFi like pseudo concepts.

What allows the separation and the materialization of the virtual pair created from the vacuum in the vicinity of the black hole horizon is the gradient of the gravity field.

Now this gradient varies as 1/(size of the horizon), which is like 1/(mass of the black hole) and therefore it is enormously larger for a microscopic black hole than for a macroscopic one (but in a infinitesimal region of space though!) , thereby allowing for rapid production energetic radiation and decay.

About negative mass particles.. Either you consider that a pair of positive mass particles (total 2m) is created near the horizon at the expense of the bh energy. One escapes to infinity, the other one falls back in==> loss of mass = m

Or you consider that a pair, one with >0 and one with <0 mass is created (total m-m =0) at no expense now, m escapes to infinity, -m falls back in the bh ==> loss of mass = m

So it is precisely equivalent. No SF, no mystery. Actually negative masses are a historical accident that should be put in the museum now.

Brad and Rick have it. But the assumption that virtual particle pairs are negative and positive mass and the assumption that the characteristics of the negative mass particle makes it more likely than the positive to head for the event horizon are really just that. Assumptions needed to support conservation of mass and loss of black hole mass. Just as the assumption that the universe is constant mass and not increasing is more to support previous theories than it's supported by observation.

The science of gravity's effects on a Planck scale is almost non existent. It will take the Grand Unified High Poobah of all theories of physics before you can call this hard science.

Hawking radiation is far from accepted science. It's really more of a hypothesis than a theory.

Black holes are not really holes, they are just extremely strong gravity sources. The Hawking radiation works on the principle of quantum entanglement where the state of one quantum is instantly transferred to the second quantum. Not just at light speed but really instantly. This second quantum can escape a Black Hole, so it effectively loses matter through this Hawking Radiation.

If the Big Freeze theory is correct, the expansion of the universe will lead to an ever decreasing overall density of the universe so in a couple of hundreds of billions of years, the only bodies left will be black holes. And eventually even these will disappear.

It's pretty weird, but energy can actually be "negative." That is, there exist particles that have the property of actually "taking away" energy and thus mass.

The particle that falls into the black hole is the negative particle.

Well, radiation is a form of energy being emitted from the black hole and energy is completely interchangeable with mass. When a black hole loses energy via Hawking Radiation its also losing mass. The strange thing is that smaller black holes release larger amounts of Hawking Radiation and therefore evaporate much, much quicker. I find that very, very odd.

If we settle for that each and all and sundry debris are surrounded by using a cloud of digital debris whose existence is extremely short, then some thrilling opportunities upward thrust up. a solid electric powered container will separate the certainly and negatively charged debris throughout the 2d that they exist. If separated some distance sufficient they gained't recombine and we can describe the progression as pair advent. further a solid sufficient gravitatinal container could have an analogous result. basically this time the particle separation relies upon on the spontaneous momentum of the debris extremely than their fee. between the debris will descend into the progression horizon and the different will take off into area. by using this suggests the bh slowly evaporates, the fee of evaporation being mentioned to extend the smaller the black hollow. All it particularly is hypothesis at present day as Hawking radiation has on no account been certainly stated.

Nobody has verified this weird phenomenon, called "Hawking Radiation", but it makes sense in a strange way. Black holes die, but it takes a while

http://www.wonderquest.com/black-holes.htm