# Singularities in accelerators

1. Aug 1, 2004

### kernelpenguin

I came across a theory that said it's possible to create miniature black holes in particle accelerators. And that these would disappear quickly because they are so small.

I thought for a singularity to form, there would have to be plenty of mass in one place. How do the velocities of the particles overcome this mass requirement? What happens inside the particles when they collide like this?

I'm doing a bit of research for a short story I have planned. (If you're interested, you can catch my latest story here -- it's my home server, so it might be down sometimes. And I'm a compsci student, not a literature student, so it might not be all that good. Plus I'm planning to edit it a bit and then maybe publish it and you should really find an online japanese-english dictionary if you want to get all the japanese wordplays. Comments welcome!)

Anyway... I'm researching the viability of singularity weapons. The way I figure it, if you just bang two particles together at near lightspeed, you get a very short-lived singularity. But taking relativity into account, if the singularity would continue moving at near lightspeed, it would decay much slower from the viewpoint of a distant observer.

So I propose something like this. Imagine a structure... like the Eiffel tower. Four "legs" would be the synced particle accelerators. The four particles all hit the same place at the same time with enough energy to create a singularity. Because of the shape of the path, the singularity does not stop moving, instead it gets momentum from the four particles that created it and then continues moving at a relativistic speed. Enough so that it would live as long as it takes to travel a few lightseconds. Is this viable?

I'm also curious as to what would happen if it were fired at a planet or another spaceship. Would it go through leaving a big hole? Would it stop to consume the thing? How much matter would it need to be fed for it to continue growing? And how long would it take for such a singularity to evaporate?

The thing is, all the physics I've seen in science fiction lately has been... crap. I don't want to make the same mistake myself. There's a difference between suspension of disbelief (wormholes, hyperspace, androids, etc) and simple crap science. Plus I'm just sick and tired of people reversing the polarity of everything whenever they get in a mess.

.edit

Oh and another thing... What would it theorethically take to deflect an incoming singularity?

Last edited: Aug 1, 2004
2. Aug 5, 2004

### humanino

:surprise: :grumpy: