Paper detail

Weak Cosmic Censorship, Superradiance and Quantum Particle Creation

Since 1970's, gedanken experiments have been devised to challenge the weak cosmic censorship conjecture (WCCC), which is the expectation that spacetime singularities will be hidden from faraway observers by event horizons so that classical predictability in a spacetime is preserved. These experiments involve the interaction of an extremal or a slightly sub-extremal black hole with a test particle or field, attempting to destroy the horizon, i.e. to create a so-called naked singularity. They usually conclude that WCCC cannot be violated starting from an extremal black hole, but may be violated starting from a slightly sub-extremal one, if backreaction and self-force effects are neglected. Some other works also analyze these effects. Starting 2007, a string of papers argue if WCCC can be violated by classically forbidden interactions occuring via the quantum nature of the particles associated with the fields; and where backrection and/or superradiance are pointed out as effects working in the direction of preserving the WCCC. We correct/modify a backrection argument, and furthermore point out that superradiance does not prevent {\em single particles} from being captured by the black hole; even if this capture would lead to WCCC violation. Then we consider the spontaneous emission (which we call the Zel'dovich-Unruh effect) of particles by the black hole, and find that at least for scalars, it can be understood without second quantization. It also completely invalidates the mentioned single- or few-particle thought experiments. However, the conclusions of our previous work on (at least) scalar fields interacting with black holes, i.e. that WCCC may be violated starting from slightly subextremal black holes, remains valid in this (semi)classical framework.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.