See quite an interesting on "anti matter entering into a math singularity..."
What happens when you fire antimatter in a black
hole ?
1 month
ago
George Jones • Antimatter has positive
mass, so the black hole gets a little bigger.
Ken Ramsley • Indeed, as George says,
the black hole gets a little more massive. Once inside the event horizon, the
antimatter may collide with ordinary matter that is also arriving. At this
point any energy released from these reactions is in the form of photons (in
this case gamma rays) which are trapped by the gravity of the black hole just
like ordinary visible light. All of the mass of the photons and any remaining
antimatter eventually accretes onto the singularity at the center of the black
hole (though it possible that some of the gamma rays might orbit the black hole
for while -- which an odd notion, to be sure). Since matter is condensed energy
the mass of your antimatter projectile is the same no matter what form it takes
when it become part of the black hole, and the antimatter or its products
simply add their mass to the black hole system.
Abdul Royan • thanks a lot for the
answers so what i understand is that even though the energy released from
annihilation of matter and anti-matter coming in contact the black hole will
suppress the released energy due to its gravitational push and as a result of
this the black hole gains mass cause of the positive mass the anti-matter
carries. Since knowing this what if there was a much greater amount of
anti-matter coming in contact with a black hole will then energy released still
be suppressed by the gravity of the black hole or will the energy released from
the matter and anti-matter be so overwhelming that the black hole will pushed
out?
Thanks
Thanks
Marino Maiorino • "The black hole
will be pushed out" of what?
1 month
ago • Like
PHILLIP GOOD • I'd love to see the
cannon with which to do the firing.
1 month
ago • Like
Snp Gupta • Black holes are math
singularities, and Antimatter is also a Hypothetical thing. The question “The
black hole will be pushed out of what? ” will really sharpen our imagination.
May I add, at present imagination is ruling the present day Physics, where it
will lead us I don’t know.....
26 days
ago
Marino Maiorino • Antimatter is not that
hypothetical thing at all. It is also true that thinking about putting together
THAT huge amount of antimatter is only a very speculative thing.
That said, I still do not understand the question, as it makes no sense to me.
"Will the energy released from the matter and anti-matter be so overwhelming that the black hole will pushed out?" Pushed out of what? Are you trying to take the huge mass of a black hole and kick it out of its own events horizon? That is pure nonsense, this is why I don't understand the question!
It is exactly that huge mass that creates the events horizon so, if you try to kick the black hole with a big blast, the whole thing will (eventually) move. But I doubt you will see that happen: the closer the blast will happen to the singularity, the slower it will happen. And actually, once the antimatter is inside the events horizon, I believe the hole will move TOWARDS the antimatter as both matter and energy, also the blast energy, will be absorbed. Virtually, the only effect after antimatter will have once it penetrates the events horizon is what George and Ken already stated: black hole becomes more massive.
If you want to move the whole thing (mass + events horizon), then you have to provide "breadcrumbs", that is, some gravitational pull, some massive bodies shying away from the hole, not falling in it. It will be a very little shift, but it might be effective in a lifetime.
That said, I still do not understand the question, as it makes no sense to me.
"Will the energy released from the matter and anti-matter be so overwhelming that the black hole will pushed out?" Pushed out of what? Are you trying to take the huge mass of a black hole and kick it out of its own events horizon? That is pure nonsense, this is why I don't understand the question!
It is exactly that huge mass that creates the events horizon so, if you try to kick the black hole with a big blast, the whole thing will (eventually) move. But I doubt you will see that happen: the closer the blast will happen to the singularity, the slower it will happen. And actually, once the antimatter is inside the events horizon, I believe the hole will move TOWARDS the antimatter as both matter and energy, also the blast energy, will be absorbed. Virtually, the only effect after antimatter will have once it penetrates the events horizon is what George and Ken already stated: black hole becomes more massive.
If you want to move the whole thing (mass + events horizon), then you have to provide "breadcrumbs", that is, some gravitational pull, some massive bodies shying away from the hole, not falling in it. It will be a very little shift, but it might be effective in a lifetime.
26 days
ago • Like
Snp Gupta • I mean to say huge
quantities of anti matter in not found, only experimental evidence exists in
some labs like CERN. No anti universe or anti earth were found. Black-holes are
supposed to be huge masses that exist mathematically. How they will collide?
26 days
ago
Marino Maiorino • Oh, sorry, I didn't
get it like that, but sure that is what I also meant: no anti-Earths around.
26 days
ago • Like
George Jones • @Snp "huge
quantities of anti matter in not found,"
This is true.
"only experimental evidence exists in some labs like CERN"
There is not true. Antimatter has practical application. For example, antimatter is routinely used in medical scans in hospitals, i.e., positron emission tomography (PET).
This is true.
"only experimental evidence exists in some labs like CERN"
There is not true. Antimatter has practical application. For example, antimatter is routinely used in medical scans in hospitals, i.e., positron emission tomography (PET).
26 days
ago • Like
Brian Mulligan • Antimatter is also
being created almost continuously by cosmic rays hitting the Earth's atmosphere
(and on the other planets, the sun, in interstellar space, etc.) Antimatter is
also created in stars like the sun as part of the fusion process by which stars
generate their energy.
26 days
ago • Like
Snp Gupta • Thank you George, Mulligan
for sharing such good information, I dont know that. What I mean to
say,antimatter of the quantities like earth or Galaxies not found. How do you
differentiate antimatter before it collide with matter? Is there any way?
26 days
ago
Barry L. Moore • X-rays. As usual.
Hypothesis, as usually spewed.
Or, usually skewered.
George? Positron emission therapy isn't quite the same as the "name" in the discussed subject matter. A positron is an electron with a positive charge, but doesn't include the whole mass of an elemental atom.
I am wondering why you guys and gals don't get your "shit together" regarding physics?
Newton may have been bipolar, and a bit arrogant, but that was several hundred years ago.
--- Barry
Hypothesis, as usually spewed.
Or, usually skewered.
George? Positron emission therapy isn't quite the same as the "name" in the discussed subject matter. A positron is an electron with a positive charge, but doesn't include the whole mass of an elemental atom.
I am wondering why you guys and gals don't get your "shit together" regarding physics?
Newton may have been bipolar, and a bit arrogant, but that was several hundred years ago.
--- Barry
24 days
ago • Like
Jayant Murthy • Barry, I may
misunderstood your comment but George is correct. Positrons are antimatter,
whether or not their mass is that of an atom.
24 days
ago • Like
Barry L. Moore • Jayant,
It makes a difference as to the ability to create energy.
A positron is simply an electron in reverse charge.
Positron (or proton) bombardment is simply a reversal of the charge to an atom stripped of its electron(s), with the charge of the electron being reversed.
In other words, it's not anti-matter.
Full anti-matter bombardment, in its simplest form, would result in all out defecation into a rotating air movement device. Short form: the shit would hit the fan.
At any rate, that was the subject, and "hypothetically", since I cannot prove it, the absorption of anti-matter by a black hole would probably result in X-Rays, just like it supposedly does with matter.
--- Barry
It makes a difference as to the ability to create energy.
A positron is simply an electron in reverse charge.
Positron (or proton) bombardment is simply a reversal of the charge to an atom stripped of its electron(s), with the charge of the electron being reversed.
In other words, it's not anti-matter.
Full anti-matter bombardment, in its simplest form, would result in all out defecation into a rotating air movement device. Short form: the shit would hit the fan.
At any rate, that was the subject, and "hypothetically", since I cannot prove it, the absorption of anti-matter by a black hole would probably result in X-Rays, just like it supposedly does with matter.
--- Barry
24 days
ago • Like
Brian Mulligan • Barry,
Positrons and protons are not the same thing at all. Positrons are the anti-particle of the electron, and as you note has a positive electric charge, but has the mass of an electron which is about 1/2000 that of a proton. Here is a wikipedia article that explains some of these differences ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter )
Positrons exist all around us (in small numbers) due to cosmic rays and radioactive decay.
Electron-positron annihilation does produce gamma-rays with an energy of around 1 MeV; this is an equivalent amount of energy to dropping a baseball 10^-13 meters (which is smaller than an atom).
In other words, the total amount of energy is insiginificant in terms or our everyday lives. The reason that radiation is dangerous to us, however, is that it can cause cellular damage on a molecular scale.
The comments above from Ken, George, and others are correct as to what effect this would have on a black hole; there would be no release of radiation.
Positrons and protons are not the same thing at all. Positrons are the anti-particle of the electron, and as you note has a positive electric charge, but has the mass of an electron which is about 1/2000 that of a proton. Here is a wikipedia article that explains some of these differences ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter )
Positrons exist all around us (in small numbers) due to cosmic rays and radioactive decay.
Electron-positron annihilation does produce gamma-rays with an energy of around 1 MeV; this is an equivalent amount of energy to dropping a baseball 10^-13 meters (which is smaller than an atom).
