English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The density limits of mass in blackhole is beyond the scope of reality, futher more if we employ only 620 kg TNT to compress the the internal core of the mass of purified plutonnium, at this such a small pressure it explodes into mushroom claud, then How on earth it come pass that our fantasy ridden non - existing blackholes so carelessly disregard the "last specific mass density limits" which is otherwise applicable on the mass of plutonium as good as atom bomb, carried out by your ever contrieving lilliput scientist to devastate your race to erase out the last trace/clue of your existence!! Infact If the maddish conditions described in/of blackhholes were ever existed, it would have only blasted in such a horrific a condition as if it never existed in the reference frame of your narrow relativistic time??What do you tink am i right??

2006-06-09 07:01:26 · 10 answers · asked by vishwa bakton 1 in Science & Mathematics Physics

10 answers

It is precisely that the density of a black hole is beyond the scope of reality that makes a black hole what it is - a singularity. In mathematics, a singularity is a point at which an equation cannot be solved. A simple example is 1/x, which is undefined at 0. In a black hole, the laws of physics have no solution.

The atomic bomb has nothing to do with this. Radioactive material like plutonium will explode in a runaway chain reaction if sufficient mass is brought together. (An explosive mass of radioactive material is called a prompt critical mass.) This only works with highly radioactive materials and involves no compression, whereas anything will form a black hole if sufficiently compressed. Compressing matter to this level is far beyond our current capabilities, however; it takes the collapse of a massive star to make a black hole.

2006-06-09 07:30:28 · answer #1 · answered by injanier 7 · 0 0

Aside from the virtual incomprehensibility of your inane babbling, comparing the force between explosives and a black hole is like comparing the destructive capability of a wrecking ball and a feather.

The inherent gravity produced from the mass of a black hole does not dissipate after an initial crunch, as it would with explosives once all of the fuel has been extinguished. The gravity will continue to collapse the matter, as it exerts greater force than the internal electromagnetic and nuclear repulsion of the matter itself.

It is a matter of strengths. The repulsive nuclear force of plutonium will overcome the minor force induced by the explosives quite easily. However in the environment of a black hole, the force of gravity is so great, (theoretically) nothing can overcome it.

2006-06-09 07:25:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

no... you are not right... simply put, everything exists in nature as a result of the energy seeking it's lowest state of balance. Weather, ice melting, gravity, atomic explosions etc. all happen to stabilize an otherwise Highly unstable higher order of energy situation. A black hole is actually a lower order energy "event" that continues to check itself to prevent from becoming the second, third or fourth BIG BANG. Gravity is so great, we can't imagine the forces... perhaps their are lakes of protons, rivers of electrons as they are compressed against an ever increasing mass. It is in effect and in fact... a "scientific faith" anomoly. It is impossible to predict what happens inside the black hole since we cannot measure it with instruments based on our present understaning of physics. So... scientists must conjecture, postulate and calculate what they can to considering what actually happens on the far side of the event horizon. That event horizon will not give up it's secrets. It is an ever frozen event of photons pointing ever outward but never attaining an exit.

www.brightstarlinks.com
ever pondering the cosmos

2006-06-09 07:25:49 · answer #3 · answered by ciscokidofhearts 3 · 0 0

Gravity is a single dimensional force that cannot be capped. In our personal world, it could be represented as being similar to individual thoughts. We all know they exist, for each of us has experience with them, but thoughts cannot be formed into anything other that what they exist as. Though the force of gravity performs work, it is unable to become, or made into anything other that what it is. Thoughts = thoughts, gravity = gravity.

Lastly, There is a limit to its physical formation and existence. Once lower than 0.717 miles from the core point of our planet, a mass released in that location would accelerate to a speed greater than the speed of light in one second. In our sun it is 400 miles from the center of it. These are the limits to which gravitational density and mass are able to exist together in these bodies.

2006-06-09 11:21:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Huh?

I don't "tink" you're right though.

First, it doesn't take 620kg of explosives to compress the fissile pit of a nuclear weapon. Not even close.

Secondly, this has nothing to do with gravitational collapse. Stellar cores collapse when their gravitational field overcomes the degeneracy pressure within. (very simplified, because i'm no expert)

While the secondary of a thermonuclear warhead may compress to an extraordinarily high density...it compares in no way to the core of a massive star.

2006-06-09 07:17:43 · answer #5 · answered by Ethan 3 · 0 0

I didn't red the hole question but trusting in what you say in the first line is true. It seams to me a question of entropy and that energy to do that effect, you would probably have to got all the energy in a specific configuration. See the site on MJ lasers and then try to get it. Attention a MJ is not anything really big, is like bolling 1Kg frozen water. But the MJ is world objective, it doesn't seem fair but it is

2006-06-09 07:37:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Try re-phrasing whatever you're trying to ask so that we mere mortals might interpret it. A basic grammar book would certainly help!

2006-06-09 07:16:00 · answer #7 · answered by Chug-a-Lug 7 · 0 0

I hope you don't talk like you write. How can you pose a question like that and expect it to be easily absorbed?

2006-06-09 07:12:27 · answer #8 · answered by adrianhartery 1 · 0 0

huh!? lol
Well that's all like very difficult to absorb, but you sound like you know more than me! :P
So perhaps you are right.

2006-06-09 07:10:19 · answer #9 · answered by svenbluefish 2 · 0 0

Shirley, you can't be serious.

2006-06-09 09:37:56 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers