Message boards : LHC@home Science : Black hole question
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · Next

AuthorMessage
PJ

Send message
Joined: 18 Sep 04
Posts: 8
Credit: 1,181,841
RAC: 0
Message 20605 - Posted: 3 Oct 2008, 10:30:59 UTC

In a discussion about the LHC and worlds near end (Ha!) I came across the question what forces a black hole can actually exhibit?

The corresponding formulas mention Mass, Angular Momentum and the electric Charge as factors in the equation describing a Black hole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerr-Newman_metric

The question that came up was if the Black Hole actually exhibits an attracting force on particles of the opposite polarity (and correspondingly a repulsing force on particles of equal polarity) beyond the Event Horizon?

I think that, as photons are transmitters of information and forces within electromagnetic fields, that the information that the particular charge is there can not possibly go through the Event Horizon and therefore, beyond it, no forces on charged particles through the charge of the black hole are exhibited.

I expect that the energy of the charge actually contributes to the mass of the black hole and that this is the whole effect measurable beyond the Event Horizon.

Can someone enlighten me please? :D
ID: 20605 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Alex

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 378
Credit: 10,765
RAC: 0
Message 20613 - Posted: 5 Oct 2008, 0:44:47 UTC - in response to Message 20605.  

Step 1. Put a black hole in a lab.

Step 2. Do some tests.

Step 3. See if results match expected. If not, then you\'ve discovered something new or at least discovered that your assumption may have been incorrect.



I'm not the LHC Alex. Just a number cruncher like everyone else here.
ID: 20613 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
PJ

Send message
Joined: 18 Sep 04
Posts: 8
Credit: 1,181,841
RAC: 0
Message 20625 - Posted: 5 Oct 2008, 19:40:56 UTC - in response to Message 20613.  

Step 1. Put a black hole in a lab.

Step 2. Do some tests.

Step 3. See if results match expected. If not, then you\\\\\\\'ve discovered something new or at least discovered that your assumption may have been incorrect.




Well. My electrical bill is already steep as of now. So I won´t be investing into that.

So sorry, that answer is impractical for me.
ID: 20625 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Greg

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 08
Posts: 7
Credit: 55,939
RAC: 0
Message 20629 - Posted: 6 Oct 2008, 11:53:49 UTC - in response to Message 20605.  
Last modified: 6 Oct 2008, 11:55:14 UTC

In a discussion about the LHC and worlds near end (Ha!) I came across the question what forces a black hole can actually exhibit?

The corresponding formulas mention Mass, Angular Momentum and the electric Charge as factors in the equation describing a Black hole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerr-Newman_metric

The question that came up was if the Black Hole actually exhibits an attracting force on particles of the opposite polarity (and correspondingly a repulsing force on particles of equal polarity) beyond the Event Horizon?

I think that, as photons are transmitters of information and forces within electromagnetic fields, that the information that the particular charge is there can not possibly go through the Event Horizon and therefore, beyond it, no forces on charged particles through the charge of the black hole are exhibited.

I expect that the energy of the charge actually contributes to the mass of the black hole and that this is the whole effect measurable beyond the Event Horizon.

Can someone enlighten me please? :D



Trying to explain this without resorting to pages and pages of at times complex equations is quite a challenge, but I\'ll try.
All the fundamental properties of a particle (charge, angular momentum, mass etc.) can be thought of as being the information that is required to define that particle. Due to a quirk of relativity, (time-dilation of objects approaching an event horizon as seen by a more distant observer) the event horizon of a black hole retains an imprint of that information for every particle that crosses it.

That information remains visible to the external universe even though the particle has crossed the event horizon and is cut off from the external universe.

I hope that helps you with your question, but if anyone else has a better analogy please post it.
ID: 20629 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ML1

Send message
Joined: 5 Oct 08
Posts: 1
Credit: 171,884
RAC: 156
Message 20631 - Posted: 6 Oct 2008, 13:46:11 UTC

Do not black holes suggest that our \"graviton\" (Higg\'s boson?) communicating particles view of gravity is flawed?

Or do gravitons have a special excuse that photons do not have?

And if you\'re relying on time dilation effects at the event horizon whereby your external view is that everything just \'piles up\' nearby but never actually gets there (because time becomes infinitely slowed), then does that also not suggest that whatever physical effects are to be communicated will likewise be in effect \'diluted\' (weakened) in proportion to the time dilation?


Do we \'feel\' any effects of black holes other than their gravity and momentum?

Regards,
Martin

ID: 20631 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
tullio

Send message
Joined: 19 Feb 08
Posts: 607
Credit: 3,776,532
RAC: 862
Message 20633 - Posted: 6 Oct 2008, 14:40:29 UTC - in response to Message 20631.  

Do not black holes suggest that our \\\"graviton\\\" (Higg\\\'s boson?) communicating particles view of gravity is flawed?

