Many astrophysical processes are mysteries precisely because they cannot be reproduced in the laboratory. The temperature and pressure within the cores of stars are far beyond anything we can create on Earth. For example, large stars can create energy from fusion of all the elements through atomic number 25. The best we can do is fuse deuterium, a special isotope of hydrogen (atomic number 1), and we can only do that for very brief periods.
And black holes are even more difficult to reproduce than stars. Some scientists think they may have produced black holes in particle accelerator experiments, but the suspected black holes are very tiny and extremely short-lived.
2007-03-07 16:55:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by injanier 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
To create a black hole or nebulae, you firstly would need a blue giant or other star with immense gravitational forces acting on it. Due to the size of a star necessary to do this, and the huge amounts of gravity needed to act upon this star, it would be physically impossible to recreate this in a lab.
Also a nebula releases the equivalent of all the energy the stars in the galaxy will create in the next 100 years in one second!
It would be pointless even if you had the required materials, because you wouldn't be around to examine it.
2007-03-07 17:57:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by mattsmasher0000 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can't create nebulae on the scale they actually exist because they're immense -- hundreds of light years. However, we can and do study the gases and dust that compose nebulae.
We DO have the technology to produce ultra-small micro black holes that can exist for a micro-second or two. It's not been done yet, but the project is in the works.
2007-03-07 16:42:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Chug-a-Lug 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Scientist cannot yet recreate black holes because it requires a massive amount of energy. Black holes were formed when a massive star undergoes supernovae and shrink into a single point, absorbing all the matters that crosses in its path. My theory is that to recreate black holes, the scientists must first create a massive star in the laboratory and allow the star to run out of energy and eventually creates a supernovae and then form a black hole, but it is unlikely considering the amount of energy required to make a star.
2007-03-07 16:32:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Plasma 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
If a famous man or woman did now no longer lose mass on an same time as turning out to be a black hollow, then the black hollow's gravity could journey the famous man or woman's on the area equivalent to the famous man or woman's radius. subsequently of truth a famous man or woman usually loses mass in a supernova, the black hollow could be a lot less large, and the area the position gravity may be resembling pre-nova may be fairly nearer in than the radius of a famous man or woman with the black hollow's decreased mass.
2016-12-05 09:48:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Erika 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
One problem is that we do not have the technology to create sufficiently great forces that create these phenomena. However, a new particle accelerator is scheduled to come online in 2007, and it is expected that microscopic instantaneous black holes will be able to be created. It is hoped that many questions about Quantum physics will be answered and bring us a little closer to a Grand Unified Field Theory.
2007-03-07 16:42:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Scarp 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
1. Vast amount of energy is required to produce these.
2. Containment field strong enough to hold them in for study.
did you know that a black hole the size of a golf ball has more gravitational mass than that of the earth?... :)
2007-03-07 19:30:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by lycan_888 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
A nebulae is a collection of gas and particles that span Light years accross. You will need a labratory bigger than our galaxy to study it !...
You cannot create a black hole in a lab, because it will swallow the Earth, the Sun and all the planets with it not to mention the Lab technicians !
2007-03-07 16:36:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by h8gwb 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
A. The energy required
B. A container in which to observe it and protect researchers from the radiation.
2007-03-07 17:08:24
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
the mass required is more than the mass of the earth. the experimaments would also have to be done in zero gravity in a vacuum.
2007-03-07 16:31:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tom B 4
·
1⤊
0⤋