Mini Black Holes

Discussion of the end of the world brought about by ultra high energy colliders.
bluecat
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:56 pm

Mini Black Holes

Post by bluecat » Fri Nov 13, 2009 4:09 pm

Does the LHC have the power to create a mini black hole? If it does, will this be the first and last time such a thing has ever existed on earth? Do you think it will sabotage itself from the future again? I think it's risky as mankind has never done anything like this before. Interferring with nature on such a colossal scale. Maybe not this time, but keep doing something like this, who knows?

User avatar
Xymox
Site Admin
Posts: 1022
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
Contact:

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Xymox » Fri Nov 13, 2009 5:11 pm

Its my understanding that mini black holes with be routinely created. Its also my understanding that they will evaporate as quickly as they are created so no threat exists.

I think however that caution is still warranted. Our understanding of mass and gravity is not complete and therefore our understanding of a black hole is not complete.

Am I worried ? Not at all.

As far as time travel goes.. My -personal- opinion is that I have no idea. I sure highly doubt that causality dictated a bird dropping some bread on the LHC. I have read the papers on this subject and, while I understand the point, I just personally find the conclusions hard to believe. HOWEVER stranger things have happened.

The papers

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/070 ... 1919v4.pdf
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/080 ... 2991v2.pdf
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/091 ... 0359v3.pdf

Also the safety study done by CERN on the LHC
http://cern.ch/lsag/LSAG-Report.pdf

muttvette
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:15 am
Location: San Antonio, TX

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by muttvette » Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:10 am

here's a thought maybe when you get a high enough energy level of collisions like you would in space where cosmic rays hit each other that the corresponding effect is a portion of the particles actually breaking the speed of light and the black hole being like what happens when we break the speed of sound but on a much bigger scale

User avatar
March_Hare
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:09 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by March_Hare » Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:31 am

Not possible within the currently generally accepted framework.

- Nothing can go faster than the speed of light

- Accelerating something with mass up to the speed of light requires infinite energy, so if particles (with mass) can't even go as fast as the speed of light, how could they be made to go even faster?

- A black hole is nothing but a certain area of space with a very high gravity. So high, that the escape velocity (speed required to get away from it) is higher than the speed of light. Since not even light can get away from it, it is called a black hole. That's something quite different from a sonic boom (which is a shock wave).
Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
~Douglas Adams

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Stephen » Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:43 am

To my understanding, black holes can be created up to 1 in a second, if a certain theory (I think string theory) is right. The same theory predicts that these black holes will evaporate, but even if they don't it will take billions of years for them to be dangerous. I have a few questions, though -
1. If black holes are created and evaporate, will they continue experiment with them, even though they don't know all of their properties?
2. If stable black holes will be created, how long it will take for the LHC to stop the collisions, and how many of these black holes will be created in the meantime?
3. If stable black holes were created, will particle accelerators be banned globally?

Shadowdraxx
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:03 am

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Shadowdraxx » Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:45 am

GET READY, GET A BREW, POPCORN HERE WE GO.....

Stephen wrote: 1. If black holes are created and evaporate, will they continue experiment with them, even though they don't know all of their properties?
2. If stable black holes will be created, how long it will take for the LHC to stop the collisions, and how many of these black holes will be created in the meantime?
3. If stable black holes were created, will particle accelerators be banned globally?
Ok lets rewind for 10 mins, the 1 a second thing came from a generated number at random, ignoring the theories and assumed its true, so they only stated it could and remember its actually irrelevant how many are created as ill demonstrate below but first you have to understand this, to generate a Mbh at 14 TEV requires a lot of "what if's", to help below is a cut where the same question was asked, how probable are they in the first place (fast answer is, you have really more chance to will the lottery 4 times in a row, if u wanna talk % chance of this happening).

Ok So even if the extension of Quantum Field Theory known as Super symmetric String Theory is true -- that doesn't by itself imply that the LHC can create black holes. You need String theory's assumption of extra spacial dimension, plus the foundationless assumption that at least some of these extra dimensions are much larger than the Planck Scale or some other way of tampering with the behaviour of gravity near the TeV scale.

Thanks to Rpenner for this above, but basically "foundationless assumption" think about that aka no one has written anything to explain a process of how that would happen. It’s like getting in on plane and assuming you can fly it, without learning.

Next added that ALL the papers published regarding Mbh production don’t even talk about the theory of creation they just assume once again that LHC = black hole, just for the sake of (safety) argument.

So given the above how many folk at Cern want to believe in this one of many possible maths equations to explain the missing link in our robust standard model, erm well like I say I’ve never seen any papers, and I watched the "LHC is safe" video which is a breakdown of the LSAG report, the room was full, Ellis (the speaker), asked that same question, who believes, and not one person in the room lifted their hand, because it would mean a lot is flawed with the standard model and its never shown to be incorrect so far.

ahh mega post alert, but i guess that’s the point to show it isn’t as simple as "1 per second".

