/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12734933

4MiB, 4320x4320, Black_hole_-_Messier_87_crop_max_res.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Theoretical smallest black hole possible

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 00:16:29 2021 No.12734933 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12735308 >>12735702 >>12735724 >>12736067 >>12737988 >>12740453

Is it doable on Earth? How small would it be to not be lethal? If possible, how much force would it have to take to create it? Writing reasons

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 00:18:45 No.12734940 Report

Quoted By: >>12734968 >>12740438

It's not possible without destroying the earth. A black hole the size of a coin would destroy the entire earth in seconds. Anything smaller wouldn't be able to last long enough and would lose all it's mass through hawking radiation almost immediately.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 00:24:14 No.12734968 Report

Quoted By: >>12735033 >>12736457 >>12737075

>>12734940
So if a black hole smaller than a coin was created, how long would it take to dissipate? What would be the after effects to anyone nearby? Just what kind of force would someone be looking at to create even such a small sized black hole?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 00:27:29 No.12734978 Report

Quoted By:

everytime the LHC at CERN is turned on a tiny black hole is generated when they collide the particles. Hasn't sucked earth into it so far.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 00:39:59 No.12735033 Report

Quoted By:

>>12734968
Depends on the mass of the black hole. If it has the mass of a coin, it'd lose it's mass in a second and cause a huge explosion that would destroy anything near it, but not destroy the earth.

If it was the size of a coin, then it's mass would be earth like. In that case it's large enough to destroy the planet, and it will.

https://insh.world/science/what-if-a-coin-sized-black-hole-appeared-on-earth/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 01:35:56 No.12735308 Report

Quoted By: >>12735507 >>12737062

>>12734933
Depends on what kind of a black hole we're talking about. The only known way black holes emerge in nature is via supernovae. If the mass of the star reaches the Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit (about 3 solar masses), then the gravitational force is greater than the neutron degeneracy pressure and there is nothing to prevent the collapse to a black hole.
That said, there are other more exotic and hypothetical ways black holes could emerge. For instance, primordial black holes, which may have emerged during the Big Bang due to energy fluctuations, can be as small as a Planck mass. Unfortunately we don't have a working theory of quantum gravity yet, so all this stuff is highly speculative. Also these small black holes would almost instantly evaporate due to Hawking radiation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 02:35:58 No.12735507 Report

Quoted By: >>12736473

>>12735308
Supernovae dont make black holes, they are an alternative end to a stars life. If it went supernova it wasnt big enough to form a black hole

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO tGlRO1n.gif, 61KiB, 680x476

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 03:36:26 No.12735702 Report

Quoted By: >>12736067 >>12740380 >>12741647

>>12734933
>Theoretical smallest black hole possible
>Is it doable on Earth? How small would it be to not be lethal? If possible, how much force would it have to take to create it? Writing reasons
You should know that within string theory, all matter is an excitation of an extremal black hole of one kind or another. The duality between string matter and classical black holes is of a nature that the two differ only in size. If you dualize fundamental strings so they become heavy, and T-dualize them to become extended, and stack them up on top of each other so that they have a macroscopic mass and charge, they smoothly become classical black holes. The identity is exact enough that all properties of black holes are translatable to string theory, through AdS/CFT.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Planet9-extreme-trans-Neptunian- (...).jpg, 54KiB, 671x377

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 03:45:31 No.12735724 Report

Quoted By: >>12735773

>>12734933
There's a theory that the hypothetical "Planet Nine" could be a primordial black hole the size of a baseball. And it's doing this to the solar system orbits. So its mass is theoretically huge, about 5 times that of Earth.

So a black hole the size of a coin could destroy the Earth, yes. I can't imagine a black hole that could exist in our atmosphere.... either it's too small and dissipates, or if stable it would be large enough to destroy or seriously fuck up with the planet.

I would love Planet Nine to be a Black Hole though, it's one of my favourite pet theories. It would be far and small enough to be safe and would provide great opportunities to study primordial black holes up close.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 04:00:22 No.12735773 Report

Quoted By:

>>12735724
What if it's dark matter

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 05:26:21 No.12736067 Report

Quoted By: >>12740281 >>12740558

>>12734933
Smallest possible is actually definitionally the Planck Length. It's a concise proof and wikipedia has a decent explanation in their article abou the aforementioned.

