Hawking Radiation and Black Hole Thermodynamics

I was looking at it as a lightning sprite for the longest time Axil but don't know another way.

Its a crackpot way of thinking about it but ...ice as a type of particle holding a charge in the cloud, we are taught positives and negatives are all within areas of the cloud as the voltage seeks a ground and a sprite discharges up? This area of an event radiation change from voltage to another type of energy. At this point I gave up trying to think this out. it makes no sense. adding gravity or lack of gravity ..the atmosphere vs the vacuum of space seems to generate through the electric universe theory of no negatives, just stability layers in gravity ,some go's up and others go down without relating to positive or negative.or voltage so much as the stability line.

sorry if that made it worst..

While I'm in the rabbit hole...The principal to my project is in this area. If a stability line is created and a charge of matter is pushed through it, what would come out of the other side....would it be the same as a sprite from a thunderstorm on one side ect... the use of a microwave behind the stability line going through it with a line of chartered particles,

This is not strictly connected but interesting article I think:

https://www.quantamagazine.org…correcting-code-20190103/

Curious what you make of it

I would like to rip this apart and re-write it but without proof ....

If the neg enrgy was listed as just a high low state I think some of this would make more sense.

https://www.quantamagazine.org…quantum-gravity-20180306/

Likely few will open the doc-copy past high lite

structure, and zap it with a microwave pulse. An electron orbiting the nitrogen-vacancy system both absorbs the light and doesn’t, and the system enters a quantum superposition of two spin directions — up and down — like a spinning top that has some probability of spinning clockwise and some chance of spinning counterclockwise. The microdiamond, laden with this superposed spin, is subjected to a magnetic field, which makes up-spins move left while down-spins go right. The diamond itself therefore splits into a superposition of two trajectories.

In the full experiment, the researchers must do all this to two diamonds — a blue one and a red one, say — suspended next to each other inside an ultracold vacuum. When the trap holding them is switched off, the two microdiamonds, each in a superposition of two locations, fall vertically through the vacuum. As they fall, the diamonds feel each other’s gravity. But how strong is their gravitational attraction?

If gravity is a quantum interaction, then the answer is: It depends. Each component of the blue diamond’s superposition will experience a stronger or weaker gravitational attraction to the red diamond, depending on whether the latter is in the branch of its superposition that’s closer or farther away. And the gravity felt by each component of the red diamond’s superposition similarly depends on where the blue diamond is.

Do Merging Black Holes Create An Information-Loss Paradox?

The discussions about black hole information paradox already consumed lotta public money and they just illustrate clearly, that the physicists don't actually understand the concepts, which they themselves invented. In particular, the entropy is quantity derived on background of thermodynamics, i.e. classical physics at the human observer scale and as such is strictly related to observability concept. Once the objects aren't observable anymore (because they get blurred by quantum mechanics and/or horizon of black hole and/or simply they become indistinguishable each other), then the thermodynamics has nothing to say about them in similar way, like the special relativity has nothing to say about let say photon behavior, because
this concept is orthogonal to special relativity.

In addition, the thermodynamic description of black holes so far completely ignores the topological space-time inversion, which runs at the event horizon and which all relativists so far consider only virtual artifact of co-moving coordinates. But this inversion switches the role of space and time coordinates and implies, that what did look like expansion above event horizon will behave like contraction beneath the even horizon with respect to thermodynamics - and vice versa.

The poor entropy handling arises immediately, once we consider than all gases spontaneously expand into infinite volume, "because" the entropy is indeed spontaneously rising. If it's so - how is it possible, that black holes should have "highest entropy" content, when they're "allegedly" formed by most compact pin-point form of matter known so far? The erroneous entropy handling is ideologically rooted in belief in relativistic Big Bang cosmology, according to which all matter of Universe ends within black holes, despite it should recycle in steady-state cosmology of dense aether model. It also reflects the infallible trust of formal physics in universal validity of its abstract theorems and descriptions of reality, despite that they're already borrowed from opposite observational perspectives. See also AWT and cosmological time arrow

If there is no need for a hole... just a fussy mass of matter behind a particle wall from Quantum tunneling waves.

the entire reaction behind the stability line using a microwave gigahertz to penetrate a solid body. fuel and waist don't exit, only the wave would exit. At least after it spits out the matter its mixing..

Quote from Zephir_AWT

The discussions about black hole information paradox already consumed lotta public money and they just illustrate clearly, that the physicists don't actually understand the concepts, which they themselves invented.

You are right: It just proves that the involved people have absolutely no clue about what information is....

0000101001001001011011100110011001101111011100100110110101100001011101000110100101101111011011100010000000100000011011100110010101100101011001000111001100100000001000000110000100100000001000000111001101101000011000010111001001100101011001000010000001110100011100100110000101101110011100110110110001100001011101000110111101110010

https://www.online-toolz.com/tools/text-binary-convertor.php

Quote from clarifier

How can You even dare to expose such criticism ?

The meaning of Information has be defined by Shannon not by Hawkings... May be you should try to understand the quantization problem.

Google helps, as always...

Personally I like the super nuclei explanation for black holes which avoids a hole lot of nonsense about a "singularity" which is really trying to say that you can cram an infinite mass into an infinitely small point. - Personally I don't buy it. - If you simply remove the electrons (or shrink the orbits) and stick a hell of a lot of neutrons together, you are going to get something that looks a lot like a black hole.

As for Hawking Radiation, based on this new model, does this black hole really need to mysteriously shrink and loose mass? Black holes are known to have ejection jets on each side of the plane of rotation which "spew out" matter at very high velocity. X-ray emissions from the wavefronts of ejection jets are observable and have been documented. Refer to: subtleatomics.com/black-holes There may well be a reverse spacetime-> mass process occurring inside the core of blackholes, i.e. mass-> spacetime. Spacetime is then ejected axially as jets as part of the larger galactic scale mass/spacetime solenoidal flux flow.

As such, so called "Hawking" black hole radiation has already been identified, but the mechanism and dynamics are quite different from existing models.