sci.physics.electromag

Dear Autymn D. C.:

On Apr 8, 1:14=A0am, "Autymn D. C." wrote:
> On Apr 6, 9:48=A0am, "N:dlzcD:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
> wrote:
> > "Benj" wrote in message
>
> >news:483e7416-c055-4346-94b2-b471c11f7dab@a22g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...=

>
> > > On Apr 6, 1:44 am, "FrediFizzx" wrote:
> > ...
> > >> Most likely we just don't know what all the
> > >> quantum objects are yet. =A0Or their possible
> > >> interactional configurations. =A0Hopefully we
> > >> will get some more clues after the LHC
> > >> has been running for awhile.
>
> > > Well, provided it doesn't open a black hole
> > > and the earth gets sucked into it...
>
> > Let us hope Hawking was right, then. =A0That
> > way, if we do manage to make a classical
> > black hole out of a few nucleii, it will entirely
> > evaporate in a tiny super hot fireball in
> > fractions of a second.
>
> nuclei
> Well, how do they make a classic black hole
> if black holes are relativistic?

Colliding very energetic nucleii. Already been done at lower energy
levels, and Hawking radiation resulted. Search on "dual to black
hole".

David A. Smith