Paper detail

Reconsidering maximum luminosity

The suggestion that there is a maximum luminosity (maximum power) in nature has a long and somewhat convoluted history. Though this idea is commonly attributed to Freeman Dyson, he was actually much more circumspect in his views. What is certainly true is that dimensional analysis shows that the speed of light and Newton's constant of gravitation can be combined to define a quantity P_* = c^5/G_N with the dimensions of luminosity (equivalently, power). Then in any physical situation we must have P_{physical} =$\wp$ P_*, where the quantity $\wp$ is some dimensionless function of dimensionless parameters. This has lead some authors to suggest a maximum luminosity/maximum power conjecture. Working within the framework of standard general relativity, we will re-assess this conjecture, paying particular attention to the extent to which various examples and counter-examples are physically reasonable. We focus specifically on Vaidya spacetimes, and on an evaporating version of Schwarzschild's constant density star. For both of these spacetimes luminosity can be arbitrarily large. We argue that any luminosity bound must depend on delicate internal features of the radiating object.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.