It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
grunt2: btw the relative increase of the sub atomic particle mass near of light speed reduce the wave propieties????
Originally posted by Nexus
Why would we want to make a blackhole anyway? We'd need to travel so far into space [a couple of hundred thousand lightyears] so the blackhole we make won't suck us in...
Originally posted by Nox
The wave properties become more pronounced.
[edit on 20-12-2004 by Nox]
No particle accelerator in the world can smash enough neutrons at a high enough energy to overcome the Exclusion Principle.
Originally posted by grunt2
are you sure about that??? the increase of energy and mass dont induce an more "stable" sistem??? (compare the low frecuency radiation with the gamma rays and you should know that the gamma have an more particle propieties), my friend told me that in fact the particle propieties aid to the investigators to see the "invisible" photons in the protons collisions, you could help me with a web link about that topic???
agreed, but i think that you can say appropriately No nowdays particle accelerator in the world can smash enough neutrons
the mass can be repaced by the density, but you even need a big amount of mass, but anything in the world (even relative small things) can be turned in cold stars if are sufficiently compressed
for me the main problem is the electron-proton fusion, the uncertanly problem
thanks to all for your replies
EDIT: It would be less time/energy consuming to find and capture one of these primordial black holes than making our own.
deutron and strip the proton off the neutron by passing it through a thin foil
Originally posted by grunt2
Nox, the behavior of the photons and electrons in their propieties with energy increase are almost the same (as i know), if the increase of speed on accelerated protons would increase the wave propiety (increasing the wave length and reducing the frecuency), the smash in to sub-proton particles should be almost impossible, and the protons accelerated near the c speed could jump in quantum tunnel and easely pass the "universe limit", even an space ship
Originally posted by Byrd
You would not want a black hole of any size orbiting Earth... it'll suck off the atmosphere, and I don't think that's very good for any of us. Should you create one in the lab, it's likely to suck the entire lab (and yourself) into it.
Artifical Black Holes
So what do you do if you can't wait around that long? For the best chance to observe Hawking Radiation and evaporation, you'd want a black hole that was much closer than naturally occurring black holes, and much less massive. It's a common misconception that you have to have a huge amount of mass to create a black hole. Any amount of mass will do, as long as you cram it into a sufficiently small space. A super-massive black hole with the mass of a billion Suns might be the size of our Solar System, but the Earth could be a black hole too if you packed it into the volume of a marble. Even a person will do, although you'd have to cram them into the space occupied by a single electron.