Disney - Celebration - TTI - Titor - MOP
- Thread starter Darby
- Start date
If he is a time traveler, maybe he knows about a discovery that stops singularities from expelling hawking radiation? Are you a time traveler Darby? Do you know for a fact someone will not discover a way to do this? johntitor.com i a crap site. It's cheap, homebrew, not out to make any money. Where are the google ads? Where are the lexus advertisements? That site probably takes a lot of time and I bet he gets a lot of hate mail from it, and hack attempts. There is no amazing product people are racing to buy! Have you setup a store on Cafepress? Do you see how little money those stores make? You sell a tshirt for $15 you only make 2 bucks.
If someone holds the copyright then challenge them to prove they own it. Make the show their notes and rough work and make it part of public record. Or maybe the only evidence they have is "a note from a time traveler who signed over rights to his story" so really, that story is up for grabs. Anyone could make a movie about it.
And it's fine for him to post on message boards, because there is probably a worldline where he doesn't post on message boards /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Razimus
Temporal Navigator
newbie_0, I disagree, about how much money the johntitor.com peeps have made. Do you know how large the Coast to Coast am audience is?, I remember 4 years ago Art Bell said the audience was around 10 million people worldwide. By now it could be more. Do the math, people do go on that show to sell books, the book is only like $15.00 each, if say 5% of the listeners of c2cam buy that book, if the listener base is 10 million that would equal $750,000.00 , big bucks. Again, why is the author afraid to put his name on the book?
--- Razimus
--- Razimus
Darby
Epochal Historian
newbie_O,
That's the problem. The black hole doesn't expel Hawking Radiation. The radiation, in the form of particle/anti-particle pairs, appears from the vacuum outside the event horizon. They don't come directly from the BH itself.
It is the enormous strength of the gravitational field just outside the EH that causes the virtual particles to "pop" out of the vacuum.
But the Titor Black Hole gambit isn't very convincing. We know that the maximum mass for his black holes is about 100 kg each (the total mass of his device is 225 kg. He said the mass for the entire gadget was 500 lbs.)
Let's get a lot more mass. Instead of a 100kg BH let's make it 10^11 kg.
The temperature of the Hawking Radiation for a 10^11 kg BH is...stand back...10^12 degrees Kelvin (it is the same for degrees Centigrade). That's considerably hotter than the core of a star. And the temperature is inversely proportional to the mass. Smaller mass equals higher temperature.
But at 1 meter the strength of the gravitational field is...1g. It is the same as you are currently experiencing. Yet his motor vehicle is supposed to be totally engulfed and swollowed whole by the gravitational field of the Titor BH's.
It just isn't so. There is absolutely no possible form of "new physics" that would have the gravitational field any stronger at 1 meter.
But remember, the above example is not Titor's BH. Titor said that the mass of his BH was less than that of an electron, not 10^11 kg or even 100kg. The mass of an electron is approximately 10^-31 kg. That is:
10^11 kg = 100,000,000,000 kg
10^-37 kg = 0.00000000000000000000000000000001 kg
The gravitational force in the latter case is 1g within the diameter of a proton.
Unless someone can find a way to thread a Chevy pick-up through the eye of a needle that is incredibly smaller than the diameter of a proton....
Titor's tiny black holes would have absolutely no effect beyond the quantum level of physics. In fact, his mass is so small that if you plug & chug the numbers all of the results are smaller than Planck's constants. They are physically meaningless.
That's the problem. The black hole doesn't expel Hawking Radiation. The radiation, in the form of particle/anti-particle pairs, appears from the vacuum outside the event horizon. They don't come directly from the BH itself.
It is the enormous strength of the gravitational field just outside the EH that causes the virtual particles to "pop" out of the vacuum.
But the Titor Black Hole gambit isn't very convincing. We know that the maximum mass for his black holes is about 100 kg each (the total mass of his device is 225 kg. He said the mass for the entire gadget was 500 lbs.)
Let's get a lot more mass. Instead of a 100kg BH let's make it 10^11 kg.
The temperature of the Hawking Radiation for a 10^11 kg BH is...stand back...10^12 degrees Kelvin (it is the same for degrees Centigrade). That's considerably hotter than the core of a star. And the temperature is inversely proportional to the mass. Smaller mass equals higher temperature.
But at 1 meter the strength of the gravitational field is...1g. It is the same as you are currently experiencing. Yet his motor vehicle is supposed to be totally engulfed and swollowed whole by the gravitational field of the Titor BH's.
It just isn't so. There is absolutely no possible form of "new physics" that would have the gravitational field any stronger at 1 meter.
But remember, the above example is not Titor's BH. Titor said that the mass of his BH was less than that of an electron, not 10^11 kg or even 100kg. The mass of an electron is approximately 10^-31 kg. That is:
10^11 kg = 100,000,000,000 kg
10^-37 kg = 0.00000000000000000000000000000001 kg
The gravitational force in the latter case is 1g within the diameter of a proton.
