Abd, The micro black hole would begin life without momentum, so it would not immediately zip off through the earth.
A 22 microgram black hole would not consume the earth, read up, lots of recent studies. A micro black hole with the mass of a mountain only exerts one gram of force on its surroundings. It would be acted on by gravity just like any other 22 microgram particle, such as a grain of sand. Over time I could see these destroying most pieces of equipment they are created in. Yes, I could see the charge changing as it consumes different particles and at times they might even act stable. A micro black hole will behave just as any other particle with mass, angular momentum and charge and at times the charge can be neutral. High Power at the surface will help it break up other particles - collective energy. All of the LHC Cern studies I referenced predicted a micro black hole would either 1)evaporate down to stable remanants or 2) evaporate completely almost instantly. I realize you have been too busy profusely chatting AbdOgabble to read any of them... On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com>wrote: > At 12:14 PM 8/21/2012, ChemE Stewart wrote: > >> As I mentioned before, quantum gravity pull has a few advantages: >> >> 1) It acts as a guiding beacon for incoming particle waves, aligning >> them on the way in. >> >> 2) If you consider the particles as waves the incoming blueshift gives >> you high power right where you need it at the point of collapse. >> >> 3) Conversely, any radiation leaving is redshifted leaving only low >> power radiation to the outside observers, you and I. >> > > That's a convenient set of assumptions. > > What high power is needed? Consider this: if a particle is in a region > where the gravity of a black hole attracts it, so too would be attracted > all other particles in the same region; as well, the black hole will be > attracted to them. That is, it's unlikely that inbound accelerated > particles will be impacting anything. > > Outbound particles (generated by what?) would be redshifted, but that is, > from any position, a fixed shift. That is, from any position there is an > escape velocity. If the outbound particle has less than the escape > velocity, it will be slowed and then reversed. If it has exactly the escape > velocity, it will indeed escape, but in the process will be slowed to a > very low level. However, there is no limit to the level of energy of > outbound particles, it depends on how close they are to the black hole at > generation. Their velocity will be reduced by the escape velocity at that > specific point. > > If the points of generation of high-energy radiation are *extremely close* > to the black hole, then the radiation would not escape at all. However, all > the products of the reaction, and anything else in that region, would be > sucked in by gravity (or the hole will travel to suck them in). Mostly, > though, the hole will be affected by the earth's gravity. It will fall > through the material -- through any material. It cannot be contained by > materials. If it has a charge, it may be contained by electrostatic fields, > that's about it. > > What do you "need" high power for? "At the point of collapse," matter > simply falls (gravity) into the hole, it "disappears." Not really, the > hole's mass and charge and energy and momentum increase as needed for > conservation laws. But it all gets placed at the singularity. > > That's how I'd expect a black hole to behave. Gravity would pull it out of > the matrix, quickly, unless it was very small and the electrostatic forces > were greater. Suppose it starts as with the conversion of a proton at a > cubic lattice position, into the hole. Assuming no other charge, the black > hole would prefer to remain at the same site, that's what electrostatic > forces will do. It will behave like a proton. > > The charge will repel other protons.... But the thing might eat an > electron. Charge neutral now. A proton could come along and be eaten. > Positive charge. Same sequence. Rapidly the mass would grow, until > gravitational forces pull the gremlin out of position and it falls through > the lattice, eating whatever it encounters, and then through the lab table, > the floor of the lab, and the earth. > > It could get quite massive and not leave visible holes. However ... if it > keeps growing, there goes the planet. It was a nice idea, eh? Planet, life, > you know. All that. > > What has not been done here is to look at details such as lifetime, > minimum mass, etc. If a very small black hole forms, how long does it live? > Does it live long enough to capture particles? > > It's been pointed out that this theory attempts to explain cold fusion by > introducing another unknown phenomenon. > > It might be simpler to just say that cold fusion is caused by gremlins. > Any kind of gremlin, except that they are very small, or operate in a > parallel dimension, and they can do anything they choose to do, they are > very smart, have what we think of here, in our limited place, as fantastic > powers, and they just love to perplex researchers. Makes them laugh > uncontrollably. Did you see the face on that one? >
