Connect with us

OT: Are protons really quantum black holes?

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by Rich Grise, Plainclothes Hippie, Nov 22, 2005.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Hi. :)

    I'm about to embark on a websearch that could ultimately tell me some
    of the numbers about protons and black holes.

    Everybody's heard of a proton, right?

    And practically everybody (at least english-speaking internet geeks)
    has heard of a black hole, right?

    I wonder if anybody's done comparative numbers on the effective mass
    vs. dimensions of the two. Like, are they conceptually equivalent,
    or could, maybe, protons (and their sisters, neutrons) actually _BE_
    teeny, tiny, infinitesimallyy smalll BLACK HOLES?????

    Thanks,
    Rich
     
  2. Ian Parker

    Ian Parker Guest

    Do you mean are quarks black holes because a proton consists of 3
    quarks.

    Yes I suppose it is possible to construct a Theory of Everything
    through black holes and the spin of multidimensional black holes but I
    have never seen it done.
     
  3. john jardine

    john jardine Guest

    It might though account for that 80% of the known universe curiously mislaid
    by the paid specialists :)

    regards
    john
     
  4. Rich, try doing it as a homework exercise, it is very easy.

    Since the mass and "size" of protons is about the same as neutrons,
    and we know that densely packed "neutron matter" does not collapse, we
    can conclude that protons are not miniature black holes.

    i
     
  5. In addition to what has been said, there is a probability
    of tiny black holes of whatever size. The smaller they
    are the faster evaporate into normal matter though.
    Hawkins didn't yet foretell how such evaporation is to
    be thought to happen. The loss of binding energy can
    be huge.

    Rene
     
  6. Mark Martin

    Mark Martin Guest

    Although a proton has no well defined radius, it is true that the
    quarks occupy a region with a radius of at least 1.2 x 10^-15 m. A
    proton has a mass of 1.675 x 10^-27 kg, for which the Swarzschild
    radius is 39 orders of magnitude smaller than the proton radius I've
    given. So no, a proton isn't a micro-black hole.

    -Mark Martin
     
  7. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

  8. $ "Micro" means "orders of magnitude smaller"-LiKE ..duh.
    The MORE "orders of magnitude smaller" ..the MORE micro a Black Hole.
    [ A GR-WORLD-point CANNOT exhibit SiZE or SHAPE, on GR-WORLD-lines. ]
    [ There are NO Black Holes with mass in GR ..G_uv & T_uv UNrelated. ]
    [ THEREfore, any GR Black Hole was, AGAiN, simply a GR-WORLD-point. ]
    $ "Micro" means "orders of magnitude smaller"-LiKE ..duh.
    The MORE "orders of magnitude smaller" ..the MORE micro a Black Hole.
    [ A GR-WORLD-point CANNOT exhibit SiZE or SHAPE, on GR-WORLD-lines. ]
    [ There are NO Black Holes with mass in GR ..G_uv & T_uv UNrelated. ]
    [ THEREfore, any GR Black Hole was, AGAiN, simply a GR-WORLD-point. ]
    brian a m stuckless
     
  9. FrediFizzx

    FrediFizzx Guest

  10. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

  11. Old Man

    Old Man Guest

    The nucleon-nucleon force isn't that of gravitation.
    The N-N force has repulsive, as well as attractive,
    components. The size of the repulsive core is many
    orders of magnitude larger than the Schwarzschild
    radius for a black hole of the same mass. At typical
    N-N distances in nuclei, the attractive component is
    much stronger than that of gravitation.

    The deuteron couldn't be held together by gravitation.

    Hawking hypothesizes that a black hole with mass
    less than ~ 10^(-8) kg (Planck mass) would decay
    very rapidly (Planck time). Nucleon mass is many
    orders of magnitude less than this.

    [Old Man]
     
  12. Guest

    A charged black hole has a maximum charge-to-mass ratio, and a spinning
    black hole has a maximum angular momentum-to-mass ratio. If these are
    exceeded, you don't have an event horizon, but instead have a "naked
    singularity."

    The charges and spins of all known elementary particles far exceed this
    maximum value.

    So, no, the proton can't be a black hole.

    Steve Carlip
     
  13. Androcles

    Androcles Guest

    Nah... what is it?
    What is it made of?

    What's that, a kind of tooth fairy?
    Oh, you want to know how many angels dance on the head of a pin!
    3.1419265, of course.
    In agreement with experience we further assume a round pin is
    taller than an angle or angel, whatever.


    Yeah, sure. Whatever floats your boat. Protons are holes in the fabric of
    the spacetime continuum, a vacuum in a vacuum, swallowing everything near
    them
    until somone empties out the paper bag.
    You must be right, I've agreed with you. Would you like some more candy,
    little one? (???????????????????????????)... mustn't forget the extra
    question marks.
    Androcles.
     
  14. Mark Martin

    Mark Martin Guest

    Tell you what. You go discuss this with Aut. I'm sure this sort of
    thing is of the utmost criticality to her as well. Tell me how it all
    comes out.

    -Mark Martin
     
  15. You must guess what the next question is...

    --
    Dirk

    The Consensus:-
    The political party for the new millenium
    http://www.theconsensus.org
     
  16. Jeff_Relf

    Jeff_Relf Guest

    Hi Ignoramus1487 and Rich_Grise, Ignoramus wrote:

    Since the mass and "size" of protons is about the same as neutrons,
    and we know that densely packed "neutron matter" does not collapse,
    we can conclude that protons are not miniature black holes.

    No one knows the density of a proton, even its location is not well known,
    it's more of a virtual field than a physical particle.

    All the same, I think its density, whatever it might be,
    is a remnant of earlier, much greater densities.
     
