|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: BradGuthBradGuth Date: Sep 10, 2008 07:39
On Sep 9, 3:56 am, Sanny hotmail.com> wrote:> Black holes once created keeps eating all the matter arround it and
> Slowly eats other stars and galexies.
>
> Most of the Galaxies are having a black hole in the center. So that
> black hole keeps eating the galexy.
>
> Are these Black holes warp holes. So if you jump into it you will get
> out of another black hole with different time.
>
> May be I jump and find myself in prehistoric age. And see how Early
> Man lives.
>
> Largest Black hole has mass of a Billion Suns.
>
> Can a small blackhole created by LARGE HADRON COLLIDER if keeps
> getting mass convert into a large black hole eating all earth, moon
> and sun.
>
> I think who creates Black holes. ...
|
| Show full article (3.42Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: jjsjjs Date: Sep 10, 2008 07:58
"N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" cox.net> wrote in message
news:MHPxk.190$ZY5.82@newsfe02.iad...> Dear John J:
>
> "John J" wrote in message
> news:T76dndqYoazrIlrVnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@supernews.com...>> Uncle Al wrote:
>>> Sanny wrote:
>>>> Black holes once created keeps eating all the matter
>>>> arround it and Slowly eats other stars and galexies.
>>> [snip crap]
>>>
>>> Hey stooopid - nothing initally external can traverse
>>> a black hole's event horizon as viewed externally.
>>
>> Black holes are still theoretical. No?
>
> Google
> "dual to a black hole"
> ...
|
| Show full article (0.87Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: dlzcdlzc Date: Sep 10, 2008 08:22
Dear jjs:
On Sep 10, 7:58 am, "jjs" wrote:
> "N:dlzcD:aol T:com (dlzc)" cox.net> wrote in messagenews:MHPxk.190$ZY5.82@newsfe02.iad......
>>> Black holes are still theoretical. No?
>
>> Google
>> "dual to a black hole"
>
>> ... same / similar results expected with LHC,
>> only with a little longer lifetime and perhaps
>> more interesting radiation.
>
> So a black hole is still a theory, and what is
> observed is rationalized into the literature
> because it's kinda-sorta-like a theoretical
> object.
|
| Show full article (0.98Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: dlzcdlzc Date: Sep 10, 2008 08:40
Dear jjs:
On Sep 10, 7:58 am, "jjs" wrote:
...
> So a black hole is still a theory, and what is
> observed is rationalized into the literature
> because it's kinda-sorta-like a theoretical
> object.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.2624
... 4 million Suns within 100AU, orbital speed of 5000 km/sec, surface
of last emission really close to event horizon for 4 million Suns.
Observation seems to agree with theory really closely.
David A. Smith
|
| |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: BenjBenj Date: Sep 10, 2008 09:51
On Sep 10, 8:40 am, John J wrote:
> I was a kid when my eldest uncle, a PhD in nuclear physics, told me that
> people worried that the H-Bomb would set the atmosphere on fire. But
> that was a no-brainer.
No Brainer? Right. Better to destroy the whole Earth than to give up
one tiny percentage of the political power that an H bomb represents!
I'm sleeping sound tonight comforted by thoughts of the guys who think
like this being in charge of the world!
> Today have no experimental evidence of black
> holes. 'bout time they made one, and I would bet a pint of Guinness that
> they will claim to have done so, then redefine a black hole to suit what
> they made. And, IMHO, a pint of Guinness at the end of the world is not
> a bad way to go. What if it were Budweiser?
Right. No problem to "stop" a small back hole if one gets made. Just
stuff a nearby planet down it until it "chokes" on it! Lessee where is
one we can use? Oh yeah, we are living on it!
|
| Show full article (1.48Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Gerhard W. GruberGerhard W. Gruber Date: Sep 10, 2008 10:27
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:26:09 -0700 (PDT) wrote PD gmail.com>
in sci.physics with
<32cd1c09-ab91-4108-9ab1-1e00974f1f12@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
>Thus, if the theory is right and mini-BHs are created in proton-proton
>collisions, then they are created all the time.
>If the theory is wrong and mini-BHs are not created in proton-proton
>collisions, then they aren't created all the time and they won't be at
>the LHC, either.
I doubt that they are created all the time. Or if they are created that they
can have any consequence. Otherwise I would expected that earth already would
have been devoured by a black hole. Also I would think that our galaxy would
look quite different, because then we should see a lot more black holes (or
rather detect them) because this type of thing would also happen on other
planets. And 4 billion years is a quite a long time without having any
consequences. We would be extremly lucky in that case.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: PDPD Date: Sep 10, 2008 10:57
On Sep 10, 12:27 pm, Gerhard W. Gruber wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 14:26:09 -0700 (PDT) wrote PD gmail.com>
> in sci.physics with
> <32cd1c09-ab91-4108-9ab1-1e00974f1...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
>>>Thus, if the theory is right and mini-BHs are created in proton-proton
>>collisions, then they are created all the time.
>>If the theory is wrong and mini-BHs are not created in proton-proton
>>collisions, then they aren't created all the time and they won't be at
>>the LHC, either.
>
> I doubt that they are created all the time. Or if they are created that they
> can have any consequence. Otherwise I would expected that earth already would
> have been devoured by a black hole.
|
| Show full article (1.86Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: jjsjjs Date: Sep 10, 2008 10:58
"dlzc" cox.net> wrote in message
news:c0497171-52d5-49d0-aea8-13320667f9b5@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com...
Dear jjs:
On Sep 10, 7:58 am, "jjs" wrote:
...> So a black hole is still a theory, and what is
> observed is rationalized into the literature
> because it's kinda-sorta-like a theoretical
> object.
| http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.2624
|... 4 million Suns within 100AU, orbital speed of 5000 km/sec, surface
|of last emission really close to event horizon for 4 million Suns.
|Observation seems to agree with theory really closely.
Yes, it is encouraging but black holes remain a theory. Remember the aether!
(said like "Remember the (Maine, Alamo...)"
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: jjsjjs Date: Sep 10, 2008 13:18
"Benj" iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:6a1842bc-5d63-4f05-b516-4f740fc3c6a1@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 10, 8:40 am, John J wrote:
> Today have no experimental evidence of black
> holes. 'bout time they made one, and I would bet a pint of Guinness that
> they will claim to have done so, then redefine a black hole to suit what
> they made. And, IMHO, a pint of Guinness at the end of the world is not
> a bad way to go. What if it were Budweiser?
| Right. No problem to "stop" a small back hole if one gets made. Just
| stuff a nearby planet down it until it "chokes" on it! Lessee where is
| one we can use? Oh yeah, we are living on it!
You make that sound like a Bad Thing(tm).
| The problem with these questions is that nobody balances the options:
| What happens if we don't do this vs what happens if we do this and
| things go wrong.
Not true! We have you balancing the options. Thank goodness! Hey, keep us
up-to-date and the latest world scare, eh? We all know of Bush, Inc.
already.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
