MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7101217759

Alberta-Thy-15-00 Mining Energy from a Black Hole by Strings

2008· article· en· W7101217759 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlack hole (networking)String (physics)Non-critical string theoryHawking radiationEvent horizonExtremal black holePrimordial black holeString field theory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss how cosmic strings can be used to mine energy from black holes. A string attached to the black hole gives rise to an additional channel for the energy release. It is demonstrated that when a string crosses the event horizon, its transverse degrees of freedom are thermally excited and thermal string perturbations propagate along the string to infinity. The internal metric induced on the 2D worldsheet of the static string crossing the horizon describes a 2D black hole. For this reason thermal radiation of string excitations propagating along the string can be interpreted as Hawking radiation of the 2D black hole. It is shown that the rate of energy emission through the string channel is of the same order of magnitude as the bulk radiation of the black hole. Thus, for Ns strings attached to the black hole the efficiency of string channels is increased by factor Ns. We discuss restrictions on Ns which exist because of the finite thickness of strings, the gravitational backreaction and quantum fluctuations. Our conclusion is that the energy emission rate by strings can be increased as compared to the standard emission in the bulk by the factor 10 3 for GUT strings and up to the factor 10 31 for electroweak strings. 1 1

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2870.081

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics→French-language works237,207→