So yeah moving on it comes to the Wagner/Ivan type folk, the anti LHC crew say OMG death, every working physicists says, erm stfu.

In some way the same theory that assumes X and Y also assumes hawking radiation.

There are a lot of published papers out there showing that if LHC = Black hole and black hole = stable, then black hole also = managed a perfect birth allowing to eat everything it can see on its path, and that black hole also = centre of earth, not flying away from the earth then also = doesn’t matter one bit.

In every mathematical paper all possible “pro” black hole scenario’s to give it the best start in life = no threat.

This is where the Anti LHC crew comes in, because they cut and paste some information (the scary bits), and their own “theories” that make the world blow up .

But don’t ask for the maths involved because you will NEVER get any answer (hello Ivan).

So back in the “real” world so to say, they would love this black hole idea, it would be awesome, and because of the above the LHC would continue and new papers showing how the world works would be written, the end, (for now say hello to a new collider to probe deeper).

They wouldn’t stop doing the experiment, not until the machine stops to present new information (the LHC suffers from diminishing returns so after the first couple of years it becomes harder for it to produce clear results, due to the damage by radiation).

And for the aspect of if more than one was created?, meaningless too because they all would have the same grow rate, after 4 billion years still only big enough to be seen in a microscope, but ofc the solar system is toast already, 1 or 40 million, still no threat to earth or the solar system in currently or future times of the lifecycle, this is according to all the papers written and reviewed to be solid.

We can go around and around with this for months, but simply put there is no worse case scenario realised in theory or practice that would mean shutdown due to Mbh.

So recap, the theory relies on another theory (both a maths equation to answer questions about the standard model, there are a lot other theories too), then relies on some unknown – unknown, which messes with gravity, and even after all that, the things have to die due to hawking radiation (otherwise theory is incorrect), and including all the other scenario theories, (no hawking rad) all the papers and guys in the field conclude, no Mbh issue for us to worry about.

And now I’m off to collapse in on myself due to the wall of text written :P.

User avatar
Texanguy
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:37 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Texanguy » Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:26 pm

Shadowdraxx wrote:And now I’m off to collapse in on myself due to the wall of text written :P.
GASP!! The "Collaptical explosion", as predicted by none other than Ivan Gorelik.. wow. :O teehee. joking, of course. it was lame, i know.

User avatar
March_Hare
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:09 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by March_Hare » Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:37 pm

Texanguy: if you can also work the number 666 into that you totally made my day. (We have another mad "scientist" on the forums).

/em pushes thread back on topic
Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
~Douglas Adams

User avatar
Texanguy
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:37 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Texanguy » Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:01 pm

March_Hare wrote:Texanguy: if you can also work the number 666 into that you totally made my day. (We have another mad "scientist" on the forums).

/em pushes thread back on topic
Is "collaptical magnetic terroristic explosion of devil" good enough? :D

User avatar
March_Hare
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:09 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by March_Hare » Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:37 pm

Good enough for me :lol:
Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
~Douglas Adams

User avatar
Texanguy
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:37 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Texanguy » Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:39 pm

awesome. glad i could help make your day. :D

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Stephen » Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:51 am

Well thanks for reassuring me :) I just think that continuing experimenting with stable black holes will be stupid, but we'll deal with that if we get there.

Shadowdraxx
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:03 am

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Shadowdraxx » Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:12 am

Stephen wrote:Well thanks for reassuring me :) I just think that continuing experimenting with stable black holes will be stupid, but we'll deal with that if we get there.
the epic length of that thread is more to show that well, was intended to show how many factors and how many things would need to be true rather written by someone, and that altho there are ofc folk prob around this forum that believe in String Theory, this aspect is boardering on the accepted side.

but yeah its also safe to feel that even if all this stuff happened to make one, ud still have to go to work the next day, and the next, and the next, and the next, and the.....

JNW
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:48 pm

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by JNW » Sat Dec 12, 2009 10:26 pm

If mini black holes could exist, then virtual black holes would mediate proton decay. Proton decay has never been observed, and the lower bound on its rate means that there are no black holes below 10^16 GeV. That's around 12 orders of magnitude higher than the LHC can reach.

So the LHC has no chance of actually producing a mini black hole.

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0009154

RonnyV
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:49 pm

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by RonnyV » Wed Jan 06, 2010 11:51 am

If I was smart enough to understand the maths and concluded for myself that mini black holes are dangerous, I'd start immediately looking for ways to be able to detect these black holes (as they are micro black holes they have micro mass, only curved very strongly in space, so I'd say they do not get trough the mechanics of the LHC tubings before "eating their way through", so should give time to be able to detect them), look for a way to remove or transport or otherwise eliminate them (maybe encapsulate them in some container and send them with a rocket out of our solar system), so I could rescue our planet when needed ...

has anyone ever heard of someone doing more then predicting mbh, stangelets, highs field collapse, dimensional leakage etc. will occur and actually think about what possible solutions can be devised for these "threats" ? That would certainly be an interesting forum topic .... :geek:

Post Reply