Comments on: The Neutron Star Paradox: Immunity to Micro Black Hole Capture https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture Safeguarding Humanity Sun, 15 Apr 2012 22:17:30 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.1 By: Niccolò Tottoli https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-106185 Sun, 15 Apr 2012 22:17:30 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-106185 Dear Mr. Kane
No problem of the age of a planet or a star, because nature does probably not (or very, very seldom) produce micro black holes, slow enough to be entrapped by gravitation. Natural MBHs would perhaps just traverse the astronomic body for once and escape into the wide space.
But white dwarfs and neutron stars seem to be not a sound basis as a guarantee for the safety of collider experiments too. There are some unsolved phenomena in the universe.
Please see my comments here too:
http://lifeboat.com/blog/2012/04/lhc-critique-press-info-ins…ent-105842
Thank you.

]]>
By: RichardKanePA https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-106069 Sat, 14 Apr 2012 13:26:50 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-106069 Wouldn’t a micro Black Hole be inert and not react with other matter in a significant way, making the likely at the center of some stellar objects, if two objects are inside they might just join together at the center. No problem for the age of a planet or star unless the LHC is creating millions of them or next to a helium atom molecule near absolute zero in the liquid Helium coil perhaps some wrapped perpendicularly around the LHC.

]]>
By: Niccolò Tottoli https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-105836 Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:41:30 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-105836 Dear EQ I thought for example you? Best regards, Niccolò
——-

]]>
By: Niccolò Tottoli https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-105780 Thu, 12 Apr 2012 01:31:00 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-105780 Dear people
Can someone tell me the parameters of a conventional horizon of a conventional black hole and can someone tell me especially the degree of time delay at the conventional horizon of a black hole?
And can someone answer me the same question for conventional micro black holes?
An infinite number of thanks, Niccolò
(Ps.: Naturally “conventional” means without Hawking radiation.)
——-

]]>
By: Tom Kerwick https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-103687 Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:33:52 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-103687 I guess you can see why I still consider superfluidity as a weaker argument than magnetic field repulsion and solar wind like effects as the true reason why neutron stars may be immune to cosmic ray produced micro black hole accretion. In either case, one would need to better assess if this is robust enough as a proof, or just a paradox…

]]>
By: EQ https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-103668 Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:33:05 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-103668 ottos argument is even inconsistent. On the one hand he insists that nothing can reach the horizont because of his (wrong) version of GR (which is, as shown, not GR any more).
On the other hand it should be possible to eat the whole planet in finite outer time. But the neutron star could not be eaten. If this infinity argument applies for N-stars, it should also apply for other objects.

]]>
By: Tom Kerwick https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-103644 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 23:45:25 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-103644 Otto — about our discussion — you misquoted me — I never stated a “portion of space” could be carried away by an MBH: If the binding force between the neutron stars’ neutrons etc is too great for the traversed portion of the neutron star to escape with the relativistic MBH, then the MBH is held back — it is stuck.

Basically — as nothing can escape from within the event horizon of a non-radiating black hole, anything that gets in the path of such a relativistic MBH is consumed by it (or in your view of the world — approaches it in infinite time?). This would result in the MBH failing to escape the neutron star as I attempted to explain above — it would become embedded.

If you can, please elaborate how the superfluidity characteristic you believe is at play would allow MBH to get through a neutron star without having a force to push anything in infront of its trajectory out of the event horizon’s path and so avoid being consumed…

]]>
By: Otto E. Rossler https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-103628 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:32:46 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-103628 The other two arguments given by eq above are unfortunately involving misunderstandings on his part. I say this here only in the — often shattered — hope that a real scientific discussion can come about with the community on this blog. Since a discussion between a scientist and many anonymous other discussants unfortunately cannot be called a scientific discussion since honesty is a vital ingredient in the definition of the latter.

(Only if historians later get interested in such a situation for some reason does the whole thing become an instance of objective scientific discussion — although the anonmous previous participants are not rehabilitated.)

]]>
By: Otto E. Rossler https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-103625 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:23:36 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-103625 This is a classic statement for once by eq: (Quote)
“Oh, Otto again with his strange ideas about infinite absolute times.”

It is indeed an — and perhaps the central — ingrained mistake of virtually the whole general-relativistic profession, not to know that something like an almost objective universal time existing in the universe — that valid at “space going to infinity”.

This unphysical idealization is quite well appproximated at quite short outer distances from the earth — or outside of a small black hole — for example.

I will have to remind my friend Roger Penrose of not having stressed this point in his beautiful book “Road to Reality” — and for perhaps not knowing humself about this important approximative standard’s physical existence.

For example, he has this wonderful paradigm of many external masses encroaching more and more tightly on an inner region of space with its own nhabitants, mentioned above in the discussion with Tom this afternoon. It is most trivial and interesting to keep in mind that while in their own time, not much will happen to those encroached-upon people, they will all become infinitely slowed in relation to the “outside universe.”

This single ingrained oversight might eventuallly prove to be the deepest reason why the — too consensualistic — relativistic community of very few people across the planet apparently got used to forgetting that nothing can reach a horizon in finite outer time — as Oppenheimer and Snyder still were very much aware of in their seminal 1939 paper.

So again: thank you, dear unknown eq.

]]>
By: eq https://spanish.lifeboat.com/blog/2012/03/the-neutron-star-paradox-immunity-to-micro-black-hole-capture#comment-103623 Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:53:46 +0000 http://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=3363#comment-103623 “you cannot snap a neutron from a neutronstar’s core”

But to snap a quark from a nucleus bound by the strongest known force is easily done, Otto?

But in the case of extreme dense stars where the force is even more important suddenly not?

]]>