Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ampersand]

Except that, a Picoscale-singularity would evaporate. There is no "If it didn't", because it would.

Indeed.  I really wanted to have a quick look up at what size (nanoscale, microscale?) a singularity could be expected to finely balance input (ripping the odd electron or even nucleus from the surrounding matter) and Hawking Radiation output, but I'm a bit rusty about current theory on that point, probably need to look up the Schwarzchild radius equation, for a start.

Consider it shorthand.  I am largely going on the principle that while the smaller stellar-quantity massed black holes can deplete relatively easily in the vacuum of space (are unlikely to have enough nearby mass, in appreciable quantities, outside of the occasional unlucky star and/or its planetary system/protoplanetry disk that wander too close), depending on how busy the area of space is/becomes, it's possible that one can be much smaller if created on (i.e. just below the surface of) a planetary mass which manages to sustain itself (and at this point I was going to say "asymptoticly", but I mean this 'time-reversed') just above the 'inevitable evaporation' point, until the factor of increase drags the infinitesimal difference of mass far enough away to zoom off into full planet-consuming glory.

But, as I said, I'm a bit unsure as to what scale could be supported by (say) the density of mass found at the Earth's core (where a loose black hole may have drifted, munching away), and besides the odd electron or bunch of nucleonic hadrons might well be significant enough so that the absence means quick death and the presence means quick inflation, especially upon the rapid time-scale of such a small body, with such a large proportion of 'surface area' to volume (or, perhaps I should say, mass... given that a singularity would technically contain infinite volume) that is surely a factor.

Perhaps the art of 'taming' a black hole would involve careful and regimented feeding to keep it 'simmering' within a managable mass-range.

As I've stated, far more energetic collisions with far more mass occur on a daily basis in earth's atmosphere. If it was even close to being possible, it would have happened eons ago.

[Neruz]

Oh god not more of this LHC = BLACK HOELS nonsense.

[CJ1145]

It's almost unbelievable that FOX news hasn't started their doom-sayings with the 2012 theories built in, considering how blatantly pro-Conservative they are, and all those half-wits who pretend to be Christian but couldn't spell Habakkuk to save their lives.

Yes, that's right. I just connected FOX to 2012. Truly, I am both awesome and the devil combined into one being.

[Puck]

Not sure, whether or not I already mentioned that. But the "world is gonna end 2012" thing is a bit like this bible thread about "god didnay create but seperate".

Back in ye olde days, people used to talk differently, a bit. As you might have guessed. This holds especially true when it comes to clerics, from no matter where.

If the 6th cycle of the mayan calendar is going to end, the most it probably means is the world will change. If I remember correctly, the mayan calendar was a bit funky, because the previous cycles kinda fit into important stages of human history. So I wouldnt be surprised if they are right.

Well, actually, you can just look outside and see they are right. Change, for a whole world, isnt just happening like that. It takes years. Today children run around with cellphones that have a multitude of the computing power available the nasa had for their first moon landing. Personal mobility and the internets made the world a MUCH smaller place than it was when the last cycle of the calendar chimed in.

I think I can say in the last 10 years the world began to change fundamentally because of that, and we are here to witness it. Pretty cool, in a way.

So, tl;dr, the doomsayers are right, they just didnt get it.

[Starver]

As I've stated, far more energetic collisions with far more mass occur on a daily basis in earth's atmosphere. If it was even close to being possible, it would have happened eons ago.

"But that was in the upper atmosphere, not in bedrock!".  Not my words, just echoing the thoughts of those who disagree with both of us.

The kind of people who are worried that the scientists (intentionally or not) coax black holes to occur in close proximity (in time and distance).  Not that I think this is going to make anything bigger than those atmospheric events, either.

Anyway, this is far from where I was originally explaining my arguments against taking seriously anyone who had 'calculated' a four year period inbetween black hole creation and end of the world.  It's just not going to happen like that.

[Psyco Jelly]

Oh, don't worry. 2012 won't be the end of the world. Just Yours.

[Spreggo]

I was told that the same set of equations which say a black hole might occur, also predict that it would 'evaporate' before having any real effects.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

2012 is silly.
Instead, let's talk about the 1976 Rush album, 2112. It's far better than this apocalypse-mongering.

[Ampersand]

I was told that the same set of equations which say a black hole might occur, also predict that it would 'evaporate' before having any real effects.

That's kind of what I've been saying since it was brought up. In any case, when we're talking about black holes of a size smaller in diameter than a proton, we're really talking small. Small enough where passing through air and rock is virtually indistinguishable. Something this small would have a lifetime measured in nanoseconds or less. In addition, this is something with gravity that is really insignificant. It could pass close to any number of protons or electrons without having any effect on them what-so-ever, simply because it's gravity would only be relevant within it's event horizon. It would have to collide head on with several billion atomic nuclei within a very small time frame, which is unlikely to happen without a lot of help, to start getting large enough to be relevant, and if it happens to have a positive electromagnetic charge, that is simply not going to happen.

[Lear]

2012 is silly.
Instead, let's talk about the 1976 Rush album, 2112. It's far better than this apocalypse-mongering.

What this guy said.

Seriously, our calendar ends all the time and begins anew, just like the Mayan's. The only difference is there's was a much longer calendar. Nothing to freak out about.

[Gorjo MacGrymm]

So, a mayan calendar, made HUNDREDS of years ago happens to stop on the EQUIVALENT of Dec 21 2012 in the Judeo Christian Calendar.  Big Whoop.

I personally think that some guy, doing some carving, got utterly fed up with the nonsense of making a calendar so far into the future and finally said "I am NOT carving anymore, get some other chump to do finish this bullshit in 2012!  I have been at this for 17 years!  Enough is frikken enough!"

[Ampersand]

Try roughly 1500 years.

[Myroc]

I personally think that some guy, doing some carving, got utterly fed up with the nonsense of making a calendar so far into the future and finally said "I am NOT carving anymore, get some other chump to do finish this bullshit in 2012!  I have been at this for 17 years!  Enough is frikken enough!"

I think it had something to do with Mayan calculations which didn't count farther than (in this case) 2012.

Or maybe i'm just rambling.

[Puck]

Gorjo's version is DEFINETLY better, sorry bout that.

[Scope]

Everyone has that wish deep down that the apocalypse would come on 2012.