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

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jul 12, 2017 12:04 am UTC

I was curious, I live on a river. Thank you.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1141
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 Jul 12, 2017 5:26 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:So you want two back to back p traps connected by a portal and by implication the portal takes care of the energy involved due to the difference elevation assuming there is any. would that be correct?

Yes. Yes, it would.

Difference in elevation: from 9 to 1500 m ASL

9800 N * 1491 m = 1.46118 * 107 J per m3. Ouch.

Change in latitude: from 53.98 to 32.61°N

464.0846 m/s to 464.7603 m/s, 107.687 to 108.001 MJ / m3, a change of 3.41 * 103 J per m3.

To shift 200 m3/s that's 2.0007 GW of power requirement. I knew there'd be an energy cost but I hadn't realised Esfahan was higher above sea level than all of Britain. If the portal's not 100% efficient, that's 2 MW of heat, enough to boil 5l of water per second, for each 1% of that power that turns becomes additional heat, or enough to raise all 200000 litres by 2.4°C as it flows through. Those trout wouldn't survive a 0.15:1 heat:work ratio.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jul 12, 2017 6:33 pm UTC

Your heart is in the right place but physics says dump the water offshore of the outlet to the ocean. Floods are beasts however. The idea caught my attention because I see one every spring in the river I live next to. The river is large and navigable, so there is a dam and locks. The dam is somewhere over a mile in length and during floods the entire length acts in a manner consistent with how I see your portal working.

On a more humorous note, have you given consideration to the idea if you could do this efficiently on a small scale you could make sewer pipes obsolete, not to mention toilets as we experience them.

peregrine_crow
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:20 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby peregrine_crow » Thu Jul 13, 2017 2:29 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:On a more humorous note, have you given consideration to the idea if you could do this efficiently on a small scale you could make sewer pipes obsolete, not to mention toilets as we experience them.
If you have access to portal gun technology, making sewers obsolete is setting the bar really, really low.
Ignorance killed the cat, curiosity was framed.

mfb
Posts: 943
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 7:48 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby mfb » Sun Jul 16, 2017 3:52 pm UTC

Sableagle wrote:Change in latitude: from 53.98 to 32.61°N

464.0846 m/s to 464.7603 m/s, 107.687 to 108.001 MJ / m3, a change of 3.41 * 103 J per m3.
I don't know what exactly you calculate here, but the change in rotational velocity doesn't matter - it is taken into account by the sea level already which is an equipotential surface.

Portals seem to violate conservation of energy without problems, so we don't have to take care of energy.
And yes, of course you could use that for free power.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25740
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby gmalivuk » Sun Jul 16, 2017 4:57 pm UTC

Sableagle wrote:
Change in latitude: from 53.98 to 32.61°N

464.0846 m/s to 464.7603 m/s
Those numbers are definitely not right, as they're both faster than a point on the equator.

It should be 272m/s to 390m/s.

mfb wrote:
Sableagle wrote:Change in latitude: from 53.98 to 32.61°N

464.0846 m/s to 464.7603 m/s, 107.687 to 108.001 MJ / m3, a change of 3.41 * 103 J per m3.
I don't know what exactly you calculate here, but the change in rotational velocity doesn't matter - it is taken into account by the sea level already which is an equipotential surface.
But this is also not right. Sea level is an equipotential surface, but taking velocity into account deals with kinetic energy, not potential.
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)

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Sun Jul 16, 2017 11:19 pm UTC

mfb wrote:
Sableagle wrote:Change in latitude: from 53.98 to 32.61°N

464.0846 m/s to 464.7603 m/s, 107.687 to 108.001 MJ / m3, a change of 3.41 * 103 J per m3.
I don't know what exactly you calculate here, but the change in rotational velocity doesn't matter - it is taken into account by the sea level already which is an equipotential surface.

Portals seem to violate conservation of energy without problems, so we don't have to take care of energy.
And yes, of course you could use that for free power.
What you have to do is to conserve momentum. And thus the heat. Use magic to move water and mother momentum would demand her toll anyway. I'd like to tell you this was original thinking, but Larry Niven actually uses this as a plot device in The Ringworld Engineers. Which was why I asked.

andykhang
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

What happen when you remove Entropy?

