Science-based what-if questions

For the discussion of the sciences. Physics problems, chemistry equations, biology weirdness, it all goes here.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:01 am UTC

My understanding is that if the black hole is small enough, it will evaporate almost instantly, like setting off a small nuke in the core of the Sun. In other words, it would have no discernible effect. But maybe the intense pressure and gravity at the center of the Sun changes things.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 2476
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Soupspoon » Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:53 am UTC

(Would I be wrong in suggesting that there's no particularly notable local gravity at the centre of the Sun, i.e. shell theorem? Though I think I know what you mean. If I actually do think what I think I mean, that is.)

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Sun Sep 03, 2017 10:03 am UTC

Well, I said inside, but I think it would be better anyway to just create it as the border of the sun (Maybe inside it abit for faster process). The opacity of the Sun is a problem though, but let said I used extreme Gamma ray's array as it.

Also, black hole last for waaaay longer than you think, even at microscopic size. A billion ton (...pretty much just all of the fish in the world, but pretty small for cosmic scale) black hole, with a radius of 1.484852e-15 (that's basically the size of an electron), would actually last for 2.335329e+16 hours, or around 2600 billion years.

Edit: According to http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:56 pm UTC

andykhang wrote:Well, I said inside, but I think it would be better anyway to just create it as the border of the sun (Maybe inside it abit for faster process). The opacity of the Sun is a problem though, but let said I used extreme Gamma ray's array as it.

Also, black hole last for waaaay longer than you think, even at microscopic size. A billion ton (...pretty much just all of the fish in the world, but pretty small for cosmic scale) black hole, with a radius of 1.484852e-15 (that's basically the size of an electron), would actually last for 2.335329e+16 hours, or around 2600 billion years.

Edit: According to http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/

A billion tons of radiation is not exactly small in my mind. That's 21 trillion megatons of TNT equivalent all focused, as you said, on an area roughly that of the scattering cross-section of an electron.

morriswalters
Posts: 6901
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Sun Sep 03, 2017 10:11 pm UTC

If you could create a Black Hole at the surface, it would do what they do. Eat the sun. Just looking at the geometry, it would orbit in the sun in a descending spiral. Not knowing anything about black holes I would naively think that it would draw mass across the event horizon which I assume is spherical, as fast as it could, starting at whatever size. Sooner or later it would do whatever stars do when they take lunch with a black hole.

Having said that, I know nothing about black holes, or quantum mechanics. I simply play at it when it won't kill people.

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Mon Sep 04, 2017 3:18 am UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:
andykhang wrote:Well, I said inside, but I think it would be better anyway to just create it as the border of the sun (Maybe inside it abit for faster process). The opacity of the Sun is a problem though, but let said I used extreme Gamma ray's array as it.

Also, black hole last for waaaay longer than you think, even at microscopic size. A billion ton (...pretty much just all of the fish in the world, but pretty small for cosmic scale) black hole, with a radius of 1.484852e-15 (that's basically the size of an electron), would actually last for 2.335329e+16 hours, or around 2600 billion years.

Edit: According to http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/

A billion tons of radiation is not exactly small in my mind. That's 21 trillion megatons of TNT equivalent all focused, as you said, on an area roughly that of the scattering cross-section of an electron.


...True that. As 1.227203e+11, the heat that managed to get out would make it practically 12x hotter than a supernovae, and pretty much shine just as much too. Still, the mass would be draw in first before it could even get away. (...Or does it?)

That made me wonder though...as what size would the heat be hot enough so that it would delivered enough counterforce to the particle outside in compare to the gravitational force?

@morriswalter I know that, I just want to know as what size would the process be fast enough so that it would consume the sun in at least a month.

p1t1o
Posts: 753
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm UTC
Location: London, UK

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby p1t1o » Mon Sep 04, 2017 8:01 am UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:
andykhang wrote:Well, I said inside, but I think it would be better anyway to just create it as the border of the sun (Maybe inside it abit for faster process). The opacity of the Sun is a problem though, but let said I used extreme Gamma ray's array as it.

