From what I remember, creating black holes that would devour the earth was a major concern of the politicians who were debeating building the accelerator down in texas. It was the scientists who told them that was a silly concern. I guess the politicians were on the right track for once.
That did make sense but you have one fact wrong. You considered a spherical cow with uniform density. Because it has uniform density, inside the cow the force dies off linearly and not at a cubic rate.
Re:Can anyone say cloaking devices ?
on
Mastering Light
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Even though it could change the "harmless" light into "dangerous" light, it would be that effective as a weapon for small amounts of energy. 100% efficiency doesn't mean same number of photons but the same amount of energy. So the light coming out in the form of gamma rays would have more energy per photon but a less concentrated beam of photons and would thus not be an effective weapon.
Slashdot Mirror
From what I remember, creating black holes that would devour the earth was a major concern of the politicians who were debeating building the accelerator down in texas. It was the scientists who told them that was a silly concern. I guess the politicians were on the right track for once.
That did make sense but you have one fact wrong. You considered a spherical cow with uniform density. Because it has uniform density, inside the cow the force dies off linearly and not at a cubic rate.
Even though it could change the "harmless" light into "dangerous" light, it would be that effective as a weapon for small amounts of energy. 100% efficiency doesn't mean same number of photons but the same amount of energy. So the light coming out in the form of gamma rays would have more energy per photon but a less concentrated beam of photons and would thus not be an effective weapon.