James Blodgett
Jul16-04, 09:19 AM
<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no,location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>\nFrank Hellmann and Alan Lewis have made useful assertions. It is =\npossible that a mini black hole could be so dormant that it could sit at =\nthe center of earth for the next few billion years and not cause =\ntrouble. I would like to see a convincing model that demonstrates this. =\nBut it is a problem to model this object convincingly. It has strange =\nproperties. Such a model could also be theoretically rewarding. A mini =\nblack hole is a quantum gravitational object; a convincing model might =\nlead to a quantum theory of gravity.\n\nThe key is accretion. This is difficult to model. Greg Landsberg modeled =\naccretion by calculating the volume "swept out" by the black hole. The =\nblack hole would slow down as it accretes mass, and the volume swept out =\nwould decrease asymptotically to zero, at which point given this model =\nthe black hole accretes no mass at all. This suggests that it will be =\ndormant.\n\nBut other things are going on. Presumably the black hole ends up more or =\nless stationary at the center of the earth. It may be stationary, but =\nsurrounding matter is moving with heat energy. Also, when the black =\nhole moves into electron orbitals, they are moving at light speed. When =\nit moves into an atomic nucleus, nuclear components are also moving with =\nrelativistic velocity. For\nvolume swept out calculations, we need to calculate volume relative to =\nthese movements. We are assuming multiple dimensions, so we need to =\ncalculate hyper volume in multiple dimensions of radii which could vary =\nfrom very small to the limit set by current observations of an inverse =\nsquare law for gravity, which I think is in the range of a few =\nmillimeters.\n\nVolume swept out arguments assume that the black hole hits something, or =\nis hit by something, directly, so gravity is not yet an issue. (That is, =\nit hits something from a quantum point of view--the probability of =\naccretion is the quantum probability of a particle being in that =\nvolume.) Angular momentum is also not yet an issue. But they need to be =\nincluded. In a Newtonian system, angular momentum would make everything =\nnot aimed directly at a body move in a hyperbolic orbit, and be gone. =\nHowever there is an area around a black hole, outside of the =\nSchwarzschild radius, where centrifugal force does not work. This is =\nbecause space is bent so much that, from the point of view of a particle =\nin that area, a circle around the black hole is a straight line. There =\nwas an article in Scientific American about this a few years back. I =\nthink the result is only to increase the effective capture cross section =\na bit beyond the Schwarzschild, but this effect needs to be included.=20\n\nThere are other effects that need to be included. The string theories =\nthat permit mini black hole formation are attempts to unify forces. They =\ninvolve multiple dimensions, with gravity as strong as other forces at =\nthe center. These need to be included.\nAlso accretion involves quantum gravity. What happens to a particle =\nprobability wave when a mini black hole moves into it? Is the =\nprobability of capture as simple as volume swept out? Or does a field of =\ninfinite gravity stretch the probability wave in some way?\n\nEven given a model, we need to demonstrate that nature actually works =\nthat way.\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form"> View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>Frank Hellmann and Alan Lewis have made useful assertions. It is =
possible that a mini black hole could be so dormant that it could sit at =
the center of earth for the next few billion years and not cause =
trouble. I would like to see a convincing model that demonstrates this. =
But it is a problem to model this object convincingly. It has strange =
properties. Such a model could also be theoretically rewarding. A mini =
black hole is a quantum gravitational object; a convincing model might =
lead to a quantum theory of gravity.
The key is accretion. This is difficult to model. Greg Landsberg modeled =
accretion by calculating the volume "swept out" by the black hole. The =
black hole would slow down as it accretes mass, and the volume swept out =
would decrease asymptotically to zero, at which point given this model =
the black hole accretes no mass at all. This suggests that it will be =
dormant.
But other things are going on. Presumably the black hole ends up more or =
less stationary at the center of the earth. It may be stationary, but =
surrounding matter is moving with heat energy. Also, when the black =
hole moves into electron orbitals, they are moving at light speed. When =
it moves into an atomic nucleus, nuclear components are also moving with =
relativistic velocity. For
volume swept out calculations, we need to calculate volume relative to =
these movements. We are assuming multiple dimensions, so we need to =
calculate hyper volume in multiple dimensions of radii which could vary =
from very small to the limit set by current observations of an inverse =
square law for gravity, which I think is in the range of a few =
millimeters.
