|
|
|
 |

October 10th, 2001, 06:50 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 117
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Balck Holes too soft
quote: Originally posted by TallTroll:
But...on totally the other end of the scale, hands up those who know which parameter of a photon is inversely related to its energy?
Actually, I suspect you wouldn't be able to get a photon pumped up to a high enough energy to collapse it into a black hole. High-energy gamma rays have a tendancy to decay into electron-positron pairs (the reverse of the antimatter annihilation reaction), with the chances of pair formation going up with the photon's energy. I've never heard of the possibility of black hole formation, so I suspect that photons would decay before they reach that point.
|

October 10th, 2001, 08:17 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 11,451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: Balck Holes too soft
quote: Now to the statment that black holes are in the middle of nowhere, not really,
...
they may in fact be in the area of several thousand in the general vacinity of Sol (an estimate I will admit).
Suicide Junkie may I ask where you knowlege of stellar phenomenon is derived?
This is kind of late, but since the thread's resurfaced, and I've noticed that comment, I should respond.
Sirkit, you have almost answered your own question here.
I was not implying that all black holes are "in the middle of nowhere", or denying that there were any near any specific place.
I merely said that the ones that happen to be solitary are hard to detect. If the hole is drifting alone, it will not have an appreciable accretion disk (since there is no nearby source of gas, such as a red giant), and its gravitational influence on its distant neighbours will be minor.
Gravitational lensing would be noticable, but you'd have to be looking right at the hole while stars move behind it.
And yes, I do know that the center of the galaxy is likely a giant black hole, but we were discussing star-scale BHs, so I didn't mention it.
quote: also time is warped arount the hole this may affect how quickly the crew of a ship can respond and how quickly the signal they transmit will reach the general empire
Sure, a little bit, but even if your black hole was large enough that you could survive the gravitational shear past the event horizon, the delay would only become noticable to humans (fractions of a second) when the ship is less than a few seconds from the event horizon. (eg. from aBHoT)
More important would probably be the fact that the message would take decades to reach home without using the Warppoint you arrived from.
Most of my info in this thread came from "A brief history of time" - S. Hawking (some good blackhole stuff & I belive I quoted it somewhere below), or "Scientific American" magazine for general ideas.
__________________
Things you want:
|

October 10th, 2001, 09:12 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: california
Posts: 2,961
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Balck Holes too soft
quote: Originally posted by BeeDee10:
Actually, I suspect you wouldn't be able to get a photon pumped up to a high enough energy to collapse it into a black hole
I thought they were designing a new super collider for that very purpose? i have been hearing an awful lot about 'mini black holes' in the press in the Last 12 months or so. or is that a different principal that is being discussed in the popular science rags these days? I recall them also theorizing that they could use a laser to create mini-black holes.. probably in effect by adding energy to photons, id guess.
------------------
"...the green, sticky spawn of the stars"
(with apologies to H.P.L.)
__________________
...the green, sticky spawn of the stars
(with apologies to H.P.L.)
|

October 10th, 2001, 09:57 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Balck Holes too soft
Puke,
I think you are right. Check this link
http://www.nature.com/nsu/011004/011004-8.html
The Large Hadron Collider at the CERN physics lab near Geneva is 27 kilometers in diameter. The article states that they will create a black hole every second.
------------------
In difficult ground, press-on;
In encircled ground, devise stratagems;
In death ground, fight.
Sun Tzu (circa 400 B.C.)
__________________
In difficult ground, press-on;
In encircled ground, devise stratagems;
In death ground, fight.
Sun Tzu (circa 400 B.C.)
|

October 11th, 2001, 05:07 AM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 117
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Balck Holes too soft
quote: Originally posted by Kadste:
The Large Hadron Collider at the CERN physics lab near Geneva is 27 kilometers in diameter. The article states that they will create a black hole every second.
Right, but photons are not hadrons. They're leptons, IIRC. Hadrons are big, massive things like protons. They can be accelerated to any energy level one likes; it's only when they're collided at high speeds that black holes might get made, depending on how physics turns out to work (it's not _known_ that black holes will be produced, it's only predicted by some of the proposed theories).
|

October 11th, 2001, 03:09 PM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Balck Holes too soft
>> High-energy gamma rays have a tendancy to decay into electron-positron pairs
True, the Pair Formation Threshold is only 1.022 MeV, but note that this only makes it POSSIBLE for a high-energy photon to decay. An interaction with matter is required to trigger the decay.
Pair production is a collision process, so as long as you are able to keep your photons away from heavy nuclei, you'll be fine.
The real problems occur when you consider that you need either a ridiuclously strong field, or a massive accelerator to achieve the required energy.
We either need to learn to produce stable magnetic fields many orders of magnitude stronger than anything we can manage today, or produce really high quality vacuums. If you need an accelerator than can realistically be measured in AU, you don't have much chance of getting a photon to survive the round trip without hitting something, unless you can COMPLETELY empty the chamber. Even interstellar space has a density of about 1 - 100 atoms/cm3.
As Pluto is about 38.5 AU away (approx. 3.6 billion miles, I think), you can see that you need a VERY clean acceleration chamber for any significant chance of a photon surviving the trip.
Theoretically possible to do it then, but much engineering needed first
|

October 11th, 2001, 04:50 PM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Rockford, Illinois, USA
Posts: 35
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Balck Holes too soft
Going back to the original topic of this thread I would say that Black Wholes should neither pull in ships or leave them be. If we were talking in the game sense doesn't a turn just stop time for you and start it for the next player? I would say that in this case the black whole should only slow down the ships perhaps makeing movement half of normal. The damage that they do should also be increased to compensate for the new larger ships being built in the various mods that have been released. No ship should be able to survive a black hole no matter what the size!!!
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|