In other words, the total amount of energy is insiginificant in terms or our everyday lives. The reason that radiation is dangerous to us, however, is that it can cause cellular damage on a molecular scale.
The comments above from Ken, George, and others are correct as to what effect this would have on a black hole; there would be no release of radiation.
24 days
ago • Like
Abdul Royan • @ Marino Maiorino what i
meant by "The black hole will be pushed out" is that once the large
quantity of anti-matter that passes the event horizon undergoes annihilation
will the energy released be so strong that it will cause the diameter of the
black hole to increase.
24 days
ago • Like
Marino Maiorino • Oh, I see now!
Well, I believe that everything (mass and energy) inside the events horizon can be considered as gravitational mass: you don't know what it is, but even if it were X-rays coming from electron-positron annihilation, they could not escape the hole.
So I also agree with George and Ken: mass of antimatter is still positive and black hole will get bigger according to usual laws diameter vs. mass.
Well, I believe that everything (mass and energy) inside the events horizon can be considered as gravitational mass: you don't know what it is, but even if it were X-rays coming from electron-positron annihilation, they could not escape the hole.
So I also agree with George and Ken: mass of antimatter is still positive and black hole will get bigger according to usual laws diameter vs. mass.
24 days
ago • Like
Luke Conlin • if antimatter falling into
a black hole makes it grow since antimatter still has positive mass (which I
totally buy), then why does Hawking say that black holes evaporate from the
matter/antimatter interactions happening at the event horizon, where one
particle of the pair falls in and the other escapes to infinity?? this has
always bothered me...there's positive mass falling in, and positive mass
leaving the area. it seems to me that the mechanism of hawking radiation should
actually make the black hole *grow* (since positive mass is falling in), or at
best, it would seem to me that the stuff leaving the black hole would 'balance'
the stuff falling in.
24 days
ago • Like
Jayant Murthy • Barry - Just to clarify,
the release of X-rays from a black hole come from thermal emission from the gas
falling in not from the actual falling in. The heating is largely due to
friction.
Luke: Hawking radiation is pair production from near the event horizon. One of the pair falls in to the black hole, the other one escapes. The energy to drive this comes from the black hole and therefore it evaporates. It is most significant for micro black holes which have lifetimes of a fraction of a second.
Luke: Hawking radiation is pair production from near the event horizon. One of the pair falls in to the black hole, the other one escapes. The energy to drive this comes from the black hole and therefore it evaporates. It is most significant for micro black holes which have lifetimes of a fraction of a second.
24 days
ago • Like
Marino Maiorino • I'd like to specify
"from WITHIN the event horizon". One of the pair is produced (and
falls back) in the black hole, the other one is produced outside (and escapes).
24 days
ago • Like
George Jones • I would like to expand a
bit on Jayant's comment.
Quantum field theory predicts that in in the quantum vacuum, virtual particle-antiparticle pairs are continually being created and then annihilated. The lifetime of such a pair is governed by the time-energy uncertainty principle.
Suppose such a virtual pair is created just outside the event horizon of a black hole. Conservation of charge gives that one element of the pair is matter and the other element is antimatter. Conservation of energy gives that one element of the pair has positive energy and the other element of the pair has negative energy. Note, however, that the virtual antimatter particle could have either positive or negative energy, as could the matter particle. They opposite energies, though.
Consider two processes, one process that is forbidden by quantum theory, and one process that is allowed by quantum theory.
Forbidden: the positive energy virtual particle falls into the black hole, and the negative energy virtual particle becomes real and has sufficient kinetic energy to escape from just above the black hole.
Allowed: the negative energy virtual particle (or antiparticle) falls into the black hole, and the positive energy virtual particle becomes real and has sufficient kinetic energy to escape from just above the black hole.
In the allowed process, the mass of the black hole goes from M to M - E/c^2, where -E is the energy of the particle that fell in.
Tidal forces near the black hole aid this process, and tidal forces near the event horizon are larger for smaller black holes. This is why smaller black holes give off more Hawking radiation than larger ones.
The devil is in the details, i.e., in the complicated calculations that justify all this.
Quantum field theory predicts that in in the quantum vacuum, virtual particle-antiparticle pairs are continually being created and then annihilated. The lifetime of such a pair is governed by the time-energy uncertainty principle.
Suppose such a virtual pair is created just outside the event horizon of a black hole. Conservation of charge gives that one element of the pair is matter and the other element is antimatter. Conservation of energy gives that one element of the pair has positive energy and the other element of the pair has negative energy. Note, however, that the virtual antimatter particle could have either positive or negative energy, as could the matter particle. They opposite energies, though.
