Originally posted by AlbertoJohnAvil
You got me on misreading a micro black hole, but I can pull up a model from a guy with a Ph. D. which will show that a black hole 1mm wide -- exponentially larger than your speck of dust -- wouldn't even completely swallow the earth, much less the solar system (but it would absolutely still kill us).
So, again, this black hole doesn't behave like a natural black hole at all, and you continue to post as if it does. You can keep doing that, and I'll keep repeating myself. It's not a strength feat, nor is it "impressive"I get off real soon, I'll come back to spank you kids more. I don't mind this going on to 1000 pages, I got time.
Of course most comic book depictions of physical phenomena are flawed when comparing to the actual natural world; black holes are no exception. MU trains and buildings are not like natural trains or buildings, MU planets are not like natural planets, and so on. Therefore, by your criterion, manipulating such objects couldn't ever be considered a "strength feat nor impressive".
But back to the black hole topic. It is indeed possible for a "natural" black hole of that size (speck of dust) to have the potential to e.g. destroy the solar system. There are different types of black holes, with different relationships between their mass and "size". Remember that a black hole is completely characterized by its mass, spin, and electric charge.
(1) The simplest type of a black hole, the so-called Schwarzschild black hole, doesn't spin nor is it electrically charged. Thus all of its properties are functions of its mass, only. In particular, its size is given by the Schwarzschild radius (rs), which is a simple function of mass (M):
(2) More generally, a black hole possesses not only non-zero mass (M) but also non-zero spin (J) and charge (Q). Such black holes are known as Kerr black holes (|J| > 0), Reissner–Nordström black holes (|Q| > 0), or Kerr-Newman black holes (|J| and |Q| > 0). For such black holes, the size becomes a function of not only mass but of all these three properties. These more general black holes are typically "smaller" than the Schwarzschild black hole of equal mass. It has been suggested that the event horizon of black holes with extremely high values of J and/or Q might even "shrink to nothingness", and reveal a naked singularity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_singularity
Typically, such black holes are unstable and, if not sustained, they would rapidly decay towards more stable forms of a black hole -- with a much larger event horizon. This would be a nice "natural" analogue to the black hole depicted in the Superman comic.
Originally posted by Magnon
Ah, so when the first stuff you cluelessly copy-pasted (without understanding it) was proven irrelevant and made you look silly, your intent is to copy-paste even more stuff you don't understand. Maybe if you google-copy-paste enough stuff some may stick, eh? My guess is you would just end up looking like a fool, as usual.Of course most comic book depictions of physical phenomena are flawed when comparing to the actual natural world; black holes are no exception. MU trains and buildings are not like natural trains or buildings, MU planets are not like natural planets, and so on. Therefore, by your criterion, manipulating such objects couldn't ever be considered a "strength feat nor impressive".
But back to the black hole topic. It is indeed possible for a "natural" black hole of that size (speck of dust) to have the potential to e.g. destroy the solar system. There are different types of black holes, with different relationships between their mass and "size". Remember that a black hole is completely characterized by its [B]mass, spin, and electric charge
.(1) The simplest type of a black hole, the so-called Schwarzschild black hole, doesn't spin nor is it electrically charged. Thus all of its properties are functions of its mass, only. In particular, its size is given by the Schwarzschild radius (rs), which is a simple function of mass (M):
(2) More generally, a black hole possesses not only non-zero mass (M) but also non-zero spin (J) and charge (Q). Such black holes are known as Kerr black holes (|J| > 0), Reissner–Nordström black holes (|Q| > 0), or Kerr-Newman black holes (|J| and |Q| > 0). For such black holes, the size becomes a function of not only mass but of all these three properties. These more general black holes are typically "smaller" than the Schwarzschild black hole of equal mass. It has been suggested that the event horizon of black holes with extremely high values of J and/or Q might even "shrink to nothingness", and reveal a naked singularity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_singularityTypically, such black holes are unstable and, if not sustained, they would rapidly decay towards more stable forms of a black hole -- with a much larger event horizon. This would be a nice "natural" analogue to the black hole depicted in the Superman comic. [/B]
geniunely impressed by your posts, thanks for the education 👆
Originally posted by Magnon
Ah, so when the first stuff you cluelessly copy-pasted (without understanding it) was proven irrelevant and made you look silly, your intent is to copy-paste even more stuff you don't understand. Maybe if you google-copy-paste enough stuff some may stick, eh? My guess is you would just end up looking like a fool, as usual.Of course most comic book depictions of physical phenomena are flawed when comparing to the actual natural world; black holes are no exception. MU trains and buildings are not like natural trains or buildings, MU planets are not like natural planets, and so on. Therefore, by your criterion, manipulating such objects couldn't ever be considered a "strength feat nor impressive".
But back to the black hole topic. It is indeed possible for a "natural" black hole of that size (speck of dust) to have the potential to e.g. destroy the solar system. There are different types of black holes, with different relationships between their mass and "size". Remember that a black hole is completely characterized by its [B]mass, spin, and electric charge
.(1) The simplest type of a black hole, the so-called Schwarzschild black hole, doesn't spin nor is it electrically charged. Thus all of its properties are functions of its mass, only. In particular, its size is given by the Schwarzschild radius (rs), which is a simple function of mass (M):
(2) More generally, a black hole possesses not only non-zero mass (M) but also non-zero spin (J) and charge (Q). Such black holes are known as Kerr black holes (|J| > 0), Reissner–Nordström black holes (|Q| > 0), or Kerr-Newman black holes (|J| and |Q| > 0). For such black holes, the size becomes a function of not only mass but of all these three properties. These more general black holes are typically "smaller" than the Schwarzschild black hole of equal mass. It has been suggested that the event horizon of black holes with extremely high values of J and/or Q might even "shrink to nothingness", and reveal a naked singularity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_singularityTypically, such black holes are unstable and, if not sustained, they would rapidly decay towards more stable forms of a black hole -- with a much larger event horizon. This would be a nice "natural" analogue to the black hole depicted in the Superman comic. [/B]
This is the best you can come up? Another trash post, I'll address in a few.