  17. Guest

    Protons are anti-black holes though.
    Since Hawking radiation wouldn't exist
    if protons were'nt anti-black holes.


    GR can't ANYTIHNG in it except TENSORS.
    Which is why the only people who erven use it are
    the Tensors wanks in internet and sci.phyics.
    .. Snice it doesn't even have light in it,
    it's only got evaporating fields.
     
  18. $ "Micro" means "orders of magnitude smaller"-LiKE ..duh.
    The MORE "orders of magnitude smaller" ..the MORE micro a Black Hole.
    [ A GR-WORLD-point CANNOT exhibit SiZE or SHAPE, on GR-WORLD-lines. ]
    [ There are NO Black Holes with mass in GR ..G_uv & T_uv UNrelated. ]
    [ THEREfore, any GR Black Hole was, AGAiN, simply a GR-WORLD-point. ]

    $ The non-GR Blackhole mass M1
    [ A GR Schwartzchild "radius" 2*G*M1 / c^2 is NOT a GR calculation. ]
    [ Mathematically speaking there is NO constraint on non-GR mass M1. ]
    [ Mathematically speaking the 2*G*M1 / c^2 is 2*G*(ANY mass) / c^2. ]
    [ Mathematically speaking the 2*G*M1 / c^2 fits 2*G*(PROTON) / c^2. ]

    YES, any PROTON is a TRUE micro-Blackhole, mathematically speaking.!!

    brian a m stuckless
    Re: OT: Are protons really quantum black holes?
     
  19. That's right, that's why I put the word "size" in quotes.

    i
     
  20. hanson

    hanson Guest

    [hanson]
    But Jako, Grise is not asking about that. He, AFAICS does want
    to know whether nucleons could be (described as) black holes.
    However, despite the nebulous answers from the other posters,
    speculations in these realms and domains can be done in so
    very many ways & fashions, that one can conjecture & look at all
    these processes and events with equal validity, as long as the dims
    and the digits do fit. i.e. ..... I can produce a picture/conjecture that
    delivers an estimate to the OP's question that Protons can be described
    as quantum black holes in a fashion that's based on two self-evident
    principles:

    a) Nature is self-similar over all observable domains.
    b) The unit systems (cgs etc) is internally self-consistent and all
    fundamental physical constants must be expressible by/thru/with
    combinations of other ones.

    With that in mind, the proton(mass), m_p, can easily be expressed
    in terms of being a black hole:
    m_p, the proton mass, is a torus type construct that is a blackhole
    of one (1) Plancklength radius across to its Schwarzschild event
    horizon which is shrouded within an outer Coulomb type accretion
    zone of EM charge energy (F, Faraday, not Farad) that interacts with
    other charges which produce the measurable effects of the 13.5 eV
    H-ionization potential and its associated Lyman series limit frequency.
    Here is the QUANTITATIVE equation:

    m_p = Schw.radius * Plank length * Coulomb/radiation parameters.

    m_p = [c^2/2G]*[sqrt(hG/(2pi*c^3)]*[I_H/(f_L*F)]*(3*pi^2)*sqrt(2a)

    m_p = 1.67E-24 gr (so, argue with the numbers not with me...ahaha)

    In other words still, it says:
    The Hydrogen nucleus (m_p) is a black hole with [***]
    --- the classical Schwartzschild limit or event horizon of (c^2/2G) at
    --- a radius of 1 Planck length sqrt(hG/2pi*c^3) and is shrouded in
    --- a substance-characteristic Coulomb mantle, being the product of,
    --- the H-Ionisation potential multiplier of 13.5
    ..... [I_H=4pi^4*sqrt(a)/sqrt(6)],
    --- the Lyman series frequency limit (f_L), and
    --- the Faraday Constant (F, the charge transfer handler),
    ..... and is further governed by
    --- toroidal geometry demands of (3*pi^2) and
    --- EM/QM fine structure conditions set by [sqrt(2*a)].

    [***] Consider the distance between this event horizon and the larger,
    classically measured H-radius as the "nuclear accretion zone" analog.

    In case of leptons, here the electron m_e, the e-shell Ionization-potential
    considerations do fall away and the situation changes to:

    m_e = [c^2/G] * [sqrt(hG/(2pi*c^3)] * [1/(f_L*F)] * a*pi*sqrt(3)/3

    m_e = 9.09E-28 gr

    It says essentially the same as above, except that as already noted ,
    there are no ionization considerations and that the electron's geometry
    is spherical (instead of toroidal as in the composite H-atom)
    Also, it indicates that the electron may be a rotating Kerr black hole
    type character with the Kerr- [c^2/G] (instead of the Schwartzschild
    [c^2/2G]) event horizon.Now figure out and post the equations for m_n, the neutron and
    other particles and cough up a numerical table for mass spectrum
    (with having set the electron mass m_e as "One", 1, for comparison)
    [hanson]
    In a way, right, deuterons and other combo particle are not held
    glued together by gravitation alone, but if the Planck mass M_pl is
    a black hole then is not ordinary matter any longer and it, like all
    other black hole matter, large or small, is shut off from the visible
    universe by definition and I would change your statement from
    "decaying rapidly" into a corollary to the "virtual QM game" & say:
    ".... a black hole with mass less than ~ 10^(-8) kg (Planck mass,
    M_pl) may pop in and out of a (Dirac's) virtual particle sea in very
    rapid intervals with flash durations lasting only 1 Planck time, T_pl.

    .... to which I might add now that, based on my above quantitative
    conjecture, a process (unknown?) is working here that grabs and
    enshrines these emergent Planck masses with EM-quanta, which
    gives them long, very long life times and makes them interactive
    with and visible to other like siblings.... and now go forth and invent
    a new cosmology! ... AHAHAHAHA.... I love these mind games!.....
    ahahaha... hanson
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-