Mass of a black hole - given only the diameter

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the mass of a mini black hole using its diameter, specifically that of a proton. The initial calculations were incorrect due to a misunderstanding of the Schwarzschild radius formula and the inclusion of a square root. After clarifying the correct formula, participants determined that the mass should be calculated as m = rc^2 / (2G), leading to a mass of approximately 3.37 x 10^11 kg. The conversation highlights the importance of accurately applying gravitational equations in astrophysics.
PirateFan308
Messages
91
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Cosmologists have speculated that black holes the size of a proton could have formed during the early days of the Big Bang when the universe began. If we take the diameter of a proton to be 1.0*10^{-15}, what would be the mass of a mini black hole?

Homework Equations



v=\sqrt{\frac{Gm}{r}}

The Attempt at a Solution



v=\sqrt{\frac{Gm}{r}}

m=\frac{v^{2}r}{G}

m=\frac{(3.0*10^{8})^{2}(0.5*10^{-15})}{(6.67*10^{-11})}

m=6.75*10^{11} kg

It says that this is wrong, but I can't find my mistake. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Schwarzschild radius is given by:
r_s = \frac{2 G M}{c^2}
I think you forgot the factor of 2.

EDIT: D'Oh. No square root! Fixed it.
 
Last edited:
gneill said:
The Schwarzschild radius is given by:
r_s = \sqrt{\frac{2 G M}{c^2}}
I think you forgot the factor of 2.

Isn't the schwarzchild radius simply:

R_s=\frac{2GM}{c^2}

So this would rearrange to

m=\frac{rc^2}{2G}

and plugging in the values, I would get m=3.37*10^{11}kg

Is this now correct?
 
PirateFan308 said:
Isn't the schwarzchild radius simply:

R_s=\frac{2GM}{c^2}

So this would rearrange to

m=\frac{rc^2}{2G}

and plugging in the values, I would get m=3.37*10^{11}kg

Is this now correct?

Yes, and yes. Sorry about the square root distraction, I don't know where my head was at!
 
Thanks for the help!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top