Also, black hole last for waaaay longer than you think, even at microscopic size. A billion ton (...pretty much just all of the fish in the world, but pretty small for cosmic scale) black hole, with a radius of 1.484852e-15 (that's basically the size of an electron), would actually last for 2.335329e+16 hours, or around 2600 billion years.

Edit: According to http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/

A billion tons of radiation is not exactly small in my mind. That's 21 trillion megatons of TNT equivalent all focused, as you said, on an area roughly that of the scattering cross-section of an electron.


Thats still only an output of about 1GW though.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Mon Sep 04, 2017 8:33 am UTC

p1t1o wrote:
Eebster the Great wrote:
andykhang wrote:Well, I said inside, but I think it would be better anyway to just create it as the border of the sun (Maybe inside it abit for faster process). The opacity of the Sun is a problem though, but let said I used extreme Gamma ray's array as it.

Also, black hole last for waaaay longer than you think, even at microscopic size. A billion ton (...pretty much just all of the fish in the world, but pretty small for cosmic scale) black hole, with a radius of 1.484852e-15 (that's basically the size of an electron), would actually last for 2.335329e+16 hours, or around 2600 billion years.

Edit: According to http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/

A billion tons of radiation is not exactly small in my mind. That's 21 trillion megatons of TNT equivalent all focused, as you said, on an area roughly that of the scattering cross-section of an electron.


Thats still only an output of about 1GW though.

wat

Are you getting that by dividing 1012 kg * c2 by 2.6 * 1012 years? Because if so, I think you are missing the point. That is the average rate at which the black hole, having already been formed, would evaporate. The power required to form it is many orders of magnitude beyond what could be plausible for any species to ever produce via any physical mechanism. I calculate 1.8 * 1052 W.

EDIT: That calculation is also sort of meaningless, since you wouldn't have to form it all at once as I implied. If you want to form it gradually, you would only have to beat the rate of evaporation of a Planck mass black hole, which is a mere 2.3 * 1048 W. Far more reasonable.

p1t1o
Posts: 753
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm UTC
Location: London, UK

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby p1t1o » Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:36 am UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:
p1t1o wrote:
Eebster the Great wrote:
andykhang wrote:Well, I said inside, but I think it would be better anyway to just create it as the border of the sun (Maybe inside it abit for faster process). The opacity of the Sun is a problem though, but let said I used extreme Gamma ray's array as it.

Also, black hole last for waaaay longer than you think, even at microscopic size. A billion ton (...pretty much just all of the fish in the world, but pretty small for cosmic scale) black hole, with a radius of 1.484852e-15 (that's basically the size of an electron), would actually last for 2.335329e+16 hours, or around 2600 billion years.

Edit: According to http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/

A billion tons of radiation is not exactly small in my mind. That's 21 trillion megatons of TNT equivalent all focused, as you said, on an area roughly that of the scattering cross-section of an electron.


Thats still only an output of about 1GW though.

wat

Are you getting that by dividing 1012 kg * c2 by 2.6 * 1012 years? Because if so, I think you are missing the point. That is the average rate at which the black hole, having already been formed, would evaporate. The power required to form it is many orders of magnitude beyond what could be plausible for any species to ever produce via any physical mechanism. I calculate 1.8 * 1052 W.

EDIT: That calculation is also sort of meaningless, since you wouldn't have to form it all at once as I implied. If you want to form it gradually, you would only have to beat the rate of evaporation of a Planck mass black hole, which is a mere 2.3 * 1048 W. Far more reasonable.


On second look, yes I think I was missing a few things :oops:

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Mon Sep 04, 2017 1:56 pm UTC

Then again, again, I don't really care about the cost. Do you think the size of an electron would be enough? Or must you get it bigger?