Consider two processes, one process that is forbidden by quantum theory, and one process that is allowed by quantum theory.
Forbidden: the positive energy virtual particle falls into the black hole, and the negative energy virtual particle becomes real and has sufficient kinetic energy to escape from just above the black hole.
Allowed: the negative energy virtual particle (or antiparticle) falls into the black hole, and the positive energy virtual particle becomes real and has sufficient kinetic energy to escape from just above the black hole.
In the allowed process, the mass of the black hole goes from M to M - E/c^2, where -E is the energy of the particle that fell in.
Tidal forces near the black hole aid this process, and tidal forces near the event horizon are larger for smaller black holes. This is why smaller black holes give off more Hawking radiation than larger ones.
The devil is in the details, i.e., in the complicated calculations that justify all this.
23 days
ago • Like
Snp Gupta • All these calculations ok,
but they also say, Blackhole is a mathematical singularity., no physical
entity. What do you say?
2 days
ago
Marino Maiorino • That is actually not
important: we are not dealing with the mathematical singularity, but only with
phenomena within the events horizon.
Sure, we do not know what he nature of the singularity is, but it is (would be) at the very heart of the black hole, it is not the hole itself. In the space between the singularity and the events horizon, physics still holds true, although with some caveats.
Sure, we do not know what he nature of the singularity is, but it is (would be) at the very heart of the black hole, it is not the hole itself. In the space between the singularity and the events horizon, physics still holds true, although with some caveats.
2 days
ago • Like
Pavankumar Naik • in normal environment
firing antimatter cause blast which produces large amount of heat, means
produces some high frequency rays, but when it is fired in black hole that rays
will be absorbed by that high gravitational field,,,,
and what happens if the amount of antimatter is greater than matter in black holes???
and what happens if the amount of antimatter is greater than matter in black holes???
2 days
ago • Like
Snp Gupta • Thank you for your comment
Marino Maiorino , But you are ignoring one fact that the event horizon is also
defined by blackhole math. It can never be any normal physical surface. Our
discussion says antimatter going into Blackhole...
2 days
ago
Marino Maiorino • I am then perhaps very
mistaken, I thought that the event horizon is simply the surface from where not
even the light can escape.
But that is not defined by any blackhole math: it is defined by Newton gravity as the surface where the mass within is so huge that escape velocity is higher than c.
That is not blackhole math, that is the simple solution to a simple problem with given constraints.
Yes, you physically need a blackhole mass to generate an events horizon, but the surface is not the singularity, and that is how I saw the question.
I would not even dare to think about phenomena involving the singularity, that would clearly be nonsense babbling, and I believe we all agree that even the concept of the singularity is an approximation for something we don't/can't fully understand/model at the moment.
But that is not defined by any blackhole math: it is defined by Newton gravity as the surface where the mass within is so huge that escape velocity is higher than c.
That is not blackhole math, that is the simple solution to a simple problem with given constraints.
Yes, you physically need a blackhole mass to generate an events horizon, but the surface is not the singularity, and that is how I saw the question.
I would not even dare to think about phenomena involving the singularity, that would clearly be nonsense babbling, and I believe we all agree that even the concept of the singularity is an approximation for something we don't/can't fully understand/model at the moment.
1 day ago
• Like
Barry L. Moore • Marino?
2+2=5, unless one is convinced otherwise.
;^)
Et al,
I find it ironic that the best ideas are often discovered by mistake.
Since, having not been close to an event horizon, I cannot prove physically that the 1) X-rays emanate by a mass's close proximity, or 2) that there is anything such as a "surface" to a singularity.
I suppose, given the subject matter, is that: The gravity produced by a "black hole" or "quantum singularity" is so great, that it overwhelms the strong or weak atomic forces, or for that matter, the electromagnetic forces.
The mathematics are suspicious, but practically, it really doesn't matter. Going near a black hole or singularity is like getting next to an "honest politician". You get sucked in, and you never escape.
;^)
--- Barry
2+2=5, unless one is convinced otherwise.
;^)
Et al,
I find it ironic that the best ideas are often discovered by mistake.
Since, having not been close to an event horizon, I cannot prove physically that the 1) X-rays emanate by a mass's close proximity, or 2) that there is anything such as a "surface" to a singularity.
I suppose, given the subject matter, is that: The gravity produced by a "black hole" or "quantum singularity" is so great, that it overwhelms the strong or weak atomic forces, or for that matter, the electromagnetic forces.