Unless someone can find a way to thread a Chevy pick-up through the eye of a needle that is incredibly smaller than the diameter of a proton....
Titor's tiny black holes would have absolutely no effect beyond the quantum level of physics. In fact, his mass is so small that if you plug & chug the numbers all of the results are smaller than Planck's constants. They are physically meaningless.
It's a lot of heat for sure but maybe they are just so small that the heat doesn't matter and you can be 2 feet away and be perfectly safe? What if the amount of spin on the microsingularity or whatever they inject affects the size of the field in ways we don't yet understand? Something yet to be discovered could make it possible is all I'm saying.
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Darby, Newbe 0' Please note and I've said this before. I don't think that Tirtor created a miniature black hole?
He did not and could not have.
All the said G.E. time displacement unit did create, in theory, was an approximation of black hole action; however not a black hole, but the effect of a double balk hole.
This situation would have been a much milder event.This is as the energy expended in the creation overlaps. So therefore as far as energy conservation would have gone, it would have been possible to convolute the effects of both black holes and merge them into one phenomenon.
Pamela said, that during the jump faze of the John Titor travel, that the windows of the truck, car, had to rolled up.
He said, that the heat was such from the outer event double shell, that a range of two hundred degrees, was reached during standard operation jump times.
So what one might have, if the Tipler Cylinder such of sort apparatuses were revolving super-flied electromagnets.Their action would be the creation of a black hole or even a fazed of a black hole, for a fraction of a second and then this creation would subside, only to be recreated again, at another rotational faze, of the Tipler mechanisms.
There had to be a projection clause to this effect, with the center of the vehicle as the projected semi and I say semi point, as it was said that smoke from a cigar would tilt inward, from the said instructors cigar, during the jump.
So no' this is not and I repeat not a pure black hole, nor even a set of them, but a mechanical approximation of a Kerr's double-arity, which projected this field?
Thank you very, very much Darby.
You are truly a peach when it comes to the physics aspects of said affairs about the said G.E. unit.
Without you and your expertise, we all could not have gotten this far in understanding some portions of how black holes work.
The outer shell of the Kerr's doublearity, is similar to a nonspecific blob of slippery Jell-O.
This outer shell is really in no one place, at any one time.
So the injection process of electrons to the outer field I guess, must be some sort of inversed transmission process?This is with the energy in only a milder animation over what a black hole would be, as again remember this is a double field by nature, so the energy is bled off into a wide expensed field of expression.
So rather than a star core, which is very hot, youre looking at an extrapolated extended by magnetic projection double field, which is the nature of the Kerr's doublarity.This new field, rather than the particle expression near the relative poles if a black hole, as by the Hawking original theory group.
Something to think on?
He did not and could not have.
All the said G.E. time displacement unit did create, in theory, was an approximation of black hole action; however not a black hole, but the effect of a double balk hole.
This situation would have been a much milder event.This is as the energy expended in the creation overlaps. So therefore as far as energy conservation would have gone, it would have been possible to convolute the effects of both black holes and merge them into one phenomenon.
Pamela said, that during the jump faze of the John Titor travel, that the windows of the truck, car, had to rolled up.
He said, that the heat was such from the outer event double shell, that a range of two hundred degrees, was reached during standard operation jump times.
So what one might have, if the Tipler Cylinder such of sort apparatuses were revolving super-flied electromagnets.Their action would be the creation of a black hole or even a fazed of a black hole, for a fraction of a second and then this creation would subside, only to be recreated again, at another rotational faze, of the Tipler mechanisms.
There had to be a projection clause to this effect, with the center of the vehicle as the projected semi and I say semi point, as it was said that smoke from a cigar would tilt inward, from the said instructors cigar, during the jump.
So no' this is not and I repeat not a pure black hole, nor even a set of them, but a mechanical approximation of a Kerr's double-arity, which projected this field?
Thank you very, very much Darby.
You are truly a peach when it comes to the physics aspects of said affairs about the said G.E. unit.
Without you and your expertise, we all could not have gotten this far in understanding some portions of how black holes work.
The outer shell of the Kerr's doublearity, is similar to a nonspecific blob of slippery Jell-O.
This outer shell is really in no one place, at any one time.
So the injection process of electrons to the outer field I guess, must be some sort of inversed transmission process?This is with the energy in only a milder animation over what a black hole would be, as again remember this is a double field by nature, so the energy is bled off into a wide expensed field of expression.
So rather than a star core, which is very hot, youre looking at an extrapolated extended by magnetic projection double field, which is the nature of the Kerr's doublarity.This new field, rather than the particle expression near the relative poles if a black hole, as by the Hawking original theory group.
