Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Can particles be black holes?

  1. Feb 24, 2012 #1
    Is there any theory for which "elementary" particles are "small" black holes or/and for which the electron and the proton would be a pair of associated black holes?

    Does such question even be meaningful ? Or is it just science-fiction, the fruit of any crazzy imagination?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 24, 2012 #2
    Any particle, given enough energy, will become a black hole
     
  4. Feb 24, 2012 #3

    Demystifier

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Are you saying that a particle can become a black hole by accelerating to a high velocity close to c? If that is what you are saying, then you are wrong.
     
  5. Feb 24, 2012 #4
    Really? I thought that energy curves space-time, and when it gets curved enough it becomes a black hole. I mean, possibly ignoring new Planck scale effects
     
  6. Feb 24, 2012 #5
    I'm quite confused here.. shouldn't a property of being a black hole be coordinate invariant?
    There should be some singularity inside of horizon with some diverging scalar quantity.
    Moving alongside the particle, no such singularity should be observed.?
     
  7. Feb 24, 2012 #6

    atyy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

  8. Feb 24, 2012 #7

    fzero

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    That's addressing the converse of the question in the OP.

    For an elementary particle to be a black hole, it must have a Compton wavelength smaller than its Schwarzschild radius, otherwise the horizon is not defined. The lower bound on the mass of a black hole is therefore the Planck mass. All known elementary particles are well below this bound, so they are not black holes.
     
  9. Feb 24, 2012 #8
    Despite the recommanded document is treating the converse of the question, I shall read it... and perhaps ask some more new questions.

    For atyy and fzero: thank you.
     
  10. Feb 24, 2012 #9
    Yeah i was wrong, sorry.
     
  11. Feb 25, 2012 #10
    What is true is this complicated interplay between the mass (the equivalent proper energy) and the dimensions (in fact the geometry, the form and the exterior surface) of a given black hole.

    I am no specialist about this thematic but I guess it must be an excellent way to test some fascinating theories concerning topology, quantization ...a.s.a...

    One could for example ask why the "smallest" black hole (of which the surface must be quantized, accordingly to different works: Hawking, Rovelli...) is not a pyramid (just a funny proposition) insteed to be a sphere?

    As non specialist, I see another objection to the possibility: particle = blac hole. Since some particles are radiating, this hypothesis -if true- would impose a coincidence between the observed radiation and the Hawking radiation which seems to be the only one authorized by the theory...
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook