4.7 Article

How not to extract information from black holes: Cosmic censorship as a guiding principle

Journal

PHYSICS LETTERS B
Volume 829, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137112

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11922508]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the evolution of charged black holes and the emission process under Hawking evaporation. Previous studies have suggested that extremal black holes may be effectively singular, violating the cosmic censorship conjecture. The study uses a simplified model and finds that having only a finite species of charged particles can actually lead to some end states becoming naked singularities.
Black holes in general relativity are commonly believed to evolve towards a Schwarzschild state as they gradually lose angular momentum and electrical charge under Hawking evaporation. However, when Kim and Wen applied quantum information theory to Hawking evaporation and argued that Hawking particles with maximum mutual information could dominate the emission process, they found that charged black holes tend towards extremality. In view of some evidence pointing towards extremal black holes being effectively singular, this would violate the cosmic censorship conjecture. Nevertheless, since the Kim-Wen model is too simplistic (e.g. it assumes a continuous spectrum of particles with arbitrary charge-to-mass ratio), one might hope that a more realistic model could avoid this problem. In this work, we show that having only a finite species of charged particles would actually worsen the situation, with some end states becoming a naked singularity. With this model as an example, we emphasize the need to study whether charged black holes can violate cosmic censorship under a given model of Hawking evaporation. (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available