Something to think on?
Darby
Epochal Historian
newbie_O,
Sure, there are going to be effects that we do not currently understand. But no matter how you slice this particular pie you aren't going to get an electron-mass to expand from a diameter of an order hilariously smaller than Planck's length to a diameter of 6 or 8 meters. The radius of an electron-mass black hole is 10^-64 meters. Even if something that small could actually exist gravity would be irrelevent. It would be so utterly alone in the universe that it would never be expected to interact with another subatomic particle during the lifetime of the universe.
Sure, it would be like any other black hole at it's event horizon. But even if it was embedded in a solid block of plutonium the nearest electron from a plutonium atom would be so far away that the scale is the radius of the universe many billions of times over.
The radius of the universe is about 10^26 meters. The black hole that we're considering is 10^64 times smaller than a meter. The two scales aren't even close. The universe is dwarfed by the meter/micro-black hole scale by a factor of 10^38.
As to the temperature, yes, if the object has a mass of an electron you'll be safe at 2 feet. Temperature is a measure of velocity. When the micro black hole evaporates 10^-128 seconds after it is created it will eject a gamma ray photon (actually a cosmic ray). Actually, at this size the time will be hugely affected by relativistic effects. It will probably be on the order of a trillionth of a second. But you get my point.
If his black holes have the upper mass of 100 kg you probably want to stand back a bit more than 2 feet. Try about 200 miles and then run like hell.
His black holes will "evaporate" in ~10^-11 seconds (.00000000001 sec). During that time it will convert 100kg of mass into energy. The output will "only" be equivalent to an 85 megaton hydrogen bomb - each. I don't believe that Florida would survive an 85 megaton hydrogen bomb let alone two of them.
Sure, there are going to be effects that we do not currently understand. But no matter how you slice this particular pie you aren't going to get an electron-mass to expand from a diameter of an order hilariously smaller than Planck's length to a diameter of 6 or 8 meters. The radius of an electron-mass black hole is 10^-64 meters. Even if something that small could actually exist gravity would be irrelevent. It would be so utterly alone in the universe that it would never be expected to interact with another subatomic particle during the lifetime of the universe.
Sure, it would be like any other black hole at it's event horizon. But even if it was embedded in a solid block of plutonium the nearest electron from a plutonium atom would be so far away that the scale is the radius of the universe many billions of times over.
The radius of the universe is about 10^26 meters. The black hole that we're considering is 10^64 times smaller than a meter. The two scales aren't even close. The universe is dwarfed by the meter/micro-black hole scale by a factor of 10^38.
As to the temperature, yes, if the object has a mass of an electron you'll be safe at 2 feet. Temperature is a measure of velocity. When the micro black hole evaporates 10^-128 seconds after it is created it will eject a gamma ray photon (actually a cosmic ray). Actually, at this size the time will be hugely affected by relativistic effects. It will probably be on the order of a trillionth of a second. But you get my point.
If his black holes have the upper mass of 100 kg you probably want to stand back a bit more than 2 feet. Try about 200 miles and then run like hell.
His black holes will "evaporate" in ~10^-11 seconds (.00000000001 sec). During that time it will convert 100kg of mass into energy. The output will "only" be equivalent to an 85 megaton hydrogen bomb - each. I don't believe that Florida would survive an 85 megaton hydrogen bomb let alone two of them.
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Newbe 0' What I could not figure out, till I had looked at the instructor's jump video, is where the locus of the center of the field was at?
What I had assumed, is that the center of the field, was at the control box itself.
This would mean at the center of this Kerr's doubelarity, there would be a projecting of gravity, such as in a gravity well, centralized outward from that point.
However' please know that this is not so and the instructor's jump film still proves this.
Remember where the instructors is sitting in the middle of the seat?The laser bends toward and down to the center of the vehiclele, not to the box.
So the conclusion for the source that I'm getting, is that the projected field originates at the control box, however the central field locus, is pushed to the almost exact center of the vehicle.
Look at the instructor's jump video and you'll see what I mean.
This would have to be, however the force field is not so great, that this field consumes the occupants of the vehicle.
What is going on here, is that there is a double locuses field and Im not talking about the outer non-specific Kerr's field, however a doubled over field, which is integral to itself.
If this would be true, then the following must have been achieved.
One the outer field which is some eight feet from the car, was a pushed out field.
Two that the nature of both the inner and outer fields, could be projected possibly using a projection horn of some kind? Maybe a magnetic projector and this appliance would have to be advance computer board controlled.
Why?
Because the nature of the outerfild, is what is known as a pulsed width variable and is a product of a rapidly replenishing field.
The nature of this type of field to be in, might be so mild, that only minimal matter distortion would occur?
This would be on the order of something such as going to a mystery spot, to where a giant meteorite has been buried beneath the ground, which can distort gravity.
The outer field however, in some respects, still would work in a similar fashion to a traditional black holes.This interaction would be with some interaction to particles and matter, which may come into the field.
What I had assumed, is that the center of the field, was at the control box itself.
This would mean at the center of this Kerr's doubelarity, there would be a projecting of gravity, such as in a gravity well, centralized outward from that point.
However' please know that this is not so and the instructor's jump film still proves this.
Remember where the instructors is sitting in the middle of the seat?The laser bends toward and down to the center of the vehiclele, not to the box.
So the conclusion for the source that I'm getting, is that the projected field originates at the control box, however the central field locus, is pushed to the almost exact center of the vehicle.
Look at the instructor's jump video and you'll see what I mean.
This would have to be, however the force field is not so great, that this field consumes the occupants of the vehicle.
What is going on here, is that there is a double locuses field and Im not talking about the outer non-specific Kerr's field, however a doubled over field, which is integral to itself.
If this would be true, then the following must have been achieved.
One the outer field which is some eight feet from the car, was a pushed out field.
Two that the nature of both the inner and outer fields, could be projected possibly using a projection horn of some kind? Maybe a magnetic projector and this appliance would have to be advance computer board controlled.
Why?
Because the nature of the outerfild, is what is known as a pulsed width variable and is a product of a rapidly replenishing field.
The nature of this type of field to be in, might be so mild, that only minimal matter distortion would occur?
This would be on the order of something such as going to a mystery spot, to where a giant meteorite has been buried beneath the ground, which can distort gravity.
The outer field however, in some respects, still would work in a similar fashion to a traditional black holes.This interaction would be with some interaction to particles and matter, which may come into the field.
Darby
Epochal Historian
newbie_O,
We know the upper and lower mass for Titor's black holes based on his posts.
First, he said that there are two of them in his gadget. He said that the total mass for his gadget (the black box and contents) is 500 lbs (~225 kg). He also said that the mass of his black holes is less than an electron's mass.
If we allow only 25 kg for the mass of the box and the components that leaves 200 kg. That's 100 kg each for the black holes as the upper limit.
An electron has an approximate mass of 10^-31 kg. That's the lower limit.
So, no - we don't have to be time travelers to know the approximate mass of his black holes. He gave us the upper and lower limits in his posts.
Do I believe in the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics? Yes, I do. But the interpretation that I accept is the one put forth by Everett and Wheeler which is the original theory. The actual name is "Relative State Formalism of Quantum Mechanics." It was Everett's 1957 PhD dissertation. Wheeler was Everett's PhD advisor.
I also accept Wheeler's statement that the term "Many Worlds" is an unfortunate term because it is sorely misinterpreted in popular science. Everett and Wheeler were not suggesting in their paper that there are these "parallel worlds" that one can journey to and back from. That's one reason why Wheeler has said that the term is unfortunate. (Actually Bryce DeWitt calls his interpretation of Everett the "Many Worlds Interpretation", not Everett himself.)
We know the upper and lower mass for Titor's black holes based on his posts.
First, he said that there are two of them in his gadget. He said that the total mass for his gadget (the black box and contents) is 500 lbs (~225 kg). He also said that the mass of his black holes is less than an electron's mass.
If we allow only 25 kg for the mass of the box and the components that leaves 200 kg. That's 100 kg each for the black holes as the upper limit.
An electron has an approximate mass of 10^-31 kg. That's the lower limit.
So, no - we don't have to be time travelers to know the approximate mass of his black holes. He gave us the upper and lower limits in his posts.
Do I believe in the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics? Yes, I do. But the interpretation that I accept is the one put forth by Everett and Wheeler which is the original theory. The actual name is "Relative State Formalism of Quantum Mechanics." It was Everett's 1957 PhD dissertation. Wheeler was Everett's PhD advisor.
I also accept Wheeler's statement that the term "Many Worlds" is an unfortunate term because it is sorely misinterpreted in popular science. Everett and Wheeler were not suggesting in their paper that there are these "parallel worlds" that one can journey to and back from. That's one reason why Wheeler has said that the term is unfortunate. (Actually Bryce DeWitt calls his interpretation of Everett the "Many Worlds Interpretation", not Everett himself.)
How do you know he's not talking the "unit" weights 500lbs, as in, try to pick it up when it's turned off, 500lbs.
You said, that he said, the mass was less than that of an electron. How do you know that wasn't the upper limit.
Back in the fitee's when they thought this up, the concept of "parallel worlds" was impossible.
Many-worlds only applies to the microscopic world, but what if someone finds a link between the micro and macro scopic worlds, and it involves many-worlds. What if it means exactly what you are saying Darby, "parallel worlds", or "world-lines" as John Titor calls them.
Do you think parallel worlds are at the least, plausible?