Volume swept out arguments assume that the black hole hits something, or =
is hit by something, directly, so gravity is not yet an issue. (That is, =
it hits something from a quantum point of view--the probability of =
accretion is the quantum probability of a particle being in that =
volume.) Angular momentum is also not yet an issue. But they need to be =
included. In a Newtonian system, angular momentum would make everything =
not aimed directly at a body move in a hyperbolic orbit, and be gone. =
However there is an area around a black hole, outside of the =
Schwarzschild radius, where centrifugal force does not work. This is =
because space is bent so much that, from the point of view of a particle =
in that area, a circle around the black hole is a straight line. There =
was an article in Scientific American about this a few years back. I =
think the result is only to increase the effective capture cross section =
a bit beyond the Schwarzschild, but this effect needs to be included.=20
There are other effects that need to be included. The string theories =
that permit mini black hole formation are attempts to unify forces. They =
involve multiple dimensions, with gravity as strong as other forces at =
the center. These need to be included.
Also accretion involves quantum gravity. What happens to a particle =
probability wave when a mini black hole moves into it? Is the =
probability of capture as simple as volume swept out? Or does a field of =
infinite gravity stretch the probability wave in some way?
Even given a model, we need to demonstrate that nature actually works =
that way.
possible that a mini black hole could be so dormant that it could sit at =
the center of earth for the next few billion years and not cause =
trouble. I would like to see a convincing model that demonstrates this. =
But it is a problem to model this object convincingly. It has strange =
properties. Such a model could also be theoretically rewarding. A mini =
black hole is a quantum gravitational object; a convincing model might =
lead to a quantum theory of gravity.
The key is accretion. This is difficult to model. Greg Landsberg modeled =
accretion by calculating the volume "swept out" by the black hole. The =
black hole would slow down as it accretes mass, and the volume swept out =
would decrease asymptotically to zero, at which point given this model =
the black hole accretes no mass at all. This suggests that it will be =
dormant.
But other things are going on. Presumably the black hole ends up more or =
less stationary at the center of the earth. It may be stationary, but =
surrounding matter is moving with heat energy. Also, when the black =
hole moves into electron orbitals, they are moving at light speed. When =
it moves into an atomic nucleus, nuclear components are also moving with =
relativistic velocity. For
volume swept out calculations, we need to calculate volume relative to =
these movements. We are assuming multiple dimensions, so we need to =
calculate hyper volume in multiple dimensions of radii which could vary =
from very small to the limit set by current observations of an inverse =
square law for gravity, which I think is in the range of a few =
millimeters.
Volume swept out arguments assume that the black hole hits something, or =
is hit by something, directly, so gravity is not yet an issue. (That is, =
it hits something from a quantum point of view--the probability of =
accretion is the quantum probability of a particle being in that =
volume.) Angular momentum is also not yet an issue. But they need to be =
included. In a Newtonian system, angular momentum would make everything =
not aimed directly at a body move in a hyperbolic orbit, and be gone. =
However there is an area around a black hole, outside of the =
Schwarzschild radius, where centrifugal force does not work. This is =
because space is bent so much that, from the point of view of a particle =
in that area, a circle around the black hole is a straight line. There =
was an article in Scientific American about this a few years back. I =
think the result is only to increase the effective capture cross section =
a bit beyond the Schwarzschild, but this effect needs to be included.=20
There are other effects that need to be included. The string theories =
that permit mini black hole formation are attempts to unify forces. They =
involve multiple dimensions, with gravity as strong as other forces at =
the center. These need to be included.
Also accretion involves quantum gravity. What happens to a particle =
probability wave when a mini black hole moves into it? Is the =
probability of capture as simple as volume swept out? Or does a field of =
infinite gravity stretch the probability wave in some way?
Even given a model, we need to demonstrate that nature actually works =
that way.