>>12735702
String theory is largely being left aside these days in favor of QCD

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 05:37:03 No.12736108 Report

Quoted By:

we don't have the power to sustain the reaction we see that happens atomically from a black hole formation.
I recon we can create a black hole, with the theoretical power of a black hole the size of a speck of sand, but it would need that same power source to stay on for a very very long long long time to accumulate the mass needed to actually begin to do damage we associate with black holes.

in other words, in classic physics, there is no way to trick the universe into having a massive gravity field without actually having mass, and any black hole scenario artificially created would break the facility down before sustaining some 'chain reaction' that might suck everything up and get more and more dense.

Here's a followup question: if you chipped off a black hole 10% the mass of our planet and the size of a penny, do you guys think you'd just have a bigger black hole, or would our mass 'quench' the reaction and leave a big heavy useless heavy rock?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 05:44:56 No.12736135 Report

Quoted By: >>12736237 >>12737682

i am a legitimate expert on this subject and i am really amused that so many people here are giving bullshit answers. a simple arxiv search gives answers to this question, read Dimipolous

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 06:10:00 No.12736237 Report

Quoted By:

>>12736135
the legitimate expert doesn't have to answer the question, he need only name drop the text in which he abides knowing full well the subject at hand is highly, highly theoretical.
what's amusing is confusing the term expert with human blowjob

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 06:38:59 No.12736457 Report

Quoted By: >>12737077

>>12734968
>how long would it take
stuff this in excel
$\displaystyle \begin{align*} \text{Mass} && M \\ \text{Radius} && R &= M \cdot \frac{2G}{c^2} \\ \text{Surface area} && A &= M^2 \cdot \frac{16 \pi G^2}{c^4} \\ \text{Surface gravity} && \kappa &= \frac{1}{M} \cdot \frac{c^4}{4G} \\ \text{Surface tides} && d \kappa_R &= \frac{1}{M^2} \cdot \frac{c^6}{4G^2} \\ \text{Entropy} && S &= M^2 \cdot \frac{4 \pi G }{ \hbar c \; ln10} \\ \text{Temperature} && T &= \frac{1}{M} \cdot \frac{ \hbar c^3 }{8k \pi G} \\ \text{Luminosity} && L &= \frac{1}{M^2} \cdot \frac{ \hbar c^6}{15360 \pi G^2} \\ \text{Lifetime} && t &= M^3 \cdot \frac{5120 \pi G^2}{ \hbar c^4} \\ \end{align*} $

G https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant
c https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light
? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant#Value
k https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_constant

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 06:44:47 No.12736473 Report

Quoted By: >>12737062

>>12735507
sure bud
https://www.calacademy.org/explore-science/failed-supernova-makes-for-a-successful-black-hole

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 11:07:14 No.12737062 Report

Quoted By: >>12740572

>>12735308
>>12736473
>parroting popsci, look at me go!
>I cannot calculate why it is so :(
Fucking idiot. Who do you think you're fooling with this shit? If you aren't prepared to defend something, then you shouldn't be pretending to understand it in response to a question like this. You will get called out, you are transparent. Please try to learn how this shit actually works, from a technical standpoint.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 11:13:26 No.12737075 Report

Quoted By:

>>12734968
luckily the Hawking radiation prevents the existence of sudden micro black holes passing through our Solar system and destroying everything.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 11:14:34 No.12737077 Report

Quoted By:

>>12736457
lifetime meant as black hole lifetime before total evaporation?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 16:15:13 No.12737682 Report

Quoted By:

>>12736135

I need the Answers

Expert Anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 21 Feb 2021 18:00:44 No.12737988 Report

Quoted By:

>>12734933
You can create a black hole with any kind of mass and size by cramming enough mass-energy into a small enough radius. The problem is that even a black hole smaller than a proton weighs over a million tonnes, so good luck. Maybe it can be done by accelerating a few huge-ass metal rods to nearly the speed of light with a huger-ass laser array and then slamming them into each other with femtometer accuracy. Maybe it could be done by covering the entire sun with mirrors and turning it into a laser. Probably not though. Maybe there's stable asteroid-massed primordial black holes around and you can harvest those, but again, they are smaller than atomic nuclei and spew out watts to gigawatts of Hawking radiation. How do you move them? How do you feed them when they're smaller than baryonic matter?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 05:23:13 No.12740281 Report

Quoted By: >>12743383

>>12736067
>String theory is largely being left aside these days in favor of QCD
Haha WHAT! Left aside in favor of QCD as a theory of.. what? The fucking strong interactions? What is this the 1970s!? What does this have to do with anything?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 05:36:59 No.12740313 Report

