• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,075 questions , 2,226 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,749 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Hawking Radiation as Tunneling

+ 7 like - 0 dislike

Firstly, I'm aware that Hawking radiation can be derived in the "normal" way using the Bogoliubov transformation. However, I was intrigued by the heuristic explanation in terms of tunneling. The story goes that a virtual particle-antiparticle pair arises just outside the horizon. The negative energy partner tunnels in and the positive energy partner escapes to infinity as Hawking radiation. (Conversely the pair can be though of as arising inside the horizon and the positive energy parnter tunneling out). This reference gives a treatment of this process, using the WKB approximation to handle the tunneling.

The thing that's confusing me about this, though, is the origination of the particle/antiparticle virtual pair in the first place. Taking the case for the moment where the pair is an electron/positron, I'm used to seeing such pairs arise in QED, following the QED rules. So for example an electron/positron pair might arise in an oyster diagram, contributing to the vacuum vacuum amplitude.

enter image description here

However in the tunneling description of Hawking radiation, no one seems to mention processes such as this. Only the electron and positron make an appearance. Why is there no photon involved? Is this simply because the tunneling explanation can only ever be heuristic and shouldn't be pursued too far?

Or perhaps it's because Oyster diagrams belong to perturbation theory and tunneling is essentially non-perturbative and QED vertices are completely irrelevant?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 16:58 (UCT), posted by SE-user twistor59
asked Nov 23, 2012 in Theoretical Physics by twistor59 (2,500 points) [ no revision ]

1 Answer

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

Perhaps not a totally satisfactory answer, but a partial clarification of one of the things I was confused about:

In the semiclassical treatment of the Hawking radiation process, there is no need to have an interacting quantum field theory. Therefore the vacuum-vacuum bubble diagrams of interacting perturbation theory are completely irrelevant to the basic HR-generation process.

Quantum vacuum states have inherent fluctuations (uncertainties) in the fields, and when an asymptotic particle detector makes a measurement and detects a particle, it's "as if" a particle arising from a pair production near the horizon had been radiated away (with its negative energy partner tunneling in). (Or vice versa for pair production within the horizon).

I'm not sure that more can be said about the mechanisms semiclassically - it's effectively just a measurement (made by the particle detector) of a vacuum fluctuation.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-03-22 16:58 (UCT), posted by SE-user twistor59
answered May 19, 2013 by twistor59 (2,500 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights