How Long to Ingest an Earth-Size Planet?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wolram
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Planet
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
6 replies · 3K views
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,411
Reaction score
551
Take a small bh say 100 sol masses, how long would it take to ingest a Earth size planet?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
wolram said:
Take a small bh say 100 sol masses, how long would it take to ingest a Earth size planet?

Depends - I think black holes are hungrier in the mornings, I know I am!

On a serious note - the ingestion rate would be directly proportional to mass of the BH and I suspect the angle/inclination and speed of the approaching object may have an impact. Then again tidal forces may be so strong as to render the approach dynamics irrelevant. There is also reference frames to consider. From the reference frame of the infalling Earth mass, the time would be fairly quick, from the reference frame of a relatavistic observer you would see a different result.

However I suspect the mass would have been smashed into an accretion disk long before all of this matter is gobbled up by the hungry hole.

Any more knowledgeable posts welcome as I find a Black Hole appetite fairly interesting!
 
A 100-solar mass black hole has a Schwarzschild radius of about 300 km, a lot smaller than Earth's radius. Tidal forces would tear Earth apart as it approached the black hole, creating an accretion disc. Friction in the accretion disc would release vast amounts of energy, blowing a substantial portion of Earth's mass completely away from the interaction (to ∞ and beyond?). So the pedantic answer is forever.
 
wolram said:
Take a small bh say 100 sol masses, how long would it take to ingest a Earth size planet?
Others have answered your question, so I'll just nitpick: 100 solar masses is pretty big for an astrophysical black hole (though obviously very small for a supermassive one!). We expect most black holes that are not the nuclei of galaxies to be closer to 5-15 solar masses, give or take. I don't think 100 solar mass black holes are nonexistent, just that there are likely a heck of a lot more smaller ones out there, so that I wouldn't call that particularly small.
 
Chalnoth said:
Others have answered your question, so I'll just nitpick: 100 solar masses is pretty big for an astrophysical black hole (though obviously very small for a supermassive one!). We expect most black holes that are not the nuclei of galaxies to be closer to 5-15 solar masses, give or take. I don't think 100 solar mass black holes are nonexistent, just that there are likely a heck of a lot more smaller ones out there, so that I wouldn't call that particularly small.

If I recall correctly the lack of mid size black holes is a hot topic at the moment.
 
If the Earth gets torn apart by tidal forces and is turned into an accretion disk, what does that mean? Does that mean that the matter in the disk tumbles into the black hole in a spiral?
 
SHISHKABOB said:
If the Earth gets torn apart by tidal forces and is turned into an accretion disk, what does that mean? Does that mean that the matter in the disk tumbles into the black hole in a spiral?

Thats a fairly accurate layman description. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disc for more info.