sci.physics.particle

On Apr 2, 11:04=A0pm, "Y.Porat" wrote:
> On Apr 1, 4:32=A0pm, PD wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 1, 3:00=A0am, "Y.Porat" wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 31, 8:29=A0pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 31, 6:57=A0am, "Y.Porat" wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 31, 3:54=A0pm, PD wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Mar 31, 3:58=A0am, "Y.Porat" wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Mar 31, 8:33=A0am, festusby...@btinternet.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On 31 Mar, 06:12, Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Mar 30, 8:44=A0pm, "Y.Porat" wrot=
e:
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Mar 31, 1:39=A0am, Eric Gisse wro=
te:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 30, 7:42=A0am, "Y.Porat" =
wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Following the current discussion about starting the =
LHC
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > a few questions should (IMHO) be examined:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > 1
> > > > > > > > > > > > is there a minimal critical mass of a black hole
> > > > > > > > > > > > in order that it will survive continuously ??
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > 2
> > > > > > > > > > > > considering the H bomb explotion =A0 and knowledge-
> > > > > > > > > > > > and experience --
> > > > > > > > > > > > are 'black holes of some magnitude
> > > > > > > > > > > > created there ??
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Questions like this automatically exclude you from the=
non-debate.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > TIA
> > > > > > > > > > > > Y.Porat
> > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------
> > > > > > > > > > please by pass the
> > > > > > > > > > -little psychopath
>
> > > > > > > > > > Y.P
> > > > > > > > > > ------------------
>
> > > > > > > > > Says the guy who seriously asked if H bombs make black hol=
es.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > Well!!!, considering black holes are found only in the heart=
of a
> > > > > > > > galaxy. Well will need at least 500 million fusion stars lik=
e our sun.
> > > > > > > > But we cannot even produce on working stable fusion reactor =
yet.
> > > > > > > > Ahahahaha!
>
> > > > > > > > Soooooo! anyhooo! We do have a long way to go before we can =
generate
> > > > > > > > the amount of energy a black hole requires.
>
> > > > > > > > We should really be worried about our carbon foot print and =
the polar
> > > > > > > > ice melting.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > ----------------
> > > > > > > you are right about global worming
> > > > > > > now abouth the LHC
>
> > > > > > > there must beno doubt abot it
> > > > > > > so it is worth to think before opperating it
> > > > > > > while we say black hole from LHC
> > > > > > > we do not mean =A0 of couirse a big one
> > > > > > > my question is
> > > > > > > is there a chance for even a microscopic back hle to be create=
d ??
>
> > > > > > Not much. But even in the event that it is, microscopic black ho=
les
> > > > > > evaporate. Very quickly.
>
> > > > > very quickly
> > > > > but we need something more** quantitative!!**
>
> > > > > we are realing here with an uknown risk
>
> > > > What is the risk of collisions that are at least 7 orders of magnitu=
de
> > > > weaker than routinely observed cosmic ray events?
>
> > > > > > > it is imporant both theoretically and practically
> > > > > > > if it will be a tiny balck hole =A0(BH) that will disapear
> > > > > > > imediately =A0than it is not relvant practically
> > > > > > > but may be theoretically
>
> > > > > > > and let me tell you my oppinion and understanding :
> > > > > > > BH is actually a =A0 bundle of protons that lost their electro=
ns
>
> > > > > > No, that's not right.
> > > > > > Try reading Kip Thorne's book, "Black Holes and Time Warps".
>
> > > > > anyway
> > > > > it is a very dense situation of particles
> > > > > while the collider can do it
> > > > > the question is how much and how far
> > > > > so =A0 =A0again
> > > > > we are confronted with an **unprecedented situation**
> > > > > (may be it i s =A0 very exagerated to think that all our globe
> > > > > will be swallowd
> > > > > but there might be a 'minor cathastrophy'
> > > > > exclpsion or else )
> > > > > and cannt afford dealing with =A0it casually carelessly
> > > > > and unresponsively
>
> > > > > ATB
> > > > > Y.Porat
> > > > > ----------------------- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > ------------
> > > since you asked sivilisly and a legitimate question
> > > i will =A0 =A0try to answer
>
> > > the main point as i ssee is that the problem
> > > *is not an abstract problem or oversimplified*
>
> > > a black hole must have some specific geometric inner structre
> > > it is not just a shaples random mess
> > > so it is not only a prioblem of energies
> > > it is a much more detailed problem
> > > now
> > > it i snot taken fo rgranter that the nenery emitted form
> > > black holes is the one than created them
> > > no onereally knowes how black holes were created
>
> > Actually, we know quite a bit, and a lot of that work was done in the
> > 1930's, set aside for WWII and the beginning of the cold war, and then
> > picked up again in the late 1950s. You can pick up Kip Thorne's book
> > on black holes (which is written for hobbyists) to get a glimpse of
> > how much is really known.
>
> > > and that is the problem
> > > may be small black holes are created regularly
> > > while we dont know aboutit because they 'evaporate' quickly
>
> > > bottom line as i saied
>
> > > the balace between =A0dangerous risks versus
> > > possible gaines
> > > is too much big against the advantages
> > > unless **proven* otherwilse
> > > and worth examining a thousand times before doing
>
> > > our civilazation will not collaps if it will take
> > > such and such more time to reexamine it ..
> > > again and agian from any possible angle
> > > and even so
> > > at last we wil have to take a =A0risk chance
> > > (ass many breakthrous that were in past
> > > while some people paied the toll for that ..
> > > im am warere of it
> > > but it must be carefully
>
> > > (Alfred Nobel lost his brother in a dynamite test...not to mention
> > > lots of other examples .)
>
> > > because no mathematical theoretist or even
> > > an ex[arimentalist can be 100 sure
> > > while cinfronting
> > > **an unprecedented event*
> > > we are not dealing here with a formula on paper rist
> > > to be found wrong
> > > we are dealing with confronting ..... nature !!
> > > (no one has a direct phone line to GOD (:-)
> > > isnt that so ???
>
> > > ATB
> > > Y.Porat
> > > --------------------
> > > isnt that so ???- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> --------------
> Thanks
> anyway it seems to me that neither me or you
> are experts about BH

You most certainly are not, that's for damn sure.

[...]