Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Vinyadan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Some years ago, the press reported worries that the Large Hadron Collider could generate a black hole. People at CERN actually considered this possibility, and said that a micro-black hole "would disintegrate rapidly, in around 10^-27 seconds". They would have been able to track its existence, and the data would have been an important step towards new knowledge and unknown possibilities.

    Today I read that a black hole the size of a dime would need as much mass as the whole planet Earth. So how much mass do I need for a black hole that won't disappear for a few hours? What for one that will last as long as, let's say, a star (if that's possible for black holes)?
    Quote Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien, 1955
    I thought Tom Bombadil dreadful — but worse still was the announcer's preliminary remarks that Goldberry was his daughter (!), and that Willowman was an ally of Mordor (!!).

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/..._hole_that_is/

    According to them, 2/3 the size of the moon to sustain itself but it can't be generated by masses less than larger than the sun.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Glyphstone View Post
    Vibranium: If it was on the periodic table, its chemical symbol would be "Bs".

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bristol, UK

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    The thing is, the acceleration toward the eruption of Hawking radiation is exponential. A black hole would appear stable until it was almost small enough to begin erupting, then it would be gone in a titanic blast. As I understand it, it would be the whole mass as e=mc^2, which is to say much more than the biggest nuclear bomb ever made.
    The end of what Son? The story? There is no end. There's just the point where the storytellers stop talking.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Theoretically once a black hole has the mass equal to the Planck mass it wouldn't be able to "evaporate" anymore since the radiating particle would need to have the mass energy equivalent of the Planck mass. The size would be the Planck length. It would be stable like this forever, and too small to actually ever absorb any energy (and if it did, just evaporate that again).
    This is because the hawkins radiation emitted from a black hole needs to have a wavelength equal to the diameter of a black hole, so big ones emit low energy waves, smaller ones emit higher energy waves.

    The sweet spot between "not radiating too fast" and "not radiating fast enough" seems to be around 606,000 metric tons if you want to use the Hawkins Radiation for something. It would be about 0.001 femtometer in diameter. (much smaller than an atom, the nucleus of an hydrogen atom is 1.7566 femtometer)
    Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_starship
    Black text is for sarcasm, also sincerity. You'll just have to read between the lines and infer from context like an animal

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Bohandas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    but it can't be generated by masses less than larger than the sun.
    I think it could if they were already very dense and smashed together at relativistic speeds
    Omegaupdate Forum

    WoTC Forums Archive + Indexing Projext

    PostImage, a free and sensible alternative to Photobucket

    Temple+ Modding Project for Atari's Temple of Elemental Evil

    Morrus' RPG Forum (EN World v2)

    If we shadows have offended, think but this, and all is mended. That you have but slumbered here, while these visions did appear, and this weak and idle theme, no more yielding but a dream. -Midsummer Night's Dream, Act 5, Scene 1

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Florida
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mastikator View Post
    Theoretically once a black hole has the mass equal to the Planck mass it wouldn't be able to "evaporate" anymore since the radiating particle would need to have the mass energy equivalent of the Planck mass. The size would be the Planck length. It would be stable like this forever, and too small to actually ever absorb any energy (and if it did, just evaporate that again).
    This is because the hawkins radiation emitted from a black hole needs to have a wavelength equal to the diameter of a black hole, so big ones emit low energy waves, smaller ones emit higher energy waves.
    Black holes can radiate particles larger than themselves.

    As the practical escapes, it becomes redshifted, increasing it's wavelength.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bohandas View Post
    I think it could if they were already very dense and smashed together at relativistic speeds
    I think TvTyrant meant generated naturally.
    Excuses and explanations are different.

    Sometimes when there can be no excuses we must look the hardest for explanations.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Quizatzhaderac View Post
    Black holes can radiate particles larger than themselves.

    As the practical escapes, it becomes redshifted, increasing it's wavelength.
    I think TvTyrant meant generated naturally.
    Right when the particle appears it would be a photon and have the energy and size of the black hole it is escaping from. This photon would a) be a Kugelblitz and b) evaporate the black hole completely. The result would be that the black hole has just moved one Planck length to the side.
    Black text is for sarcasm, also sincerity. You'll just have to read between the lines and infer from context like an animal

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Florida
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mastikator View Post
    Right when the particle appears it would be a photon and have the energy and size of the black hole it is escaping from. This photon would a) be a Kugelblitz and b) evaporate the black hole completely. The result would be that the black hole has just moved one Planck length to the side.
    There a few problems with this.

    First, there is no "right when the particle appears". The particle is virtual before it escapes. Virtual particles don't have energy the same way real particles do (which is to say, you can't use wavelength to determine their energy) . The particle doesn't become real until it's well away from the event horizon. The source of the virtual particle isn't even the event horizon, it's region of space that that ends in an event horizon; there is a pair of virtual particles outside the horizon (possibly bigger than the black hole) and one of two on falls in.

    Second, you're ignoring potential energy. As accounted by the distant observer, that particle doesn't change it's total energy during it's journey. At infinity, the photon has zero energy. Infinitely close to the event horizon, the photon would have negatively infinite potential energy.
    Excuses and explanations are different.

    Sometimes when there can be no excuses we must look the hardest for explanations.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Aug 2019

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mastikator View Post
    Theoretically once a black hole has the mass equal to the Planck mass it wouldn't be able to "evaporate" anymore since the radiating particle would need to have the mass energy equivalent of the Planck mass. The size would be the Planck length. It would be stable like this forever, and too small to actually ever absorb any energy (and if it did, just evaporate that again).
    This is because the hawkins radiation emitted from a black hole needs to have a wavelength equal to the diameter of a black hole, so big ones emit low energy waves, smaller ones emit higher energy waves.

    The sweet spot between "not radiating too fast" and "not radiating fast enough" seems to be around 606,000 metric tons if you want to use the Hawkins Radiation for something. It would be about 0.001 femtometer in diameter. (much smaller than an atom, the nucleus of an hydrogen atom is 1.7566 femtometer)
    Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_starship
    Would it be possible to extract further energy from the planck black hole by lifting its energy just above planck mass?

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Yora's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Germany

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    All the energy you could possibly get out would be identical to the energy you put in.
    We are not standing on the shoulders of giants, but on very tall tower of other dwarves.

    Spriggan's Den Heroic Fantasy Roleplaying

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Aug 2019

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Yora View Post
    All the energy you could possibly get out would be identical to the energy you put in.
    Why? If the black hole is at .8 h (h being planck mass), and you put it up to, say 1.2 h, couldn't it then radiate away h to end up at .2 h?

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Yora's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Germany

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    If that is the case, the energy you gain would literally be one of the smallest possible amounts amounts you'd ever get. Probably get a lot more energy from collecting the Cosmic Microwave Background.
    We are not standing on the shoulders of giants, but on very tall tower of other dwarves.

    Spriggan's Den Heroic Fantasy Roleplaying

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rydiro View Post
    Would it be possible to extract further energy from the planck black hole by lifting its energy just above planck mass?
    It would be virtually impossible to add any energy to it, the cross-hair is literally the smallest meaningful length. The uncertainty principle says no.

    It's also possible that no such black hole actually exists, it would have to been created in the big bang. AFAIK there's no evidence that they exist. A stellar mass black hole wouldn't become this light, a) the universe isn't old enough and b) it would gain much more energy just from the CBR than it would lose to Hawkins radiation.
    Black text is for sarcasm, also sincerity. You'll just have to read between the lines and infer from context like an animal

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The Land of Cleves
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quoth Mastikator:

    Theoretically once a black hole has the mass equal to the Planck mass it wouldn't be able to "evaporate" anymore since the radiating particle would need to have the mass energy equivalent of the Planck mass. The size would be the Planck length. It would be stable like this forever, and too small to actually ever absorb any energy (and if it did, just evaporate that again).
    It's more accurate to say that our current theories concerning black holes break down in the vicinity of the Planck mass, and thus we have no idea how such a hole would behave. For that matter, it's quite possible that our theories break down long before that point, but we're absolutely certain that they break down by then.