Or do gravitons have a special excuse that photons do not have?

And if you\\\'re relying on time dilation effects at the event horizon whereby your external view is that everything just \\\'piles up\\\' nearby but never actually gets there (because time becomes infinitely slowed), then does that also not suggest that whatever physical effects are to be communicated will likewise be in effect \\\'diluted\\\' (weakened) in proportion to the time dilation?


Do we \\\'feel\\\' any effects of black holes other than their gravity and momentum?

Regards,
Martin


A Higgs boson is not a graviton, AFAIK. It should be a massive particle.
ID: 20633 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile JLDun
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jul 07
Posts: 21
Credit: 12,058
RAC: 0
Message 20770 - Posted: 15 Nov 2008, 5:48:11 UTC - in response to Message 20633.  
Last modified: 15 Nov 2008, 5:49:46 UTC

A Higgs boson is not a graviton, AFAIK. It should be a massive particle.

In my opinion, based on half-remembered stories (news and otherwise):

Graviton
    1. A \'graviton\' is a particle that exerts a \"gravitational force\" between two objects.
    2. Gravity (or the gravitational force) is the attraction- or [direct] pull- between two objects.



Higgs Boson

    1. A Higgs Boson is a particle that gives all other particles mass.
    2. Mass warps space. [Einstein]
    3. Gravity is the warping of space.



The difference between one and the other is more what effect you expect; to me this means mainly a difference in name...


ID: 20770 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
tullio

Send message
Joined: 19 Feb 08
Posts: 607
Credit: 3,776,532
RAC: 862
Message 20772 - Posted: 15 Nov 2008, 17:28:59 UTC - in response to Message 20770.  

A Higgs boson is not a graviton, AFAIK. It should be a massive particle.

In my opinion, based on half-remembered stories (news and otherwise):

Graviton
    1. A \\\'graviton\\\' is a particle that exerts a \\\"gravitational force\\\" between two objects.
    2. Gravity (or the gravitational force) is the attraction- or [direct] pull- between two objects.



Higgs Boson

    1. A Higgs Boson is a particle that gives all other particles mass.
    2. Mass warps space. [Einstein]
    3. Gravity is the warping of space.



The difference between one and the other is more what effect you expect; to me this means mainly a difference in name...


The graviton is a hypothetical spin 2 boson which mediates gravity. But nobody has yet succeeded in quantizing the gravitational field, despite many attempts, and nobody knows its mass. It might also have a rest mass zero, like the photon. The Higgs boson is a consequence of the Standard Model of elementary particles and is certainly massive. So I don\'t think they are same particle but God only knows.
ID: 20772 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
dennisshows
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jan 08
Posts: 7
Credit: 32,097
RAC: 0
Message 20783 - Posted: 18 Nov 2008, 15:52:53 UTC - in response to Message 20613.  

Step 1. Put a black hole in a lab.

Step 2. Do some tests.

Step 3. See if results match expected. If not, then you\\\\\\\'ve discovered something new or at least discovered that your assumption may have been incorrect.

Step 1. Put a black hole in a lab.

Step 2. Do some tests.

Step 3. ???

Step 4. Profit
ID: 20783 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Misfit
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 Aug 05
Posts: 55
Credit: 8,216
RAC: 0
Message 20813 - Posted: 24 Nov 2008, 7:38:08 UTC

What really happened.
me@rescam.org
ID: 20813 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Avo

Send message
Joined: 10 Sep 08
Posts: 1
Credit: 459
RAC: 0
Message 20879 - Posted: 23 Dec 2008, 14:47:27 UTC - in response to Message 20625.  

My rent for my apartment includes free power, so we could bring the black hole over here. It\'d give me someplace to put my old laundry. When we\'re done I could just put the black hole in the dumpster, as long as my landlord doesn\'t catch me bringing it down the freight elevator.



Well. My electrical bill is already steep as of now. So I won´t be investing into that.

So sorry, that answer is impractical for me.

ID: 20879 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Midhun . C.V

Send message
Joined: 10 Nov 09
Posts: 3
Credit: 1,018
RAC: 0
Message 21794 - Posted: 15 Jan 2010, 15:20:36 UTC - in response to Message 20605.  

By comparing the flux of cosmic ray formed in LHC to Sun\'s flux i got that No probability to form blackholes in LHC.
Because i sun 10^9 times more collisions occurs there. so there is no probability to make harmful blackholes in LHC experiment
ID: 21794 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile 7ri9991 [MM]
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 09
Posts: 22
Credit: 311,184
RAC: 0
Message 21795 - Posted: 16 Jan 2010, 16:52:04 UTC - in response to Message 20813.  

What really happened.