Postby andykhang » Mon Jul 31, 2017 10:26 am UTC

In my current understanding, Entropy is the mathematically fundamental nature of all thing in the world,that, since it's make sure all possiblity are treated relatively equal (or rather the result of probabilty is the cause of entropy), is the reason why thing cool, people spread, and the universe's end. So what would happen if Entropy is suddenly remove from a system? I think since only Law is left, the law would then be exxagerate and the whole system would immediately shifted, from favoring the mass to favouring the few, the extreme, not only that but it would became unstable, shifting from one extreme to another.

Edit:...I also forgot that Entropy have like 30 different meaning now, so I just going to ask about the Physics one

peregrine_crow
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:20 am UTC

Re: What happen when you remove Entropy?

Postby peregrine_crow » Mon Jul 31, 2017 12:04 pm UTC

andykhang wrote:In my current understanding, Entropy is the mathematically fundamental nature of all thing in the world,that, since it's make sure all possiblity are treated relatively equal (or rather the result of probabilty is the cause of entropy), is the reason why thing cool, people spread, and the universe's end. So what would happen if Entropy is suddenly remove from a system? I think since only Law is left, the law would then be exxagerate and the whole system would immediately shifted, from favoring the mass to favouring the few, the extreme, not only that but it would became unstable, shifting from one extreme to another.

Edit:...I also forgot that Entropy have like 30 different meaning now, so I just going to ask about the Physics one

Despite your edit I suspect you might still be conflating some philosophical concept of entropy with the physical concept. The real world doesn't work on some kind of law/chaos dichotomy and entropy is only very loosely correlated with what most people understand by chaos. I'll interpret your question as, "what if the second law of thermodynanics suddenly stops applying everywhere?". If that was not your question, could you elaborate a bit on what exactly you're hoping to find out?

Now I am not a physicist, but from what I understand of it the second law is essentially a mathematical theorem with some physical consequences rather than an experimentally verifiable physical theorem*, similar to how the fact that if I put one pen down on my desk and then put an other pen down next to it, there are now two pens on my desk follows from the fact that 1 + 1 = 2.

Hopefully, that analogy also illustrates how hard it will be to answer your question, you can't do what-if questions on logic. How would the world look like if 1 + 1 = 3 was true? If, when I put down one pen and then another and suddenly there are three pens without the third one coming from anywhere (not materializing out of nowhere, not poofing into existence by magic, but being there as a logical consequence of me putting down the 1 + 1 pens)? The question itself stops making sense as soon as you dive into it.

Suspending the second law, allowing closed systems to spontaneously become more ordered, may appear to be more plausible to us, but that is only because we understand the physics involved on a much less intuitive level (if we understand them at all). Fundamentally, your question makes as little sense as the 1 + 1 = 3 question.

*: I mean, the second lay is obviously experimentally verified, but in principle you could prove it without involving physics in any part after establishing the base concepts.
Ignorance killed the cat, curiosity was framed.

andykhang
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby andykhang » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:22 pm UTC

Oh yeah, logic basically evaporate when law isn't applied anymore is kinda anticlimatic though (not that I complain. Most scientific thing are anticlimatic)

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:47 pm UTC

Think of entropy as being the slope of time. The universe expands and entropy is linked to that expansion. If we started with everything that will exist at the singularity, then the density of the universe decreases by the rate of expansion. Every motion(and probably things I can't imagine) you see in the sky, orbits and so on, are a product of that expansion. Set the slope to zero and that expansion stops. The heat death of the universe.


I'm sure physicists are rising up out of their graves, but I believe it is close enough for government work. Dark xxxxxxx proponents are those people, who, when they do the math, realize that what they can see isn't enough to explain the observed rate of expansion.

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5192
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Somerville, MA
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby doogly » Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:20 pm UTC

Yeah, if your were like, "What if Mekop, the God of Order, resigned from the cosmos in disgust and his eternal rival, Ixos, God of Chaos, were left unchecked, what would the world look like?" then it would be a reasonable question. The answer would be a fun story. (Though the answer here is also a little unsatisfying, because, being the God of Chaos and Madness, Ixos will occasionally just bork over his own long term agenda for shits and giggles. Mostly he is very good but this tendency can be a bit unsettling for his allies.)

It is not that science is anticlimactic, it is that there are no good scientific answers to non-scientific questions.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 2384
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Soupspoon » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:05 pm UTC

doogly wrote:It is not that science is anticlimactic, it is that there are no good scientific answers to non-scientific questions.