You said, that he said, the mass was less than that of an electron. How do you know that wasn't the upper limit.
Back in the fitee's when they thought this up, the concept of "parallel worlds" was impossible.
Many-worlds only applies to the microscopic world, but what if someone finds a link between the micro and macro scopic worlds, and it involves many-worlds. What if it means exactly what you are saying Darby, "parallel worlds", or "world-lines" as John Titor calls them.
Do you think parallel worlds are at the least, plausible?
creedo299
Epochal Historian
If the black hole similarity is the size of an electron and the field is eight feet away, then this is not a correct black hole interpretation.
A black hole, only exerts gravity near to its proximity.
So the event horizon, if the BH is at electron size and the field is correct, should not be more than an inch away.
This can't be only one electron either.
This would have to be a group of electrons, in order to do this?
A black hole half the size of the moon, would throw a field of influence,. not more than twice the distance away from Earth effecting anything by this BH.
This is so, due to the universal energy conservation theory of spatial adjustment.
So the field would be immense in gravitational pull, but would diminish at so much of a distance away.
So there has to be a secondary field influencing something similar to a black hole creation, to throw that field some eight feet away from the primary electron sized black hole?
A black hole, only exerts gravity near to its proximity.
So the event horizon, if the BH is at electron size and the field is correct, should not be more than an inch away.
This can't be only one electron either.
This would have to be a group of electrons, in order to do this?
A black hole half the size of the moon, would throw a field of influence,. not more than twice the distance away from Earth effecting anything by this BH.
This is so, due to the universal energy conservation theory of spatial adjustment.
So the field would be immense in gravitational pull, but would diminish at so much of a distance away.
So there has to be a secondary field influencing something similar to a black hole creation, to throw that field some eight feet away from the primary electron sized black hole?
Darby
Epochal Historian
Dan,
In reality you can't actually form a BH with the mass of an electron. The radius of the event horizon would be on the order of 10^-66 cm...about 10^33 times less than Planck's Length.
Even at Planck's Length for the radius (10^-33 cm) if you tried to inject an electron (radius ~10^-18 cm) it wouldn't be effected by the black hole at all...even if it passed directly through the BH. 99.99999999999+% of the electron would exist outside the event horizon because it is 10^15 times larger than the BH. Electrons are fundamental particles and cannot be partially swollowed by the BH. It would pass by the BH treating it as if it was a neutrino...absolutely no effect other than a tiny "wiggle" in the wave length of the electron.
And that assumes that you could even come close to hitting the BH with an electron. It is so incredibly small that at that scale it is literally somewhere on the "other side of the universe" with respect to the closest sub-atomic particle to it. It's gravitational field would be exactly the same as a non collapsed electron at any distance equal to or greater than 10^-18 cm from the singularity. At the sub-atomic level gravity is totally ignored because its force is almost literally zero relative to the strong nuclear and electromagnetic forces.
Which brings me to...
newbie_O,
There are aspects of how Titor described his gadget that involve well founded, tested and verified fundamental physical facts that do not require us to know anything that we don’t already know in so far as making a decision about whether or not his gadget is real or not. In fact, Titor actually said that virtually all of the scientific discoveries involving his gadget were made during and prior to the 1970's.
One known science fact that is the death knell for his gadget is how he described pumping up the negative charge and angular momentum of his “less than electron mass†black holes.
He said that they inject electrons into the black hole to both capture the angular momentum of the electrons and add their negative charge to the BH’s. If he was describing a stellar mass black hole this would not be a particular problem. But it is an insurmountable problem for a black hole with the mass of a sub-atomic particle. Here’s why:
We know from our basic physics in junior high school that like charges repel. In this case we have a negatively charged black hole and we are attempting to shoot it with a negatively charged electron to form a Kerr-Newman black hole (charged and spinning black hole) exactly as Titor described them.
It’s true that as the electron approaches the black hole the attractive strength of the gravitational field increases. The repulsive strength of the negative charge of the black hole also increases. But the relative strength of the electromagnetic field is not the same as the strength of the gravitational field.
We can “normalize†the strength of gravity and arbitrarily assign it a strength of g = 1. The electromagnetic force then is e = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (that’s a one followed by 36 zeros – one-thousand decillion).
The relative strength of gravity versus electromagnetism is 1:10^36.
While gravity is “attracting†the electron with a relative force of “1†the opposite charges are repelling each other with a force of 10^36. Even if you launch the electron at 99.997% the speed of light it will be radically deflected from a great distance from the BH and never come close to the black hole’s event horizon. The gravitational field of the BH will never have a chance to come into play. ANd...
the BH will also be accelerated away from the incoming electron. They have approximately the same rest mass. To be a bit more precise, because we have accelerated the electron to near the speed of light it will have the approximate mass slightly greater than a proton as a result of the effects of Special Relativity. The BH will be deflected more than the electron.
In reality you can't actually form a BH with the mass of an electron. The radius of the event horizon would be on the order of 10^-66 cm...about 10^33 times less than Planck's Length.
Even at Planck's Length for the radius (10^-33 cm) if you tried to inject an electron (radius ~10^-18 cm) it wouldn't be effected by the black hole at all...even if it passed directly through the BH. 99.99999999999+% of the electron would exist outside the event horizon because it is 10^15 times larger than the BH. Electrons are fundamental particles and cannot be partially swollowed by the BH. It would pass by the BH treating it as if it was a neutrino...absolutely no effect other than a tiny "wiggle" in the wave length of the electron.
And that assumes that you could even come close to hitting the BH with an electron. It is so incredibly small that at that scale it is literally somewhere on the "other side of the universe" with respect to the closest sub-atomic particle to it. It's gravitational field would be exactly the same as a non collapsed electron at any distance equal to or greater than 10^-18 cm from the singularity. At the sub-atomic level gravity is totally ignored because its force is almost literally zero relative to the strong nuclear and electromagnetic forces.
Which brings me to...
newbie_O,
There are aspects of how Titor described his gadget that involve well founded, tested and verified fundamental physical facts that do not require us to know anything that we don’t already know in so far as making a decision about whether or not his gadget is real or not. In fact, Titor actually said that virtually all of the scientific discoveries involving his gadget were made during and prior to the 1970's.
One known science fact that is the death knell for his gadget is how he described pumping up the negative charge and angular momentum of his “less than electron mass†black holes.
He said that they inject electrons into the black hole to both capture the angular momentum of the electrons and add their negative charge to the BH’s. If he was describing a stellar mass black hole this would not be a particular problem. But it is an insurmountable problem for a black hole with the mass of a sub-atomic particle. Here’s why:
We know from our basic physics in junior high school that like charges repel. In this case we have a negatively charged black hole and we are attempting to shoot it with a negatively charged electron to form a Kerr-Newman black hole (charged and spinning black hole) exactly as Titor described them.
It’s true that as the electron approaches the black hole the attractive strength of the gravitational field increases. The repulsive strength of the negative charge of the black hole also increases. But the relative strength of the electromagnetic field is not the same as the strength of the gravitational field.
We can “normalize†the strength of gravity and arbitrarily assign it a strength of g = 1. The electromagnetic force then is e = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (that’s a one followed by 36 zeros – one-thousand decillion).
The relative strength of gravity versus electromagnetism is 1:10^36.
While gravity is “attracting†the electron with a relative force of “1†the opposite charges are repelling each other with a force of 10^36. Even if you launch the electron at 99.997% the speed of light it will be radically deflected from a great distance from the BH and never come close to the black hole’s event horizon. The gravitational field of the BH will never have a chance to come into play. ANd...
the BH will also be accelerated away from the incoming electron. They have approximately the same rest mass. To be a bit more precise, because we have accelerated the electron to near the speed of light it will have the approximate mass slightly greater than a proton as a result of the effects of Special Relativity. The BH will be deflected more than the electron.
Darby
Epochal Historian
newbie_O,
That's correct. The entire gadget, box, components and black holes weigh in at 500 lbs.
I suppose that we could increase the upper limit for the BH mass to 111 .5 kg each by assuming that the box and the components only weigh 1 kg. But the extra 11.5 kg mass for each BH doesn't change the numbers at all.
Titor actually said that the mass of the BH's was less than an electron. I used the electron's mass because the numbers there are so small than that they are impossible. The numbers work out to results less than Planck's Length. Distances less than Planck's Length are meaningless. So there's no reason to figure the problem for a smaller mass.
And there are Newtonian Mechanics reasons to stop the mass at 225 kg. The gadget is shown in one photo sitting on top of the plastic shell of the folded passenger's seat of the Corvette. It's doubtful that you could safely lift the thing into the car if it actually weighed 225 kg but if you could you'd crush the plastic shell. Two people can lift 225 kg. But it's a bit crowded and an awkward maneuver to get it into the Corvette. One slip and someone gets a broken leg...or worse.
Just moving the box at all is a linear acceleration for the "contained" black holes. Considering their size (10^-66 cm) moving then just one inch per second is about the same thing as grabbing you by the collar and launching you two or three galaxies away in one second.
As Titor said, I'm not selling anything so you don't have to buy any of this. I will tell you that I'm not making any of this up. This is real physics. New theories in physics will likely alter the situation but the current "realities" of physics will be retained in the new theories as limiting cases just as Newtonian Mechanics and Relativity are retained in Special and General Relativity as limiting cases.
That's correct. The entire gadget, box, components and black holes weigh in at 500 lbs.
