In reply to MarkI-ZeroPoint's message of Sat, 18 Aug 2012 22:50:51 -0700: Hi, [snip] >Robin stated, >" Other factors to take into consideration are that a neutral black hole >would oscillate back and forth through the planet" > >Funny, that's exactly how electrons behave in my physical model... with the >electron 'hole' being the other half of the electron. So whatever is >oscillating is constantly traversing the nucleus, only it is traveling so >fast that it is only 'inside' the nuclear volume for a very short time >(10^-30s). > >Robin, do you have a ref for your above statement? > >-Mark
Not necessary. If you drop a brick it will land on your toes. ;) If you drop a black hole it's density is such that nothing will stop it. It will keep on going, building in speed and mass till it reaches the core of the planet, then start slowing down as it comes out the other side. Eventually it will come to a stop, then start falling back again. Well that's what I originally thought. ;) However it's actually quite a bit more complicated. Everything on the surface has angular momentum due to the rotation of the planet. Conservation of angular momentum means that as the radius decreases, the tangential momentum must increase. Since the latter comprises both mass and velocity, there will be some velocity increase in the West to East direction, which may mean that eventually it may go into an "orbit" at some depth. This is complicated by the fact that the mass changes over time, both due to Hawking radiation, and due to the fact that gremlins get hungrier as they grow, so whether the mass increases or decreases depends on which process dominates. Neither process has a constant rate, as both rates depend on the momentary size of the gremlin. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