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:13 pm UTC

The black hole will definitely eat the star, or at least the parts of it that don't get ejected as a result of pressure from fusion or neutron degeneracy or whatever happens as the star starts to collapse. A billion tons isn't much, but it should grow exponentially. I don't know how long it would take, but my gut feeling is that it wouldn't be as long as you would expect.

On the other hand, there is a definite possibility that the black hole itself ends up getting ejected, while the star is just fine. I have no idea how to evaluate the probability of that.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Sep 04, 2017 3:48 pm UTC

I'm not sure if it would eat the star at that size, because the (Hawking) radiation pressure coming out of it is too high to let anything in.

(By my calculation a billion-ton black hole is strong enough to pull matter through a luminosity of 100MW, but this one puts out 350MW, so it would only need to be slightly bigger to work.)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Mon Sep 04, 2017 4:59 pm UTC

That said, if you build it in the star's core, that won't be a problem, right?

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Sep 04, 2017 9:50 pm UTC

Why wouldn't it be a problem there? The star's own gravity has no net effect at its center so it's not going to make a difference.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Mon Sep 04, 2017 9:58 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Why wouldn't it be a problem there? The star's own gravity has no net effect at its center so it's not going to make a difference.

I was thinking more about the star's pressure than it's gravity. The pressure at the center of the Sun is 27 PPa. Surely that's a significant contribution. Though the scale here is so confusing, it's impossible for me to tell intuitively whether this is huge or negligible.

morriswalters
Posts: 6901
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:08 am UTC

Instead of starting it in the sun, start it in orbit close to the sun. Put it out where it can eat, and let gravity take care of everything else. Not even close to a Physicist.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:15 am UTC

I don't imagine pressure in the usual sense matters at all to something the size of an electron, whether or not that tiny thing is also extremely luminous.

I also think in this case that pressure is negligible. I don't know if the math really works this way, but the power emitted by the billion ton black hole would produce a bit more than one newton of thrust if those photons all went in the same direction. The area of the event horizon is on the order of 10^-29 square meters, so it amounts to about 13 orders of magnitude more radiation pressure outward than the star's own pressure inward.

morriswalters wrote:Instead of starting it in the sun, start it in orbit close to the sun. Put it out where it can eat, and let gravity take care of everything else. Not even close to a Physicist.
Doesn’t matter where you start it, this black hole is too luminous to eat.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:57 am UTC

Not even with 3.026414e+31 m/s/s surface gravity?

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Sep 05, 2017 4:11 am UTC

While the equation I have for Eddington luminosity uses Newtonian potential, given that atomic distances are a few orders of magnitude larger than the black hole you're talking about, that's a reasonable enough approximation even if it is only an approximation.

Electrons are so small that even a minuscule force is enough to accelerate them a great deal, and this black hole is putting out more than a newton of total pressure. Right at the event horizon maybe it actually could suck another electron in, but it has to get close enough first, and I don't think that can happen.

(And right at the event horizon of an electron-sized black hole, I don't think we can say at all what would happen to an individual electron, without a quantum theory of gravity. But conveniently for us I doubt more than a few electrons would be able to get close enough for that to happen, and meanwhile the black hole is shedding quintillions of electron-masses worth of energy every second.)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Tue Sep 05, 2017 6:26 am UTC

Make sense. I supposed it should at least be as large as a proton then?

Edit:...I just tried to calculate this myself and found a nifty trick: an Eddington Limit is approximately equal to the mass in kg*6.321809415. If I follow that, this electron-size black hole would actually be magnitude away from reaching it (10^8 compare to 10^12, so 10000 times). Pretty much enough then.

Edit2: Though whether the electron themselves could reach them or not, is up to debate...

Edit 3: Then again, the Eddington limit is specifically to compare radiation pressure with gravitational force anyway...

