You seem to be lost in your own thoughts.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I didn't know we had so many nuclear physicists posting here.
Quote from: RageBeoulve on March 13, 2010, 07:07:22 PMQuote from: Singularity on March 13, 2010, 12:36:09 AMI'm come to the conclusion that it poses no danger at all... as long as the proton beams are shot in a sequence of small pulses. If it's done like that, it'll allow any formed micro blackholes to safely dissipate via hawking radiation before the next sequence of collisions occur.However if the beam is continuous without pause, I feel the risk of a stable micro-blackhole forming statistically increases over time. This is because there's a very small chance that a group of micro black holes may form within immediate vinicinity of each other upon the collisions, absorbing each other and then grow instead of decaying as intended. But this assumes that the collisions produce a high volume of micro black-holes in an immediate vicinity of space and time. Also such a process would take a long period of time of 'feeding' to achieve, and any interruption of the beam would likely cause the micro black hole to dissipate beforehand. It's hard to say really, as my knowledge isn't great with this aspect of physics.On a lighter note, a new galaxy will be formed! If the Earth was consumed by a micro black-hole, the rest of the Solar system would be unaffected. Only objects which approached the black-hole at a distance smaller than the radius of the Earth would experience a difference in the gravitational field between the black hole and the pre-black-hole Earth; the gravitational field of an Earth-mass black hole continues to increase all the way to the event horizon, but the gravitational field of the Earth is strongest at the surface of the Earth and decreases with depth, eventually reaching zero at the Earth's centre of mass. At distances greater than one Earth-radius, the gravitational field is identical, and the Moon and artificial satellites would continue to orbit as before.
Quote from: Singularity on March 13, 2010, 12:36:09 AMI'm come to the conclusion that it poses no danger at all... as long as the proton beams are shot in a sequence of small pulses. If it's done like that, it'll allow any formed micro blackholes to safely dissipate via hawking radiation before the next sequence of collisions occur.However if the beam is continuous without pause, I feel the risk of a stable micro-blackhole forming statistically increases over time. This is because there's a very small chance that a group of micro black holes may form within immediate vinicinity of each other upon the collisions, absorbing each other and then grow instead of decaying as intended. But this assumes that the collisions produce a high volume of micro black-holes in an immediate vicinity of space and time. Also such a process would take a long period of time of 'feeding' to achieve, and any interruption of the beam would likely cause the micro black hole to dissipate beforehand. It's hard to say really, as my knowledge isn't great with this aspect of physics.On a lighter note, a new galaxy will be formed!
I'm come to the conclusion that it poses no danger at all... as long as the proton beams are shot in a sequence of small pulses. If it's done like that, it'll allow any formed micro blackholes to safely dissipate via hawking radiation before the next sequence of collisions occur.However if the beam is continuous without pause, I feel the risk of a stable micro-blackhole forming statistically increases over time. This is because there's a very small chance that a group of micro black holes may form within immediate vinicinity of each other upon the collisions, absorbing each other and then grow instead of decaying as intended. But this assumes that the collisions produce a high volume of micro black-holes in an immediate vicinity of space and time. Also such a process would take a long period of time of 'feeding' to achieve, and any interruption of the beam would likely cause the micro black hole to dissipate beforehand. It's hard to say really, as my knowledge isn't great with this aspect of physics.
Quote from: Anarcho-Syndicalheap on March 15, 2010, 11:06:58 AMQuote from: (empty space) on March 15, 2010, 11:04:36 AMAs opposed to thick fuckheads like you? Still psychologically projecting I see. You are dumber than her.
Quote from: (empty space) on March 15, 2010, 11:04:36 AMAs opposed to thick fuckheads like you? Still psychologically projecting I see.
As opposed to thick fuckheads like you?
Quote from: Anarcho-Syndicalheap on March 15, 2010, 10:53:57 AMI didn't know we had so many nuclear physicists posting here. Well, technically I'm an astronomer but I did take the necessary courses on quantum physics and the like.
Quote from: odeon on March 15, 2010, 02:22:57 PMQuote from: Anarcho-Syndicalheap on March 15, 2010, 10:53:57 AMI didn't know we had so many nuclear physicists posting here. Well, technically I'm an astronomer but I did take the necessary courses on quantum physics and the like. To understand astronomy, I'd imagine you'd also have to know a lot about physics. The two go together like peanut-butter and chocolate.
i wish we could shut down our large hardon collider for a while
all those 2012 suicidals should do everyone a favor of camming themselves "passing on"theres way too few interesting live suicide footage. like all those people jumping off cliffs and stuff, for hale bopp, why did nobody film it :/
I need to avoid this thread. This stuff totally fascinates me...
You seem to be lost in your own thoughts.