Hawking Radiation Claimed Created In a Lab

eldavojohn writes "In 1974, a young newcomer to the Royal Society named Stephen Hawking predicted that black holes emit Hawking Radiation. Researchers have been looking for it in space ever since. A new paper up for publication claims to have beaten searchers by observing it in a lab. Doing it wasn't easy. They say they brought light to a standstill by drastically increasing the refractive index of the material it was being fired at, creating a 'white hole.' This horizon, beyond which light cannot penetrate (event horizon), is the same between white and black holes, which caused the team to suspect they observed Hawking Radiation when light of a different uniform wavelength than the input laser was emitted. But, before you rejoice, the Tech Review article notes, 'Of course, the big question is whether the emitted light is generated by some other mechanism such as Cerenkov radiation, scattering or, in particular, fluorescence which is the hardest to rule out.'"

Comments

what bs are you posting

[Anonymous Coward]

this was disproved a long time ago and hawking even admitted as much
it was about black holes and that they emit themselves basically to death and "evaporate"
which was later proven totally false

Nobody could be that thick.

[Anonymous Coward]

I would just love to start an inquisitive investigation to determine the source of all this peer-reviewed claims by a wheelchair-ridden creature that allegedly can't speak on his own.

I wouldn't doubt it if he was actually captured a long time ago by his arch-nemesis and enemies, forever used as their strawman to make broad unprofitable claims and assertions while the real meat of the matter is covered with actual science published to a patent. I think the latter is more evident, because no so-called King of Haw will ever name any amount of Radiation in such a way without having a good use for it: it just defies all purposes of discovery, as a s(p)oilled brat with too much attention.

Brool. Cory. Sto.

Science Fiction

[BitZtream]

Which is more or less what the article is. Yes there is SOME proof to back it up, but 99% of the 'proof' about black holes in general is really just theory.

Astrophysicists will make shit up to prove themselves right before they'll bother to look for real proof. At this point the theories are more or less freaking useless because they are based on theories based on theories based on theories based on theories. They just start making shit up so their theory fits.

They need to back up about 50 to 100 years and start proving some of those theories rather than just inventing shit to fill in the wholes where their previous theories made no sense.

When EVERYTHING you do is theoretical, its not science, its fantasy or fiction. Its not research if the only place it is confirmed to exist is in your head.

Seriously ... 'we think black holes emit a kind of radation, and we know what its like because we created it in a lab before ever actually observing it in nature.'

Thats not fucking science, its fantasy.