The mathematics are suspicious, but practically, it really doesn't matter. Going near a black hole or singularity is like getting next to an "honest politician". You get sucked in, and you never escape.
;^)
--- Barry
1 day ago
• Like
Marino Maiorino • Hello Barry,
I see your point (don't talk to me about "honest politicians", as I am Italian! LOL! ), but there are a few things we can still discuss about, if we keep reasonably far from the singularity.
1) X-rays emission was observed around very compact celestial objects, and in many cases that is explainable only with the mass/size of a black hole spinning matter and thus producing synchrotron radiation.
2) I am not giving a surface to the singularity: I want to keep the surface and the singularity apart. Singularity will be the hell for politicians, while surface will be some geometrical boundary light cannot escape from.
I see your point (don't talk to me about "honest politicians", as I am Italian! LOL! ), but there are a few things we can still discuss about, if we keep reasonably far from the singularity.
1) X-rays emission was observed around very compact celestial objects, and in many cases that is explainable only with the mass/size of a black hole spinning matter and thus producing synchrotron radiation.
2) I am not giving a surface to the singularity: I want to keep the surface and the singularity apart. Singularity will be the hell for politicians, while surface will be some geometrical boundary light cannot escape from.
1 day ago
• Like
João Pires • antimater + matter = energy
how does the energy escape from black hole?
if the result of aniquilation was only energy inside black hole ... it seems to me that those energy still trapped inside of him. then the energy near to the even horizon could escape because the T of the black hole increases an some kind of evaporation will result.
Am I correct?
how does the energy escape from black hole?
if the result of aniquilation was only energy inside black hole ... it seems to me that those energy still trapped inside of him. then the energy near to the even horizon could escape because the T of the black hole increases an some kind of evaporation will result.
Am I correct?
1 day ago
• Like
Barry L. Moore • Mr. Maiorino?
I don't want too "off topic", but our U.S politicians can be as irreligious or unscientific as they can attempt to be, even minus brains.
Now, as to a response:
1) X-ray emissions are often observed in newly-formed solar systems, aka accretion disks,
so I discount the observation that it must be a result of EXTREME gravitational influence.
2) Perhaps my wording was incorrect. Elaboration.
At the confluence of a singularity, or black hole, you are turned from a 6 foot average guy/gal into a 6 mile long spaghetti string, but you don't realize it until the last minute..actually, microsecond.
In fact, you don't realize it at all. To you, it's just a moment in time.
Gravity and time must have some provable relation, just like an Einstein-Rosen bridge.
Truthfully, I just have a lot of thought as to what is discussed here.
I'm still "on" the theory of compacted electron shells giving rise to a warped space, by virtue of the fact that a smaller atomic space gives rise to a smaller area of occupation.
And, politically, Marino, I'm always for politicians occupying smaller spaces.
;^
--- Barry
I don't want too "off topic", but our U.S politicians can be as irreligious or unscientific as they can attempt to be, even minus brains.
Now, as to a response:
1) X-ray emissions are often observed in newly-formed solar systems, aka accretion disks,
so I discount the observation that it must be a result of EXTREME gravitational influence.
2) Perhaps my wording was incorrect. Elaboration.
At the confluence of a singularity, or black hole, you are turned from a 6 foot average guy/gal into a 6 mile long spaghetti string, but you don't realize it until the last minute..actually, microsecond.
In fact, you don't realize it at all. To you, it's just a moment in time.
Gravity and time must have some provable relation, just like an Einstein-Rosen bridge.
Truthfully, I just have a lot of thought as to what is discussed here.
I'm still "on" the theory of compacted electron shells giving rise to a warped space, by virtue of the fact that a smaller atomic space gives rise to a smaller area of occupation.
And, politically, Marino, I'm always for politicians occupying smaller spaces.
;^
--- Barry
1 day ago
• Like
Francisco Siddhartha Guzman •
Interesting effects appear when the matter accreted does not satisfy the weak
energy condition, like phantom or ghost matter. An example can be found in http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.0881 or equivalently
Phys.Rev.D79:121501,2009, where we make a black hole to accrete this type of
matter and show fully non-linearly that the event horizon decreases.
10 hours
ago • Like
Snp Gupta • Thank you Marino Maiorino
and João Pires for your nice comments. We should use our minds to surface of
Earth or water to get more realistic results. There is no point in wasting our
brains in total imagination which are never realities. It is something like
showing, mixing of cartoon characters with normal people or people entering
into Game-space in virtual reality games in movies !!!
56
minutes ago