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Split down to atoms

Postby andykhang » Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:42 pm UTC

Supposedly, a swordman want to demonstrated his skill. He done so by throwing an apple into the sky, and slice it down to indivitual atoms in an instance (alternatively, use a ray gun that could cancel the bonding force between atoms). What would happen to the used-to-be apple?

User avatar
Sizik
Posts: 1158
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Sizik » Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:01 pm UTC

All of the individual carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, and nitrogen atoms that made up the apple would most likely spontaneously react with each other to produce stable molecules again, causing an explosion.
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:04 pm UTC

Lots of the atoms would be ions. You would briefly have a hot apple plasma before it dissipated due to convection. The gas would exert an initial pressure of around 50 MPa, producing a sound pressure level at the edge of around 135 dB. The ions and radicals leftover would react quickly with each other and various species in the air, especially water vapor and oxygen. You would probably get a bunch of interesting organic compounds in low quantities, but mostly you would have simple products.

So it would be a loud, hot, messy explosion, about as you would expect.

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Tue Oct 24, 2017 2:57 pm UTC

Where did you get the number?

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:57 pm UTC

I used ballpark figures for the mass, molar mass, and volume of an apple, then just used the ideal gas law to determine the pressure. The answer should be right to within an order of magnitude.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby SDK » Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:29 pm UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:hot apple plasma

That sounds delicious.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 2476
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Soupspoon » Tue Oct 24, 2017 8:21 pm UTC

SDK wrote:
Eebster the Great wrote:hot apple plasma

That sounds delicious.

"WARNING: Hot Apple Plasma May Be Hot"

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Sableagle » Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:24 pm UTC

The conflict erupted from a disputed succession after the Arch-duke's death. Various explanations for how his apple came to be served at 15000K have been put forward, some more easily refuted than others. At the time, the question of whether it was an assassination by bizarre means or a bizarre accident was drowned out by the question of who would rule what regions of the Empire. Likewise, the names of the other people who were in his transport at the time and died with him remained almost unknown throughout the long years of war and were only immortalised thanks to the efforts of a privately-funded local museum.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:50 am UTC

Okay, here's a more interesting question: Supposed that the swordman used a normal sword to do that, instead of a obviously superthin laser sword, what would happen to it?

User avatar
Sizik
Posts: 1158
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Sizik » Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:56 am UTC

the sword would be covered in applesauce
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Wed Oct 25, 2017 3:11 am UTC

I imagine, with how fast it have to go to do that, that there would be some explosion going on...

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Wed Oct 25, 2017 6:52 am UTC

A sword can't do what you're describing, though, so it's not really a question we can answer.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby SDK » Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:31 pm UTC

Whatever tool you're using, you're talking about splitting molecules. Millions of molecules into billions of atoms. That requires a lot of energy[citation needed]. When a lot of energy happens in a short amount of time (for example, the time that a tossed apple spends in the air), explosions are the result. So, yes, some explosion is going on.

Or did you want to talk about the speed the sword would have to go? Moving about 10 cm for each slice, with one billion slices (one for each atom), all in about 1 second means you've got an average velocity of about 100 000 000 m/s. So only about a third the speed of light. No big deal. (Note that this estimation could easily be off by a factor of three, and therefore may be impossible in this universe).

Then again with the energy that sword is carrying, you probably don't need a billion slices. Moving that fast should turn basically everything it touches into plasma (I assume turning the apple into ions instead of atoms counts as victory). Problem solved in one easy swipe!
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Wed Oct 25, 2017 2:52 pm UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:A sword can't do what you're describing, though, so it's not really a question we can answer.


Yeah, I know. I was asking what happen when you attempted to do that.

Edit: And you don't exactly need a billion slice to pick out indivitual atom. You could already split half a billion from another just by 1 slice.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2747
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:35 pm UTC

It's not clear where you are getting the "one billion atoms" from, since an apple has a mass of around 100-200 g, which is something like 1025 atoms.

