Talk:Charged black hole

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the relativity task force.

disputed[edit]

I say that a black hole can, and must, have another instrinsic property: gross coloral charge, taken from the stuff it's eaten. The quarks just don't disappear. lysdexia 19:26, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

this is nonsense. it can eat only eat up colour-neutral stuff because of confinement. I'm removing the tag.

Your reply is nonsense. I said gross, not net color. And respect the spellings of originators' terms: It's color, not colour. lysdexia 05:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can you cite a source for this? Otherwise I think your objection approaches original research. I'm not sure that I understand what "gross" color means either. Threepounds 05:46, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's two signifigant things here, first of all this is an OR issue, and secondly 'gross' and 'net' don't apply in a black-hole anyway because of the holographic principal. I don't think anyone's ever done research into colour-charged black holes, probably because QCD and General Relativity make very little sense in the context of each other. Tom 08:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It seems reasonable to me that tag be removed. Threepounds 16:34, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just realised lysdexia has been blocked indefinitely for trolling, and I don't think there's anything in it, so I'm going to go ahead and remove the tag. Tom 22:51, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

charge measurement[edit]

How does a black hole's charge manifest itself? How do you measure it? Will it attract oppositely charged particles preferentially?

I've been wondering the same. Even if it had a charge before it collapsed, how does charge become evident after the black hole forms? ie I am assuming photons have to be able to escape the black hole to "transmit" the information about the charge -- but nothing can escape. Appears a bit contradictory. I sort of thought the "information" about the charge disappears once the BH forms.Feldercarb (talk) 22:23, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't the ads principle imply that outside world sees as if the charge is emanating from the "surface" of the black hole? J mareeswaran (talk) 03:32, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering the same: Charge forces, like light, are exchanged by photons, but photons don't escape the BH, so it could appear to be without charge (like it appears to be without light). But if viewed from the outside, due to time stopping at the Schwarzschild radius, the charged particles appear to stay forever on their journey towards that border and from there they could emit photons carrying the information about their charge. But then, on the other hand, these particles could also emit photons representing visible light. Due to the immense gravity these photons would be of extremely low frequency and have the lowest possible energy and thus have nearly no effect. But clearly, this topic seems to be too complex for a WP article. Some link to a source explaining this in detail would be nice, though. --Alfe (talk) 12:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with a question like this is that it could only be answered with a theory that describes both gravity and the electromagnetic force, i.E. a unification of General Relativity and Quantum Electrodynamics. As far as I know no such theory exists. There are some approaches to unite these theories, but none of them is developed far enough to make any predictions about black holes. --MrBurns (talk) 02:42, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]