<annoyingly precocious child's voice>Why?<annoyingly precocious child's voice>

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5192
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Somerville, MA
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby doogly » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:47 pm UTC

That is not precocious, just regular type annoying.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:09 pm UTC

Dammit, I always shoot this gun in the wrong direction. :oops:
doogly wrote:That is not precocious, just regular type annoying.
On the chance that's directed at me. It's probably true, since I have yet to find a way to correct defects in my knowledge without first laying my neck on the chopping block, and opening my mouth. So I understand that it is annoying. It what I have though and it's all I can do.

Having said that I don't see that it changes anything. If heat death is maximum entropy, what does the singularity represent? And why are we looking for elementary particles?

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5192
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Somerville, MA
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby doogly » Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:26 pm UTC

Oh no, it was directed at Soupsoon's description of the child who chants "whyyyyy" as precocious. I don't think that's quite what I would use that word for. There's special premature uncharacteristic or otherwise surprising cleverness or ability. Mostly just annoying.

Your statements above are generally legit and fine, not obnoxious.

I'm not sure what you mean by singularity. Like, big crunch end of the universe? Then we don't go into a heat death. That's a bit of a weird future but it also looks like we're not going there. It has a chance to bork with entropy though. In the heat death, things just equilibriate, the expansion doesn't stop. It just coasts. The entropy density can keep going down, forever. It'll happily asymptote.

What do you mean by 'why are we looking for elementary particles'? You mean, like, why do we bother? To get fed and laid.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:59 pm UTC

While they're getting fed and laid they're looking at the point t=0, 0 or perfect entropy, the top of the mountain. The point, which is as far as we can look backwards.
doogly wrote:Your statements above are generally legit and fine, not obnoxious.
I wish, my knowledge is defective. And I know it.
doogly wrote:The entropy density can keep going down, forever. It'll happily asymptote.
Yeah, I got it backward in school too.

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5203
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Xanthir » Tue Aug 01, 2017 9:54 am UTC

The singularity is absolute minimum entropy; there's a single possible arrangement of things in a singularity. (Rather, our models fail at singularity, but at an ε afterwards, entropy is still exceedingly small and rapidly increasing.)

Heat death is maximal entropy; the *density* of entropy asymptotes toward zero, the total entropy asymptotes toward maximum for the given mass-energy.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

SuicideJunkie
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby SuicideJunkie » Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:06 pm UTC

If we were to discover a single constant voltage source (for discussion purposes, it is in the form factor of a magical AA battery, eternally 1.5v difference between the ends), what would be the best uses we could put it to?

As an obvious starting point, I'd expect some superconductive, fractal wiring would be applied to spread that voltage out into a maximum amount of current. But simply reducing electric bills is far too mundane a thing to settle for.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25740
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:26 pm UTC

You have an infinite energy source. You could literally do pretty much anything with it.
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
Flumble
Yes Man
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 9:35 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Flumble » Sat Aug 05, 2017 10:23 am UTC

So the best use would be to power a machine that sets an alarm 6 hours in the future and is triggered by that same alarm.

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:09 pm UTC

SuicideJunkie wrote:If we were to discover a single constant voltage source (for discussion purposes, it is in the form factor of a magical AA battery, eternally 1.5v difference between the ends), what would be the best uses we could put it to?

As an obvious starting point, I'd expect some superconductive, fractal wiring would be applied to spread that voltage out into a maximum amount of current. But simply reducing electric bills is far too mundane a thing to settle for.

Anything you could do with a AA battery, forever. Do the math. (V=IR) They call it a power supply. What you seem to want is a power supply that specs P=infinity.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1141
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 » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:49 am UTC

Could we run a "power-glider" drone with PTZ broad-spectrum cameras and long-range feed on one AA cell? Wildlife monitoring, refugee-spotting, wildfire-spotting, iceberg-spotting, glacier melt monitoring, ...

DC~AC converter, step-up transformer, mains power! Use it to power the tram network and ban all the cars.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2416
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Copper Bezel » Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:39 am UTC

Yeah, if it was literally an infinite AA, you'd be limited to things like the first option. If it's made of magic and has no current limitations, internal resistance, or operating temperature range, then there's a maximum current you'll be able to draw before it vaporizes whatever contacts you devise to connect it to your external system, but it's going to be quite a lot. What you do with that power is still likely to be pretty mundane.

Laser propulsion space ship?
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1141
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 » Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:43 am UTC

Orbital sweeper. Stays in low earth orbit, grabs chunks of junk and throws them down into the atmosphere to burn up.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Sun Aug 06, 2017 11:54 am UTC

No, not very mundane at all. It allows situations where light bulbs have infinite current but zero resistance and can't give off light at all. It can be demonstrated by a current loop in a superconductor. Am I missing something?