I am revising my earlier estimate. A 150 g apple contains around 25 moles of atoms and has a volume of around 250 cm3. Using an estimated temperature of 3000 K (which is pretty arbitrary, but it's easily a lower bound), we get not 50 MPa but 2.5 GPa, 50 times greater, corresponding to an SPL of not 135 dB, which I'm not sure where that came from, but rather 282 dB, which is probably not good news.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Sableagle » Wed Oct 25, 2017 6:45 pm UTC

10g of sugar per apple (according to Google).

I'm ignoring fibre, protein, lipids and a lot of water here. Really, a LOT of water.

10g of sugar. Sugar:
Image
C6H12O6 has RMM of
(( 6 * 12.011 ) + ( 12 * 1.008 ) + ( 6 * 15.999 )) = 180.156
Those 10g are therefore 0.0555 moles of sugar ... approximately. I'm making the crazy assumption that it's all glucose here.
34581140789093896400897.000377451 sugar molecules. Well, I guess we can drop anything after the decimal point, but it amuses me that there are three zeroes after the decimal point. 3.458 * 1022 molecules of glucose.

96.583 kJ of C-C bonds.
160.472 kJ of C-H bonds.
139.878 kJ of C-O bonds.
----------
396.934 kJ of inter-atomic bonds in the sugars of one apple.

That energy has to come from the sword, and it has to be put into the sword by the swordsman's muscles.

How much mass his triceps have is hard to guess or google, but I've got a figure of 42% for skeletal muscle as part of total mass and 3.25% for upper arm as part of total mass. There being no lungs, brain or digestive system in it, I suppose the upper arm is more than 42% muscle by mass. The triceps aren't going to be much more than 2% of him, though, are they? I wonder how much of the work of chopping an apple in mid-air is done by the triceps.

Next, oh dear. 18% to 26% efficiency? That's not good. Even if we call it 25%, that's three times as much energy turned to waste heat as was put into the work done.

1190.8 kJ generated in a ... huh. 70 kg swordsman? 1.4 kg tricep? 3421 J/kg°C for muscle. 249°C temperature increase in that muscle. I think even one fifth of that would be very serious. 249 + 37 = 286. 286°C?

Code: Select all

  275 °F      140 °C                1
  300 °F      150 °C                2
  325 °F      165 °C                3
  350 °F      177 °C                4
  375 °F      190 °C                5
  400 °F      200 °C                6
  425 °F      220 °C                7
  450 °F      230 °C                8
  475 °F      245 °C                9
  500 °F      260 °C               10


He'd be off the chart, and that's an oven temperature chart ...

... and that's just the sugar and not even the OH bonds in the sugar, let alone all those OH bonds in the water content of that apple.

...

So who's this guy trying to impress, anyway, who can tell whether he's sliced an apple into 0.1mm dice, cells, molecules or atoms while standing far enough back not to get sliced up too?
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

wing gundam
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:47 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby wing gundam » Wed Oct 25, 2017 7:57 pm UTC

Given its total SWL was only 200 dB, an SIL of 282 dB would sound roughly 158,489,319 times louder than the inside of the Saturn V's F1 engine as it was taking off. Expect minor casualties.

wing gundam
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:47 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby wing gundam » Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:03 pm UTC

On the other hand, if you treat the sound wave as an overpressure wave, then that's about 36,000 times the overpressure required to blow limbs offs (10 psi). So again, expect minor casualties.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby SDK » Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:07 pm UTC

Eebster the Great wrote:It's not clear where you are getting the "one billion atoms" from, since an apple has a mass of around 100-200 g, which is something like 1025 atoms.

Rough estimate based on me containing something-trillion atoms and an apple being about 1/1000th my size. Dumb mistake on my part since I contain something-trillion cells each of which contain something-trillion atoms.

In any case, this ain't happening.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

andykhang
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Thu Oct 26, 2017 1:05 am UTC

So in the end, turn out better than I thought. So, between this and detonating a nuke, which would do more damage? What's the final damage here?


Return to “Science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: doogly and 11 guests