I suppose that we could increase the upper limit for the BH mass to 111 .5 kg each by assuming that the box and the components only weigh 1 kg. But the extra 11.5 kg mass for each BH doesn't change the numbers at all.
Titor actually said that the mass of the BH's was less than an electron. I used the electron's mass because the numbers there are so small than that they are impossible. The numbers work out to results less than Planck's Length. Distances less than Planck's Length are meaningless. So there's no reason to figure the problem for a smaller mass.
And there are Newtonian Mechanics reasons to stop the mass at 225 kg. The gadget is shown in one photo sitting on top of the plastic shell of the folded passenger's seat of the Corvette. It's doubtful that you could safely lift the thing into the car if it actually weighed 225 kg but if you could you'd crush the plastic shell. Two people can lift 225 kg. But it's a bit crowded and an awkward maneuver to get it into the Corvette. One slip and someone gets a broken leg...or worse.
Just moving the box at all is a linear acceleration for the "contained" black holes. Considering their size (10^-66 cm) moving then just one inch per second is about the same thing as grabbing you by the collar and launching you two or three galaxies away in one second.
As Titor said, I'm not selling anything so you don't have to buy any of this. I will tell you that I'm not making any of this up. This is real physics. New theories in physics will likely alter the situation but the current "realities" of physics will be retained in the new theories as limiting cases just as Newtonian Mechanics and Relativity are retained in Special and General Relativity as limiting cases.
Darby we have not created black holes, we haven't made them spin, we havn't made two of them spin beside each other, and we certainly have not pumped a black hole with electrons to see what happens.
Why are you speak with such certainty about things that humans have no attempted yet? That's a silly as someone who believes 100% in the Titor story.
I'm all for proving Titor is a hoax but you can't do that with the physics of today. That's the whole point of the story.
Underneath that plastic shell could be piece of metal. You don't know what's underneath the plastic shell, unless you have your own time machine.
Why didn't you ask my question about multiple-world lines Darby? Do you at least think they are plausible!!?
Why are you speak with such certainty about things that humans have no attempted yet? That's a silly as someone who believes 100% in the Titor story.
I'm all for proving Titor is a hoax but you can't do that with the physics of today. That's the whole point of the story.
Underneath that plastic shell could be piece of metal. You don't know what's underneath the plastic shell, unless you have your own time machine.
Why didn't you ask my question about multiple-world lines Darby? Do you at least think they are plausible!!?
Darby
Epochal Historian
newbie_O,
I don't quite understand your plight with the fact that we haven't created an electron mass black hole and therefore can't know what the physics there would be.
The fact that we are even talking about black holes is because we have some clear understanding of a major part of the underlying physics. The part that we are truly unsure of is what occurs at the singularity itself. But we aren't concerned with that in this particular story. As Boomer wrote it, Titor avoids the singularity by traversing a wormhole in the ring singularity of a Kerr-Newman black hole (spinning and charged BH).
I'm also not quite sure what you mean by "multiple world lines."
You're mixing terms from two very different physics theories.
"World Lines" deals with General Relativity and comes from Minkowski. This has nothing to do with alternate universes. Minkowski used the term to describe the path and the history of a particle as it travels through spacetime. Every sub-atomic particle marks out its own path through spacetime...they have one pathway that Minkowski called a world line.
"Many Worlds" (Interpretation) comes from quantum mechanics as originally theorized by Everett and further explained by Bryce DeWitt - who coined the term "Many Worlds Interpretation." These theories deal with how the wave of probabilities behaves and how it collapses (or doesn't collapse) to resolve itself into some observable "reality."
I don't think that we want to get into a discussion of coherence, decoherence, entanglement, advanced wave, retarded wave, wave collapse, Copenhagen vs. Relative State Formalism, Bohm vs. Bohr, vs Heisenberg vs. Everett vs. DeWitt, etc. do we?
I think that I answered your question but I'm not sure who it is that you want me to ask (or should have asked) about this.
I don't quite understand your plight with the fact that we haven't created an electron mass black hole and therefore can't know what the physics there would be.
The fact that we are even talking about black holes is because we have some clear understanding of a major part of the underlying physics. The part that we are truly unsure of is what occurs at the singularity itself. But we aren't concerned with that in this particular story. As Boomer wrote it, Titor avoids the singularity by traversing a wormhole in the ring singularity of a Kerr-Newman black hole (spinning and charged BH).
I'm also not quite sure what you mean by "multiple world lines."
You're mixing terms from two very different physics theories.
"World Lines" deals with General Relativity and comes from Minkowski. This has nothing to do with alternate universes. Minkowski used the term to describe the path and the history of a particle as it travels through spacetime. Every sub-atomic particle marks out its own path through spacetime...they have one pathway that Minkowski called a world line.
