I'm not at all acquainted with astrophysics but I remember seeing an article state that there was a different physicist who proved this same thing:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7191324

A quick google shows his response to this:

https://twitter.com/abhasmitra/status/514804101024997376

His response:

"Hawking radiation is unproven. And particle physicists are not aware that even without any Quantum Mechanics, classical gravitation dictates that all gravitational collapse must be accompanied by radiation. :

http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.024010

(http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0605066v3.pdf)

And then grav collapse should naturally lead to radiation supported ECO: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1384107606...

http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/content/369/1/492

http://mnrasl.oxfordjournals.org/content/404/1/L50

And as far as non -formation of ``Event Horizon'' is concerned, in contrast to the conjectures of the present yet unpublished paper I gave EXACT proof:

http://www.ias.ac.in/pramana/v73/p615/fulltext.pdf

But phys.org never highlighted my research which is infinitely more accurate than the present paper whose authors are not even aware that Question of Hawking Radiation Would Arise Only If There Would Already Be a Black Hole With an Event Horizon. Therefore This paper is not self-consistent. But that does not matter:

The lead author of this paper has CAMBRIDGE AFFILIATION.

So phys.org is glad to highlight an inconsistent and yet unpublished paper by ignoring my series of my exact and original papers on the same topic."

I don't have any background in astrophysics, can anyone comment on Dr. Mitra's response and the relation of his work to the above research?

The best discussion I can find on Dr. Mitra's work is on quora: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-Abhas-Mitra-resolved-t...