Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Micro-Black Holes Make Poor Planet Killers

Posted by timothy on from the they-don't-even-make-good-nightclubs dept.

astroengine writes "Physicists are getting excited about the possibility of micro-black holes (MBH) being produced by the LHC and an international group of researchers have done the math to see what kind of impact they could have on the Earth. Unfortunately, if you're a megalomaniac looking for your next globe-eating weapon, you can scrub MBHs off your WMD list. If a speedy MBH is produced, flying through our planet, it will only have a few seconds to accrete the mass of a few atoms. It would then be lost to space where it will evaporate. If a slow MBH is produced, dropping into the Earth where it sits for a few billion years, the results are even more boring."

10 of 314 comments (clear)

  1. Re:But what if slow black holes collide? by b0ttle · · Score: 0, Troll

    They will merge into a slighter bigger MBH.

  2. Re:More Mass = More Suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    You seem intrigued in micro black holes. Now that you are interested in girls, try the front.

  3. Re:More Mass = More Suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    and more mass = deeper suckage

  4. As if! by Abuzar · · Score: -1, Troll

    Sure, everyone's a physics expert even when dealing with completely unknown phenomena and experiments conducted for the first time in human history.

    Of course they're saying there is no cause for concern, it's their job that's on the line. Risks to humanity, the planet etc. be damned, we want our LHC!

    1. Re:As if! by Abuzar · · Score: -1, Troll

      Heh, asshole moderators... can't tell the difference between a difference of opinion and trolling. With such intellectually challenged homo sapiens in existence, I shudder to think what frame of mind those who work at the LHC... no, let's not go there. Some things just shouldn't be imagined. Suffice it to say that if major disaster does strike humanity, it shan't be such a great loss.

  5. Black holes are fiction by clone53421 · · Score: -1, Troll

    You can't crush something with a force that's weaker than the repulsive force that's holding it apart.

    Gravity is much, much weaker than the subatomic electrostatic forces that hold subatomic particles apart.

    In essence, what you're claiming in a black hole is a neutron star – a single massive nucleus – packed together as tightly as is physically possible for matter to be packed. This is impossible on the most basic level: the larger an atomic nucleus gets, the more unstable it is. There are no stable atomic nuclei any larger than lead-208.

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    1. Re:Black holes are fiction by clone53421 · · Score: -1, Troll

      At the Schwartzchild radius, the gravitational field is supposedly equal to the speed of light. This is not possible, according to physics, because it takes an infinite field to accelerate any nonzero mass to the speed of light. The gravitational field will never reach the speed of light, because the gravitational field would then be infinite.

      Basically, you're assuming that the formula for gravitational field works according to the normal algebraic laws, but this is not the case. It is exactly the same situation as if you assumed that the algebraic function v(t) = at could be extended to infinity. It can't. Integrating a constant acceleration, as time goes to infinity the formula says that velocity should also go to infinity. It doesn't. It is asymptotically limited by the speed of light, which is a non-infinite constant.

      The gravitational field is also asymptotically limited by the speed of light.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    2. Re:Black holes are fiction by clone53421 · · Score: 0, Troll

      The Schwartzchild radius is the result of some clever but wrong algebraic operations.

      You can cleverly look at the formula v(t) = at and decide "if a equals 1 m/s^2, then in 10 years I will be traveling at a little over 105% of c".

      Similarly, you can cleverly look at the formula for the gravitational field and determine how much matter you need at a given density to make (A) the radius at which the field equals the speed of light equal to (B) the radius of your sphere of mass.

      Both are incorrect, for the same reason.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  6. I have a VERY pertinent link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    This is what happens when a micro black hole is observed too often. Sorry if all the links are down. I tried!

  7. Re:Do they mean a black hole or a singularity? by mcgrew · · Score: -1, Troll

    The LHC isn't going to produce anythin the mass of the earth. Google and Wikipedia can enlighten you. Don't you have a computer?

    --
    Free Martian Whores!