    And while there's no known mechanism in the current Universe that could produce black holes smaller than a few times the mass of the Sun, it's quite possible that smaller holes might have been formed during the very early stages of the Universe, and some of those might still be around. And of course, it's also possible that there are mechanisms in the current Universe that we don't know of. So it would be very exciting, but no great surprise, to discover black holes of sub-stellar size.
    Time travels in divers paces with divers persons.
    As You Like It, III:ii:328

    Chronos's Unalliterative Skillmonkey Guide
    Current Homebrew: 5th edition psionics

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Aug 2019

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Yora View Post
    If that is the case, the energy you gain would literally be one of the smallest possible amounts amounts you'd ever get. Probably get a lot more energy from collecting the Cosmic Microwave Background.
    A quick application of E=mc˛ gives about 180 000 000 000 Joule for one planck mass, if I'm not mistaken.
    Which would power a fridge for four years.
    Sure, small on an industrial scale, let alone on an astronomical. But pretty sure beats the CMB.
    Last edited by Rydiro; 2021-06-18 at 07:24 AM.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bristol, UK

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rydiro View Post
    A quick application of E=mc˛ gives about 180 000 000 000 Joule for one planck mass, if I'm not mistaken.
    That looks high to me. They're expecting the emissions from any micro-blackholes produced in the LHC to be containable, which I don't think that would be.
    Last edited by halfeye; 2021-06-18 at 07:30 AM.
    The end of what Son? The story? There is no end. There's just the point where the storytellers stop talking.

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lord Torath's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Sharangar's Revenge
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rydiro View Post
    A quick application of E=mc˛ gives about 180 000 000 000 Joule for one planck mass, if I'm not mistaken.
    Which would power a fridge for four years.
    Sure, small on an industrial scale, let alone on an astronomical. But pretty sure beats the CMB.
    The Plank length is on the order of 10-35 meters. What's the order of a plank mass in grams? I confess I do not know.

    E = m c2 => m = E/c2

    c = 299,792,458 m/s.

    c2 = 8.98755 x 1016 m2/s2 ~ 1.0 x 1017 m2/s2

    180 billion joules is roughly 2.0 x 1011 kg m2/s2

    m = (2.0 x 1011 kg m2/s2) / (1.0 x 1017 m2/s2)

    The m2/s2 cancel out, and you're left with 2 x 10-6 kg. Or about 2 mg. I'm... pretty sure that's a good bit heavier than a Plank mass.
    Last edited by Lord Torath; 2021-06-18 at 08:36 AM. Reason: Typos
    Warhammer 40,000 Campaign Skirmish Game: Warpstrike
    My Spelljammer stuff (including an orbit tracker), 2E AD&D spreadsheet, and Vault of the Drow maps are available in my Dropbox. Feel free to use or not use it as you see fit!
    Thri-Kreen Ranger/Psionicist by me, based off of Rich's A Monster for Every Season

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Aug 2019

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Torath View Post
    Or about 2 mg. I'm... pretty sure that's a good bit heavier than a Plank mass.
    Yeah, I was off by a factor of 100. Planck mass is 20 micro grams. I did get that right, but was off on c by a factor of 10.
    Guess you can run that 1000 Watt fridge just for some weeks.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    The Land of Cleves
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Minimum Viable Size for a Black Hole?

    Our current understanding of physics would not allow for the LHC to produce black holes. Which would mean that if it did produce black holes, that would be a sign that our current understanding was incomplete. But in any event, any black hole (or in fact, anything at all) produced by the LHC would have a mass much, much lower than the Planck mass. The only energy you'll ever get out of anything produced in a particle accelerator is the energy you put in, which won't be much.
    Time travels in divers paces with divers persons.
    As You Like It, III:ii:328

    Chronos's Unalliterative Skillmonkey Guide
    Current Homebrew: 5th edition psionics

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •