Talk:Black hole thermodynamics

message: (William M. Connolley 17:31, 2004 May 26 (UTC)) Errrm... is this page dodgy? It starts off by saying that inside BH's classical thermo breaks down. Then it derives a pile of things using classical thermo. Then electrons go back in time.
:I have no recollection of editing the intro; but I clearly did about six months ago. So you may rightly be suspicious of that bit. Charles Matthews 18:32, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Requesting someone who is experienced in astrophysics looks over this article, becuase it's quite confusing and I'm not sure if it's all correct (September 2006) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.133.225.32 (talk • contribs) on 23:02, 31 August 2006.
:To whoever is willing to improve the article, here is a link to a review article: Don N. Page, Hawking radiation and black hole thermodynamics, New Journal of Physics 7 (2005) 203..  --LambiamTalk 18:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks (although the link seems to be broken), I plan on improving this article sometime, only I can't say when.  I have a copy of Wald's 1994 Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics, which I will use to clean this article (although I still like to find one more book).  Later: --Sadi Carnot 19:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadi, I recommend the book by Birrel and Davies: Quantum Field Theory in Curved Space. -Joshua Davis 23:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for review 

message: Shouldn't we say that the constant of proportionality is approximately 1/4, up to quantum gravity corrections, or is it somehow proven to be 1/4 regardless of what gravity looks like at Planck scale? Itinerant1 03:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There have indeed been cases studied where quantum corrections change it from 1/4.  But this may be too technical to get into here.  PhysPhD 06:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proportionality 

message: There may be some parts of these sections that could be salvaged, but they were way below the bar as they stood.  All that stuff with waves and rolling dice was some author making stuff up.PhysPhD 06:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted "Problems" sections 

message: : I am a chemist and fixed the parts on the page pertaining to thermodynamics. A lot of the definitions were sub par and the one for the 3rd law was flat out wrong. Whoever wrote this clearly has no training or grasp of thermodynamics. I do not know the quality of the astrophysics part, but from looking at it and reading other comments, this page is an unfortunate exception to wiki's very accurate scientific articles. Alchemist314 (talk) 09:34, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor Quality 

message: You don't need an astrophysicist to look at the article. It is completely wrong. If the entropy is proportional to the area then you don't need temperature. It exists at absolute zero, and the third law? The point that the area increases while evaporation decreases the area is well-taken. Evaporation by black-body radiation is complete nonsense. You need a thermal source to keep the walls of the cavity at a given temperature so that the radiation will be thermal at that temperature. If the black hole is the final state what would give rise to a finite temperature that would allow for thermal radiation? The zeroth law is also wrong. It say that when two bodies at different temperatures are placed in thermal contact they will arrive at thermal equilibrium at a common temperature. What does it mean for a black hole to have a uniform temperature? Is it possible for a gradient in temperature to exist? Temperature inversely proportional to the energy (mass) is also wrong. The entropy must be a concave function, i.e. a negative second derivative, not a convex function. Concave functions are to be maximized, convex functions minimized. The Bekenstein-Hawking expression is a convex function of the mass (energy), and, hence, it is not a candidate for an entropy at all.  See arXiv:1110.5322v1  and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpzbDfqcZSw for more detailed criticisms.Bernhlav (talk) 04:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Simply Wrong

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Black hole thermodynamics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130329060031/http://www.charlierose.com/guest/view/6294 to http://www.charlierose.com/guest/view/6294
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:15, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Black-hole thermodynamics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110926235833/http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/phys/2005-0622-153848/14549.pdf to http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/phys/2005-0622-153848/14549.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:42, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)