Quoted By:

There's at least one very tiny black hole at the center of the Earth. Since we are still here, it's not a problem, at least not on humanity's timescale.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 05:58:18 No.12740380 Report

Quoted By:

>>12735702
interesting post anon. i have heard these arguments before and i think they are interesting, and i realize strominger and vafa did amazing work using this kind of stuff but i can’t follow the math myself. but i did have one question because one paper i can follow the math on is this:
https://webspace.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/gthpub/BH_interpretation_stringtheory.pdf
where ‘t Hooft derives the fact that black holes are strings — but with one important difference:
> Furthermore, we put "string" between quotation marks because what we get is not exactly a string. Rather, we discover a string with imaginary string constant.
how does string theory manage to arrive at a different result (real string constant)? it looks like ‘t Hooft has got to be right because it’s all simple S-matrix stuff

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 06:32:21 No.12740438 Report

Quoted By: >>12741086

>>12734940
>hawking radiation
Stop using this term

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 06:37:03 No.12740453 Report

Quoted By: >>12740519 >>12740574

>>12734933
Black holes don't exist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SkCEfP9MrA

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 07:02:21 No.12740519 Report

Quoted By: >>12741598 >>12741639

>>12740453
except there is a picture of one anon. and plenty of evidence going back decades but the picture project was specifically designed to give brainlets like you the only evidence their microbrains would accept

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 07:23:14 No.12740558 Report

Quoted By:

>>12736067
fucking retard, QCD is APART of string theory.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 07:28:57 No.12740572 Report

Quoted By: >>12740587

>>12737062
cope retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 07:30:41 No.12740574 Report

Quoted By: >>12741580

>>12740453
>eu garbage
into the trash it goes

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 07:37:33 No.12740587 Report

Quoted By:

>>12740572
Good bot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 12:55:55 No.12741086 Report

Quoted By:

>>12740438
Why? It's a thing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 16:04:38 No.12741580 Report

Quoted By: >>12741852 >>12743430

>>12740574
It has nothing to do with the electric universe.

Albert Einstein himself didn't believe black holes exist as he and J Robert Oppenheimer both argued matter could never collapse into a singularity.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1604720714247.png, 118KiB, 800x789

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 16:10:05 No.12741598 Report

Quoted By:

>>12740519
Go munch on Bill Nye's dick, pop science fag.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 16:27:06 No.12741639 Report

Quoted By: >>12741697 >>12743433

>>12740519
>"We have pictures of the theoretical object with gravity so intense that not even light can escape from it. Checkmate retards."

And I bet you think gender is a social construct too.

According to general relativity, time slows down as it approaches the Schwarzschild radius where it stops completely. IOW, an imploding massive object is always collapsing but never reaching the Schwarzschild radius let alone collapses into a singularity, which is what a black hole really is. And since matter never can collapse into a singularity, there can never be a true black hole.

None of you pop science fag ever think for yourselves. You just regugitate whatever Bill Nye tells you and then act like a smug fucktard with the Downs who called someone "retarded" because they said there is no Santa Clause and you know Santa exist because your mommy said so.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 16:30:28 No.12741647 Report

Quoted By: >>12741665 >>12743358 >>12745355

>>12735702
>string theory
>science

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 16:39:59 No.12741665 Report

Quoted By: >>12743358

>>12741647
Can we call a moratorium on hypotheses that can not be tested and falsified, at until the means to test it has been developed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 16:51:26 No.12741697 Report

Quoted By: >>12741836 >>12741848

>>12741639
>And since matter never can collapse into a singularity
except that it can and often does?

>None of you pop science fag ever think for yourselves. You just regugitate whatever Bill Nye tells you and then act like a smug fucktard with the Downs who called someone "retarded" because they said there is no Santa Clause and you know Santa exist because your mommy said so.

None of you trolls ever try hard enough to put an actual ruse on. Its pretty sad actually. You run out of argument and then you go full retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 17:36:54 No.12741836 Report

Quoted By:

>>12741697
>except that it can and often does?
And the evidence of that happening is next to the pictures of the invisible pink unicorn?

Where is your evidence that the celestial objects are zero dimensional point singularities of infinite density, which is the very definition of a black hole. You don't half-ass your evidence by saying "oh we can't see the massive object acting on those visible objects by gravity, therefore black hole", pop science fucktard. Prove the object is a singular or go back to watching "Bill Nye saves the world from gender" on Netflix.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 17:39:52 No.12741848 Report

Quoted By: >>12743445

>>12741697
>except that it can and often does?
And the evidence of that happening is next to the pictures of the invisible pink unicorn?

Where is your evidence that the celestial objects are zero-dimensional point singularities of infinite density, which is the very definition of a black hole. You don't half-ass your evidence by saying "oh we can't see the massive object acting on those visible objects by gravity, therefore black hole", pop science fucktard. Prove the object is a singularity or go back to watching "Bill Nye saves the world from gender" on Netflix.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 17:40:43 No.12741852 Report

Quoted By: >>12741885

>>12741580
You are no Einstein

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 17:47:06 No.12741885 Report

Quoted By: >>12743975

>>12741852
I'll take that as a "no, there is no evidence that point singularities exist". BTW, you're the one claiming to know more about Einstein's theory of general relativity than Einstein himself since he was skeptical of the existence of point singularities.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 23:35:02 No.12743358 Report

Quoted By:

>>12741647
>>12741665
>implying string theory is unfalsifiable
>implying string theory cannot be tested
popsci faggots

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 23:44:36 No.12743383 Report

Quoted By:

>>12740281
He probably means that today string theory and other beyond-Standard-Model theories aren't doing that well, since the LHC hasn't shown us anything new in 10 years. People today are focusing more on QCD, since there is no way to treat it perturbatively and it is insanely complicated compared to the electroweak force. Also, we can test it, unlike quantum gravity.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 23:56:30 No.12743430 Report

Quoted By: >>12743457 >>12743923

>>12741580
Einstein didnt think a lot of things were possible which are, like CPT and some interpretations of QM. Luckily experiment trumps theory and there is experimental evidence for black holes.
Cope harder

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 22 Feb 2021 23:58:50 No.12743433 Report

Quoted By: >>12743906

>>12741639
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gender
"...behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits"
Gender is a social construct you idiot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 00:01:47 No.12743445 Report

Quoted By:

>>12741848
Thats literally exactly what you do, welcome to the basics of experimentation and theory. Propose a better solution to explain observation or get out.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO yesno.jpg, 11KiB, 300x168

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 00:05:34 No.12743457 Report

Quoted By: >>12743493

>>12743430
>there is experimental evidence for black holes
Indirect evidence. We really don't know if these are just extremely dense, but not singular objects, or actual black holes in a precise GR sense. GR is an incomplete theory, so who knows, we may be wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 00:15:11 No.12743493 Report

Quoted By: >>12743618 >>12743971 >>12743980

>>12743457
Yes and? Evidence is evidence and the theory is the current best fit. Given that the goal here is explanation and prediction GR is what we have. Simply denying the theory and evidence is functionally the same as saying "cuz magic".

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 00:48:00 No.12743618 Report

Quoted By:

>>12743493
No one is denying GR just like no one is denying Newtonian mechanics. "Incomplete" means we know there has to be some more "general" version of GR, since GR is not renormalizable in quantum field theory. This isn't magic, this is some basic knowledge about what modern theoretical physicists do.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 02:15:07 No.12743906 Report

Quoted By:

>>12743433
Those long things between men's legs that you like to suck on isn't a social construct, pop/sci/ fag.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 02:18:53 No.12743923 Report

Quoted By:

>>12743430
>Luckily experiment trumps theory
And what experiment created or observed an infinitely dense point singularity? The experiment validating QM doesn't mean shit for a different hypothesis explaining a different phenomenon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 02:36:14 No.12743971 Report

Quoted By:

>>12743493
The black hole theory is not conjoined with GR as though disproving black holes also disproves GR. In anything, it's the other way around since it would take an infinite amount of time for the matter of a collapsing stellar core to even come within the confines of the event horizon let alone form a point singularity of infinite density.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 02:38:00 No.12743975 Report

Quoted By: >>12744023

>>12741885
You are no Oppenheimer

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 02:38:42 No.12743980 Report

Quoted By:

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 02:52:38 No.12744023 Report

Quoted By: >>12744039

>>12743975
And who is an Oppenheimer on this board anyway? Certainly not you. And if you have to be an Oppenheimer to post here, then you need to fuck off.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 02:57:03 No.12744039 Report

Quoted By:

>>12744023
You will never be a man

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Feb 2021 12:17:36 No.12745355 Report

Quoted By:

>>12741647
string theory is as much a part of physics as relativity and qm are.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches