Calling all black hole theorists (i need your help!)

Post Reply New Topic

In terms of condensing energy, this is not such a theoretical concept. As molecules' energy increase they will begin to disassociate into their individual atoms, increasing the energy further cuases the electrons to move out of the atomic quantum well and the atoms become fully disassociated. Further increases in energy cause the individual quarks to be freed from their binds and the matter becomes a plasma, cooling causes it to condense into quarks, particles, atoms, etc. So if sufficient energy existed in a sufficiently small enclosure which was allowed to expand, releasing the the predictable results are that the energy will condense into matter.
There may be a correlation to quantum foam in terms of the colliding membranes, but I am not sure how? It seems that the theory of quantum foam is based on small perturbations at quantum levels and results in rapid annihilation, which seems to me in contrast to the anthropic principle essentially if it is applied to our universe. The basis of the theory of a membrane collision is that it was an inelastic collision essentially, the resulting energy constituting the energy of our universe, which was born from the point of collision and condensed rapidly during inflation as it expanded from the singularity (not the same singularity associated with the black hole for any unfamiliar with the term).
Thoughts?

well thats certianly shocking and a litte scary

huh

"There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened." - Douglas Adams

CERN's large Hadron collider scares people. But the possibility black hole production is remote, cosmic rays with +1000 times higher energy hit our atmosphere every day, but we are still here.

I read somewhere that the fluorecent light depends on vacuum fluctuations, which causes ionization of the tube's gas that allows electricity to flow (like a Geiger-Muller tube). A faulty flickering fluorecent detects random vacuum fluctuations i.e. virtual positron-electron pairs.

Here is a nice fact: 3 trillion neutrinos pass through your thumbnail every second, and it takes 100 light years of lead to stop 50% of them.

I KNEW flourescent lights were evil!!

I've heard something about this in regards to M-theory. M-theory is a generalized version of superstring theory. It postulates that our universe might be a three dimensional brane (think membrane) floating in a 11 (I think) dimensional space. Two branes can collide, and that's where the energy comes from to produce a big bang. Concievably if that's how the big bang happened then the same thing could happen again, anywhere, anytime.

But this is all pretty spectulative stuff. Once the Large Hadron collider is finished there is a small chance that something confirming string theory could be created.

It needs to be added that the almost finished LHC at Cern can produce something like 15billion electrion volts (I think that is the measure and the amount), but the old Supercollider that was going to have been built around the town of Waxahachie, Texas was going to be 20billion electron volts, more powerful. Does everybody remember when your U.S. congress stopped funding for the project in the early nineties (I think)? It cost more to shut down than it would have cost to go ahead and finish it, at least that was the rumor I heard. They put back physics 15 years.

Big bang in your kitchen? I really doubt it, plus thats nothin I have a stargate in my basement

It sounds like many know their stuff, these strange theories, i myself have heard all sorts of crazy stuff, M theory is relativly new from my understanding, and originally their were 5 different eqasions representing a single outcome.

That big bang in your kitchen is pretty bizzarr. The problem is, its all theory, and their are a ton of theories about Black Wholes (macro) to particles (micro). So many equasions, so many models, truth is their are too many variables, too much unknown (much more so in the micro world, the macro world at least seems logical with the exception of black wholes).

I dont like many theories about the micro world, like saying black wholes occure constantly in the micro world. In that world, the normal laws of physics seem to not apply (particles seem to arrive, and then dissapear all outa nothing for instance) logic breaks down both at the singularity and at the sub atomic level, until we can put a real accurate number in place of all these unknown variables we will be stuck with these crazy mathamatical models, some true (as much as can be) and some completly bizzarr.

How about a wormhole in the dryer? I mean missing socks have to go somewhere.
http://www.wrongplanet.net/modules.php? ... 6&start=15

some say that black holes can be very small

ya some mathmatician or physisist (love my spelling) had some math formula and calculated that in theory these blackholes dont have to have the mass on many suns to become a blackwhole. They 'found' that they can exist at the sub-atomic level. Over the years, i have heard so many theories, some that proove others, some the disproove others, its hard to tell what to beleive. We simply do not have enough facts, at least in my opinion, to decide once and for all how the sub-atomic world opperates, too many more variables, variables that do not exist in the macro world (logic is more prevelant). I think these theories are amusing, but I would not invest in them.

For instance, look at superstring. If supersting is correct, then atoms, as we know them, do not 'look' like we thought they did. Back in the 1930's-1940's people beleived atoms looked like pies, i guess for lack of a better term, as time and technology progresses, so will our understanding, and some of what we studied in high school and collage (physics) will eventually be proven wrong.

white holes are a myth completely made up by science fiction, key word being fiction.

Black holes break down matter and convert all types of energy into matter.

Stars takes the smaller types of matter and combine them, release energy and create more complex types of matter that will be later broken down by black holes so your theoretical white holes should be stars people are just too busy looking for something that doesn't exist to see whats right in front of them.

And convert all types of energy to matter? Care to better explain that?

but his original point is that if you let of enough firecrackers, by chance one would produce a black hole eventually!

its also kind of trivial. there is also a possibility the sun won't come up tommorrow because earth has been knocked out of its orbit by a comet. and thats much higher.

its an interesting issue though.

I would love to see some GR hermitians / equations for the firecracker idea.

Let me clarify this.

"Matter" is perhaps the wrong term, since when we think of matter, we kind of think of "more particles".

But imagine a single particle accelerated to like 0.999999999999c. its still the same particle. But its mass is HUUUUUUUUUUUUGE!


To prove mike is onto the right idea, even though it was phrased wrong. Lets assume the opposite. That energy entering black holes just adds to the energy of the system, say, by accelerating two point like masses that weigh as much as tennisballs so their orbital frequency increases to the degree that its possible that there would be significant gravity waves coming from this osscilation. (remember, we haven't measured gravity waves yet, but they if einsteins general relativity is to hold, we must measure them!)

The reality is, that even though these things could increase in their oscillation frequency, and thus the amount by which they shake the fabric of space time, there is a point, at which they cannot exceed in speed, and thus, their mass MUST increase.

so. although its likely that mass in black holes it added to by the addition of more "particles and stuff" the mass can also be added to by the energy in the locale building up.