# OT: Are protons really quantum black holes?

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

1. ### Rich Grise, Plainclothes HippieGuest

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 ParkerGuest

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 jardineGuest

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

regards
john

4. ### Ignoramus1487Guest

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. ### Rene TschaggelarGuest

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 MartinGuest

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

8. ### brian a m stucklessGuest

\$ "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

11. ### Old ManGuest

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. ### AndroclesGuest

Nah... what is it?

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 MartinGuest

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. ### Dirk Bruere at NeopaxGuest

You must guess what the next question is...

--
Dirk

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

16. ### Jeff_RelfGuest

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.
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. ### brian a m stucklessGuest

\$ "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. ### Ignoramus1487Guest

That's right, that's why I put the word "size" in quotes.

i

20. ### hansonGuest

[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 = [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