Notices
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: LHC...Missing Particles?

  1. #1 LHC...Missing Particles? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2
    Just a little question...

    When the particles eventually collide...the recorded data of the aftermath...in my understanding...should equal the volume (for want of a better word) of the total that was initially fired.

    My question (naive as it may be) is that if the theorized miniscule black holes appear and instantly disappear....might they suck in with them, some of the initial volume...thus distorting the total remaining...leaving a shortfall?

    Thanks in advance for any comments.

    Stuart

    [/b]


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: LHC...Missing Particles? 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Instinctstu
    Just a little question...

    When the particles eventually collide...the recorded data of the aftermath...in my understanding...should equal the volume (for want of a better word) of the total that was initially fired.

    My question (naive as it may be) is that if the theorized miniscule black holes appear and instantly disappear....might they suck in with them, some of the initial volume...thus distorting the total remaining...leaving a shortfall?

    Thanks in advance for any comments.

    Stuart

    [/b]
    The quantity that is conserved and that is tracked is energy, which is the same thing as mass (relativity tells us that).

    Mini black holes, if such should form, would be expected to evaporate nearly as quickly as they form, due to Hawking radiation.

    In any case the mass/energy of a black hole does not simply disappear. Mass is one of the quantities (along which charge and angular momentum) that characterize a black hole.

    There will be no shortfall of energy, and it will be consierved, whether or not black holes are formed.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2
    Thank you DrRocket...

    So what I'm taking from your reply is that...the mass/energy, that the fleeting black hole would have been formed from is..on it's evaporation...conserved as an equal amount of mass/energy.

    Would that mass/energy have undergone any transformation?

    Thanks again...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Instinctstu

    Would that mass/energy have undergone any transformation?

    Thanks again...
    That depends on what you mean, precisely, by "transformation".

    I think that in most senses of the word "transformation" the answer would be yes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: LHC...Missing Particles? 
    Forum Senior Booms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The perceptual schematic known as earth
    Posts
    361
    Quote Originally Posted by Instinctstu
    Just a little question...

    When the particles eventually collide...the recorded data of the aftermath...in my understanding...should equal the volume (for want of a better word) of the total that was initially fired.

    My question (naive as it may be) is that if the theorized miniscule black holes appear and instantly disappear....might they suck in with them, some of the initial volume...thus distorting the total remaining...leaving a shortfall?

    Thanks in advance for any comments.

    Stuart

    [/b]
    good question

    but you're misinterpreting the term disapear black holes don't dissapear, like all other forms of matter and energy they are only changed. when black holes die (nearly instantly in the LHC case) they emit hawking radiation and theoretically explode (no black hole has died to date so we don't actually know, they're all too big to die soon or too small to be registered when they do go)

    baseline, when the BH dies it emits all the stuff it ate in one form or another, so the overall volume of energy will remain the same
    It's not how many questions you ask, but the answers you get - Booms

    This is the Acadamy of Science! we don't need to 'prove' anything!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Re: LHC...Missing Particles? 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Booms

    baseline, when the BH dies it emits all the stuff it ate in one form or another, so the overall volume of energy will remain the same
    As usual, you are speaking gibberish.

    There is no such thing as "volume of energy".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: LHC...Missing Particles? 
    Forum Professor leohopkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Dulwich, London, England
    Posts
    1,418
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Quote Originally Posted by Instinctstu
    Just a little question...

    When the particles eventually collide...the recorded data of the aftermath...in my understanding...should equal the volume (for want of a better word) of the total that was initially fired.

    My question (naive as it may be) is that if the theorized miniscule black holes appear and instantly disappear....might they suck in with them, some of the initial volume...thus distorting the total remaining...leaving a shortfall?

    Thanks in advance for any comments.

    Stuart

    [/b]
    The quantity that is conserved and that is tracked is energy, which is the same thing as mass (relativity tells us that).

    Mini black holes, if such should form, would be expected to evaporate nearly as quickly as they form, due to Hawking radiation.

    In any case the mass/energy of a black hole does not simply disappear. Mass is one of the quantities (along which charge and angular momentum) that characterize a black hole.

    There will be no shortfall of energy, and it will be consierved, whether or not black holes are formed.
    Hawking radiation has nothing to do with black holes dissappearing. Hawking radiation is the hyperthoses of a paritcle and its anti particle popping out of the quantum foam, where one is just the other side of the event horizon and gets devoured; the other does not and gets ommitted.

    This is is Hawking radiation.

    Stephen Hawking said that black holes "may" evaporate; but thats not covered with 100% certainty
    The hand of time rested on the half-hour mark, and all along that old front line of the English there came a whistling and a crying. The men of the first wave climbed up the parapets, in tumult, darkness, and the presence of death, and having done with all pleasant things, advanced across No Man's Land to begin the Battle of the Somme. - Poet John Masefield.

    www.leohopkins.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: LHC...Missing Particles? 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by leohopkins

    Hawking radiation has nothing to do with black holes dissappearing.
    This is just plain wrong.

    Hawking radiation, although not confirmed to exist, is the only proposed mechanism by which black holes might disappear. Without the mechanism of Hawking radiation the mass of a black hole could only be a montonically increasing function of time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Ph.D. Heinsbergrelatz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    994
    hawking radiation is mathematically proved to a certain extent that black holes evaporate rather than disappear, but the time for the black hole to completely evaporate (or now disappear) will take an incredible span of time. of course the time that takes black holes to disappear is correlated to its gravitational mass.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Heinsbergrelatz
    hawking radiation is mathematically proved to a certain extent that black holes evaporate rather than disappear, but the time for the black hole to completely evaporate (or now disappear) will take an incredible span of time. of course the time that takes black holes to disappear is correlated to its gravitational mass.
    Wrong.

    The time required depends strongly on the size of the black hole. Black holes of the size that might, not will but might, be created in the LHC would be expected to evaporate almost instantly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11 Re: LHC...Missing Particles? 
    Forum Bachelors Degree Waveman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Quote Originally Posted by leohopkins

    Hawking radiation has nothing to do with black holes dissappearing.
    This is just plain wrong.

    Hawking radiation, although not confirmed to exist, is the only proposed mechanism by which black holes might disappear. Without the mechanism of Hawking radiation the mass of a black hole could only be a montonically increasing function of time.
    Assuming blackholes even exist....... (which i dont think they do)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12 Re: LHC...Missing Particles? 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Waveman28
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Quote Originally Posted by leohopkins

    Hawking radiation has nothing to do with black holes dissappearing.
    This is just plain wrong.

    Hawking radiation, although not confirmed to exist, is the only proposed mechanism by which black holes might disappear. Without the mechanism of Hawking radiation the mass of a black hole could only be a montonically increasing function of time.
    Assuming blackholes even exist....... (which i dont think they do)
    I am quite sure that you don't think (they do). The evidence is overwhelming.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D. Heinsbergrelatz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    994
    Wrong.

    The time required depends strongly on the size of the black hole. Black holes of the size that might, not will but might, be created in the LHC would be expected to evaporate almost instantly.
    what i meant to say was the time a black hole needs to disappear more specifically "evaporate" is related to its independent rotation, in relative to its mass and size
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •