| Thread Closed |
Charge equivalent to a gravitational black hole??? |
Share Thread |
| Jun19-05, 12:32 AM | #1 |
|
|
Charge equivalent to a gravitational black hole???
<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>The coloumb force is about 10^40 times greater than\ngravity for a pair of elementary particles.\n(For p+e it is <10^40 but for p+p it is near 10^43).\n\nThe mass of a nucleon relative to its radius is about\na factor of 10^44 too small to create a black hole.\n\nI guess this is a sort of new way of looking at the\nLNH (Large Numbers Hypothesis). Perhaps the second\nitem above is a new addition to the ~10^40 club?\n\nWhen put this way, it strongly suggests to me that\nthere ought to be a charge "black hole" equivalent\nto the gravity black hole. In that case, nucleons\nwould appear to be seriously near to this already\ngiven the above ratios.\n\nAfter all, the bending of light by charge effects\nhappens substantially in ordinary matter in ordinary\nlittle things whereas gravitational light bending\nrequires huge aglomerations of matter to achieve.\n\nHas this idea ever been investigated?\n\nDoes this relate to anything in standard physics?\n\nThanks\nRay Tomes\nhttp://ray.tomes.biz/\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>The coloumb force is about [itex]10^40[/itex] times greater than
gravity for a pair of elementary particles. (For [itex]p+e it[/itex] is [itex]<10^40[/itex] but for [itex]p+p it[/itex] is near [itex]10^43)[/itex]. The mass of a nucleon relative to its radius is about a factor of [itex]10^44[/itex] too small to create a black hole. I guess this is a sort of new way of looking at the LNH (Large Numbers Hypothesis). Perhaps the second item above is a new addition to the [itex]~10^40[/itex] club? When put this way, it strongly suggests to me that there ought to be a charge "black hole" equivalent to the gravity black hole. In that case, nucleons would appear to be seriously near to this already given the above ratios. After all, the bending of light by charge effects happens substantially in ordinary matter in ordinary little things whereas gravitational light bending requires huge aglomerations of matter to achieve. Has this idea ever been investigated? Does this relate to anything in standard physics? Thanks Ray Tomes http://ray.tomes.biz/ |
| Jun19-05, 05:24 PM | #2 |
|
|
<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>In article <d8ooi8\\$j13\\$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Ray Tomes\n<ray@tomes.remove.biz> wrote:\n\n> When put this way, it strongly suggests to me that\n> there ought to be a charge "black hole" equivalent\n> to the gravity black hole. In that case, nucleons\n> would appear to be seriously near to this already\n> given the above ratios.\n....\n> Does this relate to anything in standard physics?\n\nIf you have an atomic nucleus with Z > ~150 it causes a \'sparking of\nthe vacuum\', where an electron-positron pair can be formed so that the\nelectron falls into the nucleus, the positron is ejected, and the whole\nsystem has less energy than before.\n\nThis is similar to Hawking radiation.\n\n--\nDavid M. Palmer dmpalmer@email.com (formerly @clark.net, @ematic.com)\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>In article <d8ooi8$j13$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>, Ray Tomes
<ray@tomes.remove.biz> wrote: > When put this way, it strongly suggests to me that > there ought to be a charge "black hole" equivalent > to the gravity black hole. In that case, nucleons > would appear to be seriously near to this already > given the above ratios. .... > Does this relate to anything in standard physics? If you have an atomic nucleus with Z > ~150 it causes a 'sparking of the vacuum', where an electron-positron pair can be formed so that the electron falls into the nucleus, the positron is ejected, and the whole system has less energy than before. This is similar to Hawking radiation. -- David M. Palmer dmpalmer@email.com (formerly @clark.net, @ematic.com) |
| Thread Closed |
Similar discussions for: Charge equivalent to a gravitational black hole???
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| Black hole entropy as a Noether Charge | Special & General Relativity | 1 | ||
| Charge equivalent to a gravitational black hole??? | General Physics | 1 | ||
| GR: Black Hole - Electrical Charge | Special & General Relativity | 2 | ||
| Black hole charge | General Physics | 13 | ||
| how can a black hole have any force charge??? | Beyond the Standard Model | 8 | ||