Originally posted by Magnon
For such black holes, the size becomes a function of not only mass but of all these three properties.
The singularity that's extended from a point to a closed curve with angular momentum, which elongates the event horizon (because it's within a mass-dependent proximity to the singularity) and displaces the ergosphere. Increased charge, however doesn't affect either.
However the "inner" Cauchy horizon is affected by the charge of the black hole, which, when overlapping with the event horizon creates an exposed singularity.
In fact my Master's Thesis was on particle trajectories around around Kerr-Newman black holes, but Mathematica ****ed up their syntax by removing a bunch of functions, and I don't feel like updating it at the moment.
Heres the summary.
Albert is saying that since it was small and possibly artificial and therefore not as powerful as a natural black hole.
But it was seen destroying solar systems and said to have destroyed a galaxy. This proves its power.
But then albert said, it wasnt the black hole that destroyed the solar system or galaxy. It was mnemon. In other words, mnemon has the power to destroy galaxies (without the use of the black hole). 😱
Didn't know he had that type of power on his own. Well that means Superman's feat is even more impressive since Superman sealed a being that had the power to destroy a galaxy.
Superman didn't "hold a black hole." He held together a device that contained a black hole. In fact it's specifically explained that it's the electromagnetic field that contains the black hole, not Superman's physical interaction with it.
Does it make sense that a electromagnetic field would impede a gravitational field? No. But you could always justify that with alternate physics.
However, nowhere is it said that Superman exposed to the actual gravity of the black hole. In fact he specifically points out that the device exerts pressure (which he counteracts with his closed fist) which is the opposite of what a black hole does.
And the scale of the pressure is neither specified nor implied.
Originally posted by Astner
Superman didn't "hold a black hole." He held together a device that contained a black hole. In fact it's specifically explained that it's the electromagnetic field that contains the black hole, not Superman's physical interaction with it.Does it make sense that a electromagnetic field would impede a gravitational field? No. But you could always justify that with alternate physics.
However, nowhere is it said that Superman exposed to the actual gravity of the black hole. In fact he specifically points out that the device exerts pressure (which he counteracts with his closed fist) which is the opposite of what a black hole does.
And the scale of the pressure is neither specified nor implied.
The magnetic field DID contain the black hole. The key is Past tense. It stopped containing the black hole the moment IT FULLY released into Superman's hand.
What was going on the moment before Superman and John created an alternate magnetic field and why did they do such? Was it because the black hole didn't have a magnetic field to contain it anymore and they needed another?
Lastly, assuming there was a magnetic field on the black hole containing it (which i disproved above), why would the black hole be contained by a magnetic field (as to prevent the destruction of the solar system) when the implication of mnemon and the writer was to destroy the solar system? In other words, the intention was to use the black hole to destroy the solar system yet it wont because it was contained by the magnetic field. Then why in the hell was Batman and everyone freaking out? Its magnetic field was going to keep the solar system safe just like it did the other solar systems and galaxy it destroyed.
😆
In fact, it's unreasonable to assume that the force exerted to contain the pressure was anywhere near that of a black hole because just two issues earlier in JLA #75, Superman, Wonder Woman, and Martian Manhunter failed to stabilize the Earth's orbit after Orin used his water to change it. And this was after Superman amped himself with sunlight.
Originally posted by Astner
In fact, it's unreasonable to assume that the force exerted to contain the pressure was anywhere near that of a black hole because just two issues earlier in JLA #75, Superman, Wonder Woman, and Martian Manhunter failed to stabilize the Earth's orbit after Orin used his water to change it. And this was after Superman amped himself with sunlight.
Thats silly logic. These aren't REAL beings. These are comic characters which follows the laws of fiction inconsistency. They might as well be toons. That is why Supergirl was seen casually lifting a half million ton key and soon after struggling against shit that was less than 100 tons.
Characters have highs and lows. Stop pretending these characters are real with a fixed power level that doesn't depend on the story.
Originally posted by h1a8
The magnetic field DID contain the black hole. The key is Past tense. It stopped containing the black hole the moment IT FULLY released into Superman's hand.
In fact, Superman visibly throws the device and specifies that it would blow up, before it does in the next panel.
Originally posted by h1a8
What was going on the moment before Superman and John created an alternate magnetic field and why did they do such? Was it because the black hole didn't have a magnetic field to contain it anymore and they needed another?
Originally posted by h1a8
Lastly, assuming there was a magnetic field on the black hole containing it (which i disproved above), why would the black hole be contained by a magnetic field (as to prevent the destruction of the solar system) when the implication of mnemon and the writer was to destroy the solar system? In other words, the intention was to use the black hole to destroy the solar system yet it wont because it was contained by the magnetic field. Then why in the hell was Batman and everyone freaking out? Its magnetic field was going to keep the solar system safe just like it did the other solar systems and galaxy it destroyed.
😆