This is impossible. It cant happen until 2012.
ID: 21795 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Nagilum

Send message
Joined: 14 Apr 09
Posts: 64
Credit: 37
RAC: 0
Message 21796 - Posted: 20 Jan 2010, 7:28:29 UTC
Last modified: 20 Jan 2010, 7:30:21 UTC

Okay black holes and high electric bills, sounds symetrical but thats not "SUZY" and why aren't we hearing from CERN scientist like "bigmac"? Did they discover something that's "hush hush"? I'd like to hear something just to keep my hopes alive, and this blog has so many excellent individuals inputing their thoughts here.
Nagilum...
ID: 21796 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Sid
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Jul 07
Posts: 43
Credit: 367,186
RAC: 0
Message 21798 - Posted: 20 Jan 2010, 13:40:05 UTC - in response to Message 21796.  

Okay black holes and high electric bills, sounds symetrical but thats not \"SUZY\" and why aren\'t we hearing from CERN scientist like \"bigmac\"?



Nagilum:


I doubt that the CERN scientists have learned anything new since the LHC is in test and tune mode.

. . . from everything I can gather, the LHC will be back online around 20Feb, and will gradually ramp up to it\'s design energy levels.

Who knows what new understanding of particle physics might be coming in 2010!
LHC: The Essential Guide Part 2
ID: 21798 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Andrew Gorokhov

Send message
Joined: 15 Feb 10
Posts: 27
Credit: 8,826
RAC: 0
Message 22032 - Posted: 10 Mar 2010, 8:43:30 UTC

Our Universe is fundamentally casual (on microlevel). That\\\'s why physics says \\\'Who knows?..\\\' ;) So, what are you talking about? :) Welcome Back2black! ))))) ♀

Another version (Einstein):
\\\'God does not play dice\\\'
ID: 22032 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Ver Greeneyes

Send message
Joined: 10 Sep 08
Posts: 29
Credit: 34,924
RAC: 0
Message 22037 - Posted: 10 Mar 2010, 19:39:28 UTC - in response to Message 22032.  

Our Universe is fundamentally casual (on microlevel). That\'s why physics says \'Who knows?..\' ;) So, what are you talking about? :) Welcome Back2black! ))))) ♀

Another version (Einstein):
\'God does not play dice\'

The whole point of quantum mechanics is that the universe does -not- appear to be fundamentally causal - all attempts at finding a \'hidden structure\' to explain locality problems have so far failed. Indeed, it really does appear that the answer to \'if a tree falls and there\'s no one around to hear, does it still make a sound?\' is no, at least for the fundamental particles.

Einstein may not have liked the idea, and there are still theories (of quantum gravity, no less) that state that the universe is fundamentally deterministic, but at this point we have little reason to question the fundamental randomness of reality.

Mind you, even a deterministic reality can be unpredictable - this is a consequence of emergent chaos, which we see just about everywhere in nature; for instance, because the orbits of the planets in our solar system are elliptic, and there are more than two bodies involved, they form a chaotic system, and it is almost impossible to accurately predict their orbits more than several millions of years into the future or past (though we do our best using perturbative theories).
ID: 22037 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Neasan
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 06
Posts: 234
Credit: 11,078
RAC: 0
Message 22046 - Posted: 11 Mar 2010, 10:41:31 UTC
Last modified: 11 Mar 2010, 10:41:44 UTC

This is the first \"new physics\" from the LHC:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.5430

It is a paper from the ALICE experiment. However as previously said LHC is in test and tune, once we get 7TeV collisions in the next few weeks *fingers crossed* we will have some data for the scientists to analyse.

Graviton =/= Higgs Boson
ID: 22046 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Andrew Gorokhov

Send message
Joined: 15 Feb 10
Posts: 27
Credit: 8,826
RAC: 0
Message 22047 - Posted: 11 Mar 2010, 12:47:07 UTC - in response to Message 22037.  


Mind you, even a deterministic reality can be unpredictable - this is a consequence of emergent chaos, which we see just about everywhere in nature; for instance, because the orbits of the planets in our solar system are elliptic, and there are more than two bodies involved, they form a chaotic system, and it is almost impossible to accurately predict their orbits more than several millions of years into the future or past (though we do our best using perturbative theories).


That\'s for sure - we should not keep our standard dialectic point of view any more. That\'s why the theory of chaos (Prigozhin etc.) is so popular. And the same -> particles (♪)/waves (♫) , ∞*0, symmetric - not symmetric, etc.
___________
¬ (¬(♪♫#♪♫))
ID: 22047 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile Andrew Gorokhov

Send message
Joined: 15 Feb 10
Posts: 27
Credit: 8,826
RAC: 0
Message 22048 - Posted: 11 Mar 2010, 13:00:32 UTC - in response to Message 22046.  
Last modified: 11 Mar 2010, 13:01:09 UTC



Graviton =/= Higgs Boson


But they didn't find graviton :) And will not :))
Waiting for H. B. @ 7TeV

And thanks for the link (♫)!
ID: 22048 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : LHC@home Science : Black hole question


©2020 CERN