0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Find a mini black hole and orbit a satellite around it.Then you shoot α-particles at the black hole at a rate of 1 per second.As the particle gets sucked into the BH, lots of high power X-rays radiation results.Catch that enery your tame BH throws at you, convert it into micro waves and beam to wherever you need it.What energy problem?Now you may shoot holes in my theory.
This has been used as source material for several sci fi stories. You dont have to do that all you need is the mini black hole! if you chose on the right size you can get millions of years of energy from it as it evaportates naturallyhttp://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/ This website will give you the correct size for the hole. The big problem is creating a small black hole! it takes all the gravitiational enegy in a collapsing star many times the size of the sun to compress material into a stellar mass black hole and the smaller the mass of the hole the higher the energy density you need to create it. the best way would probably to accelerate a lot of neatly shaped smallish asteroids at near light velocities and get them to collide at a single point in a dynamically balanced collision. A bit beyond current technology.
Sorry Edward Can i apologise, it seems rather than shooting your theory they seem to have blown it to smithereens, bloody scientists.
Black holes might not exist – or at least not as scientists have imagined, cloaked by an impenetrable "event horizon". A controversial new calculation could abolish the horizon, and so solve a troubling paradox in physics.The event horizon is supposed to mark a boundary beyond which nothing can escape a black hole's gravity. According to the general theory of relativity, even light is trapped inside the horizon, and no information about what fell into the hole can ever escape. Information seems to have fallen out of the universe.That contradicts the equations of quantum mechanics, which always preserve information. How to resolve this conflict?
If it were true i would imagine their would be a lot of astrophysicists looking for something new in their lives
<Black holes evaporate.>Let me see if I understand it:A black hole is the ultimate miser, it lets out nothing, neither particles nor EM radiation.Evaporation is the escape of particles to where there is lower entropy.To me, these two propositions are mutually exclusive.Either something escapes and it is not a black hole, or nothing escapes and it is a black hole.
<Then there's the problem of how many alpha-particles you're going to need.>Some sources of α's, I guess a mass of 1 kilo would last a pretty long time... I am more concerned about (most of) this stuff being strong poisons besides being a little radioactive. * Americium * Radium * Radon gas * Uranium * Plutonium-238 * Plutonium-239 * Polonium<For comparison a 1200MW nuclear power station fissions around 1020 atoms of Uranium per second.>I think this is irrelevant, I am not talking fission nor atoms.
have not the foggiest, but that is for you Boffins to improve on. After all, it's all in th EM spectrum so what about those X-ray satellite? Their detectors convert X-rays into ultimately an AC voltage which received here on earth gives the pretty pictures.As Radio Amateur, I never went into giga and micro territory, because the efficiency of affordable IC's was around 4-10%. (For a schoolboy, forking out £ 300 or more was a big no-no.) Things have improved and I would guess that efficiency rating is now up to 50-60%.Again, I cannot find data on X-ray satellites.
Lightarrow:<We should use it to get rid of garbage and radioactive wastes!>The sun is closer.
<I believe the theory suggests that these orphaned virtual particles then survive at the expense of the Black-Hole's Energy/Mass.>You just lost me there but I'll accept it as only theory. Seems theory and real world don't meet for a non physisist... ;-)<No - think a bit more carefully about this...>I thought I had. Simple thinking, perhaps too simple... I am trying to understand the calculation but my field is medical chemistry. Physics was way back when...<The upshot is that if you converted all the alphas from 1kg of Pu-239 completely to energy you'd be generating (on average) 240 Watts!!! Enough for a couple of light bulbs...>But I', not converting the alphas, I want to shoot them at a BH and then catch the resultant flare energy. I could trow rockes at the sucker, but that would result in enormous flares of X-ray energy, if I hear astronomers talking? Too dangerous then.
You have your physics all wrong. If you were to shoot individual particles into a black hole they would vanish without a trace.
Although I agree that multiple collisions between particles rotating around a black hole will produce heating and consequent radiation this is not what I understand as Bremsstrahlung radiation.Surely this is radiation produced when particles move thru a medium at a greater speed than the speed of light in that medium ( a sort of sound breaking breaking type phenomena ).
<You have your physics all wrong.>Granted, but I am a writer, not a physicist. I have to go by the info you boffins publish, like:http://3quarksdaily.blogs.com/3quarksdaily/2005/04/physicists_coul.htmlhttp://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/29199So, if I misinterpreted it, maybe it was not clearly enough explained for the layman?<If you were to shoot individual particles into a black hole they would vanish without a trace.>Oh, and those pics that show giant jets of gas being expelled then?http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/our_black_hole_000920.html (scroll down a bit)