The discussion centers on the concept of Schwarzschild radius and its implications for particles with mass, such as electrons and quarks. Participants assert that while all particles theoretically possess a Schwarzschild radius, this does not classify them as black holes. The conversation highlights that a mass must exceed a specific threshold to become a black hole, and tiny black holes are theorized to evaporate rapidly. The debate also touches on the existence of black holes and the nature of antimatter origins.
PREREQUISITESPhysicists, astrophysicists, and students of theoretical physics interested in black hole mechanics, particle physics, and the nature of antimatter.
quantumfireball said:Correctly speaking all particles having mass should be a black hole and should have a small but finite schwarzchild radius,for example the electron,quarks etc are all black holes.
But what would happen if two particles come within their schwarzchild radius?
Very unlikely. Tiny black holes evaporate and explode fairly quickly according to some theories....for example the electron,quarks etc are all black holes.
quantumfireball said:Correctly speaking all particles having mass should be a black and should have a small but finite swarchild radius,for example the electron,quarks etc are all black holes.
But what would happen if two particles come within their swarzchild radius?
Mentz114 said:Where did you come by this assertion ?
Whether a mass can become a black hole depends crucially on the mass of the matter, which has to be above a certain limit.
Very unlikely. Tiny black holes evaporate and explode fairly quickly according to some theories.
Some physicists don't accept that there are any black holes anywhere.
quantumfireball said:i wasnt speaking of stellar collapse on chandrashekar limit.
what i meant to say that any point like mass should have a swarzchild radius
in the case of electrons it should be infinitely infinitely small