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2416
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Copper Bezel » Sun Aug 06, 2017 8:19 pm UTC

Well, I think only the power source itself is magical, not everything else we attach to it.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

SuicideJunkie
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:40 pm UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby SuicideJunkie » Sun Aug 06, 2017 10:49 pm UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:there's a maximum current you'll be able to draw before it vaporizes whatever contacts you devise to connect it to your external system, but it's going to be quite a lot.
I suppose using a plasma as a contact would work in that case, to turn the problem into an advantage.
It would then be a matter of tapping off the plasma tube for whatever you need and piping it around to convenient locations, and presumably feeding in some waste gasses to be recycled.

morriswalters
Posts: 6889
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby morriswalters » Sun Aug 06, 2017 11:10 pm UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:Well, I think only the power source itself is magical, not everything else we attach to it.
By definition it seems to break thermodynamics. But I concede that I might not be bringing my sense of humor along for the ride today.

p1t1o
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:32 pm UTC
Location: London, UK

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby p1t1o » Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:23 pm UTC

SuicideJunkie wrote:If we were to discover a single constant voltage source (for discussion purposes, it is in the form factor of a magical AA battery, eternally 1.5v difference between the ends), what would be the best uses we could put it to?

As an obvious starting point, I'd expect some superconductive, fractal wiring would be applied to spread that voltage out into a maximum amount of current. But simply reducing electric bills is far too mundane a thing to settle for.


Build an apple pie from scratch?

User avatar
Dr34m(4+(h3r
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:34 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Dr34m(4+(h3r » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:07 am UTC

I have a rhetorical question, and anyone seriously interested in discussing the answer can PM me about it: Dr. James Gates Jr. discovered Error Correcting Code in String Theory. Why would there be error correcting code in the universe unless there are errors in the universe?

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1628
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby ConMan » Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:25 am UTC

Eh, I'm not actually that excited by the discovery at this point. It seems fairly natural that if there's some kind of structure to the universe there needs to be something underpinning it that helps that structure stay what it is. It's probably like other phenomena where "the current laws of physics allow X, Y and Z but only X ever happens".
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

User avatar
Eebster the Great
Posts: 2693
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:58 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Eebster the Great » Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:38 am UTC

There is a pretty good answer on stackexhange. While the groups in question do arise in error correction, they also arise in many diverse areas of math. And they are not really out of place in string theory.

commodorejohn
Posts: 945
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby commodorejohn » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:10 pm UTC

Random question: if you form a black hole out of iron, is it subject to magnetic attraction? (Obviously, hard to test, I'm just curious if there's any operating theory on this.)
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

User avatar
Sizik
Posts: 1146
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby Sizik » Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:35 pm UTC

commodorejohn wrote:Random question: if you form a black hole out of iron, is it subject to magnetic attraction? (Obviously, hard to test, I'm just curious if there's any operating theory on this.)

I think the no-hair theorem would say no.
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
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5192
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Somerville, MA
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby doogly » Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:12 pm UTC

yeah, you could have it have a magnetic field, but not react ferromagnetically to some other field
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

User avatar
cyanyoshi
Posts: 357
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 3:30 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby cyanyoshi » Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:26 pm UTC

Even you make a black hole by shoving a bunch of iron together, you won't be left with a chunk of iron in the usual sense. You will have a black hole with a certain mass, charge, and angular momentum (and whatever magnetic field this results in). Where the black hole's mass-energy came from is largely irrelevant.

wumpus
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:16 am UTC

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby wumpus » Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:22 pm UTC

I assume that a black hole originally made from iron may or may not have a magnetic field, but any field propagating away from the iron core would not pass the Schwarzschild radius. It is presumably undefined, and no experimental means would determine the original matter.

andykhang
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 4:40 pm UTC

Suneater

Postby andykhang » Sat Sep 02, 2017 7:18 am UTC

Supposedly I want to destroy a star. I wanted to do that by making a Kugelblitz - Black hole made out of light - By firing an array of intense (and i mean intense) light beam as a focal point inside the sun. A black hole inside a sun is obviously going to harm it, but at what size (and subsuquencely, mass) would harm it with a significant result on a short period of time? (Let said, in a month?)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25740
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Science-based what-if questions

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Sep 02, 2017 5:25 pm UTC

You can't use light to form a black hole in the center of a star unless the light can actually reach the center.
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)


Return to “Science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests