Questions about the origin of the universe

[Kronos5253]

True, but that's most likely because you'd have to observe a black hole for an extremely long period of time before you'd notice any fluctuations in mass or density.

I know about the micro-BH from the LHC.. I think it's an absolutely ridiculous hypothesis though. The immense amount of density and the resulting rapid rise in gravitational pull from a collapsing star is what causes a BH in the first place (theoretically speaking of course), so how could a micro-BH even exist? A micro-BH might as well just be called a micro-explosion, because the density and amount of matter produced from 2 electrons colliding is nowhere near enough to create a BH. It would be similar to a smaller star collapsing.

If just doing that could create micro-BH, then any star that collapses would inevitibly turn into a black hole, and we already know that isn't true. The star has to be large enough and have enough mass to produce enough density to create a BH.

I just think it's a ridiculous notion lol But that's just an opinion :)

No takers or arguments to this?

I make a valid point correct?

 

[buffordboy23]

True, but that's most likely because you'd have to observe a black hole for an extremely long period of time before you'd notice any fluctuations in mass or density.

Exactly, and this timescale is a great many magnitudes larger than that of a human life span. There would have to some monster of a physical mechanism yet to be discovered that causes a rapid mass-loss rate that is observable.

I know about the micro-BH from the LHC.. I think it's an absolutely ridiculous hypothesis though. The immense amount of density and the resulting rapid rise in gravitational pull from a collapsing star is what causes a BH in the first place (theoretically speaking of course), so how could a micro-BH even exist? A micro-BH might as well just be called a micro-explosion, because the density and amount of matter produced from 2 electrons colliding is nowhere near enough to create a BH. It would be similar to a smaller star collapsing.

Actually, the LHC will collide protons, which are comprised of quarks. In simple terms, we can say that the apparent mass of some object (in this case a proton) increases as the object approaches the speed of light:

$$m_{apparent}= \frac{m_{rest}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}$$

Go ahead and put in something like v = .99999999 c to see what the apparent mass is. So you will have two protons with this apparent mass and now you should see that it is possible to have a large density in a small area.

 

[Kronos5253]

Exactly, and this timescale is a great many magnitudes larger than that of a human life span. There would have to some monster of a physical mechanism yet to be discovered that causes a rapid mass-loss rate that is observable.



Actually, the LHC will collide protons, which are comprised of quarks. In simple terms, we can say that the apparent mass of some object (in this case a proton) increases as the object approaches the speed of light:

$$m_{apparent}= \frac{m_{rest}}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^{2}}{c^{2}}}}$$

Go ahead and put in something like v = .99999999 c to see what the apparent mass is. So you will have two protons with this apparent mass and now you should see that it is possible to have a large density in a small area.

While that formula theory is facinating, looking at the result I got from the equation, it's still not near enough to form a black hole. The mass I got wasn't half that of our Sun, and our Sun will eventually become a white dwarf, not a black hole, because it doesn't have enough mass.

That concept (and equation) sheds new light on the subject for me though, even if I still don't find it to be plausible.

But thank you :) I appreciate it.

 

[buffordboy23]

While that formula theory is facinating, looking at the result I got from the equation, it's still not near enough to form a black hole. The mass I got wasn't half that of our Sun, and our Sun will eventually become a white dwarf, not a black hole, because it doesn't have enough mass.

It's not the total mass that is important here. It's the density. Calculate the densities and compare.

 

[Kronos5253]

It's not the total mass that is important here. It's the density. Calculate the densities and compare.

Gotcha.

:resigns: