Observer-dependent horizon temperatures: a coordinate-free formulation of Hawking radiation as tunneling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We reformulate the Hamilton–Jacobi tunneling method for calculating Hawking radiation in static, spherically symmetric spacetimes by explicitly incorporating a preferred family of frames. These frames correspond to a family of observers tied to a locally static timelike Killing vector of the spacetime. This formulation separates the role of the coordinates from the choice of vacuum and thus provides a coordinate-independent formulation of the tunneling method. In addition, it clarifies the nature of certain constants and their relation to these preferred observers in the calculation of horizon temperatures. We first use this formalism to obtain the expected temperature for a static observer at finite radius in the Schwarzschild spacetime. We then apply this formalism to the Schwarzschild–de Sitter spacetime, where there is no static observer with 4-velocity equal to the static timelike Killing vector. It is shown that a preferred static observer, one whose trajectory is geodesic, measures the lowest temperature from each horizon. Furthermore, this observer measures horizon temperatures corresponding to the well-known Bousso–Hawking normalization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".