"Many Worlds" (Interpretation) comes from quantum mechanics as originally theorized by Everett and further explained by Bryce DeWitt - who coined the term "Many Worlds Interpretation." These theories deal with how the wave of probabilities behaves and how it collapses (or doesn't collapse) to resolve itself into some observable "reality."
I don't think that we want to get into a discussion of coherence, decoherence, entanglement, advanced wave, retarded wave, wave collapse, Copenhagen vs. Relative State Formalism, Bohm vs. Bohr, vs Heisenberg vs. Everett vs. DeWitt, etc. do we?
I think that I answered your question but I'm not sure who it is that you want me to ask (or should have asked) about this.
Plight? Because until we create them, it's just theory that could change once you can take a real measurement.
John Titor use the term world-lines term synomously with your term "parallel worlds".
For the story to be true, there is a link between the macroscopic world and the many-worlds theory. This may sound impossible now ( I mean the universe is so big man, no way there could be 2 of them, or 10, or trillions... haha, what a silly concept), but whoever wrote the story is saying we should find this plausible.
John Titor brought up world-lines. When(If) you asked him about mixing up theories, what did he say?
You didn't answer my question, do you at least think it's possible that there are multiple, parallel, or however you want to call them, worlds? A zillion Darby's all doing everything that was possible for Darby to do? Yes, no, maybe?
Hehe and no you don't want to waste your time talking about all those vs's 'cause I'm just a dumb farmer and I wouldn't understand /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif But I am interested in any Everett many-worlds-for-dummies pages if such things exist?
John Titor use the term world-lines term synomously with your term "parallel worlds".
For the story to be true, there is a link between the macroscopic world and the many-worlds theory. This may sound impossible now ( I mean the universe is so big man, no way there could be 2 of them, or 10, or trillions... haha, what a silly concept), but whoever wrote the story is saying we should find this plausible.
John Titor brought up world-lines. When(If) you asked him about mixing up theories, what did he say?
You didn't answer my question, do you at least think it's possible that there are multiple, parallel, or however you want to call them, worlds? A zillion Darby's all doing everything that was possible for Darby to do? Yes, no, maybe?
Hehe and no you don't want to waste your time talking about all those vs's 'cause I'm just a dumb farmer and I wouldn't understand /ttiforum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif But I am interested in any Everett many-worlds-for-dummies pages if such things exist?
creedo299
Epochal Historian
Re: JT timeline contamination
Creedo299 divest interest from this thread on a technical count.
This is so, as the actual structure of black holes has to deal with relative mass and size perceived.
However in this theory that miniature black holes are produced by a machine, then this point of manufacture is so minute, that the machine making them, must always be producing prototypical structure, in order to replace any said B.H. evaporation rates.
Therefore the argument within this thread compairing real black holes, to artificially said produced black holes, is inane.
Creedo299 divest interest from this thread on a technical count.
This is so, as the actual structure of black holes has to deal with relative mass and size perceived.
However in this theory that miniature black holes are produced by a machine, then this point of manufacture is so minute, that the machine making them, must always be producing prototypical structure, in order to replace any said B.H. evaporation rates.
Therefore the argument within this thread compairing real black holes, to artificially said produced black holes, is inane.
Darby
Epochal Historian
newbie_O,
There's no such animal as a dumb farmer. The first person that comes along and calls a farmer dumb deserves that the farmer ask them to go out and see if they can grow a farm full of food to feed a few hundred (or thousand) people for a season. I'm not a farmer - but I'm the first generation in my family who aren't farmers.
Give me a couple of days to ponder some good, basic and understandable sites and books for you to read.
Right off the top of my head I would recommend a couple of books for you that are available at any major cookstore or on Amazon:
1) "Relativity: The Special and General Theories", Einstein, Albert.
Get the paperback edition for about $10.00. The "perfesser" himself wrote the book. It is a popular science treatment with very little math. The book is very readable and contains an excellent explanation of both parts of Einstein's relativity.
2) "Six Not-so-Easy Pieces", Feynman, Richard.
Again, get the paperback edition for about $10.00. This book contains six of Feynman's early 1960's lectures from Cal Tech. They include some calculus but you can skip the math. He has one excellent chapter on relativity and the nature of "absulute motion." This book is a bit more advanced but it's still somewhat of a popular science treatment. Feynman intended the lectures to be his lesson plan for a survey course in physical sciences to be delivered to Cal Tech freshman. He was such an excellent lecturer and the classes were so "fun" that they had to move the class to a hyge lecture hall. He discovered that even the professors were cutting their own lectures to attend his survey class in physical science. His students couldn't find a seat in the original classroom.
You could buy the whole series of lectures. It's a classic textbook used worldwide...for only $135 - $150. Ouch! (Yeah - I bought it. And the DVD set of the live recorded lectures.)
3) "A Journey into Gravity and Spacetime", Wheeler, John A.
This one is still a popular science explanation of gravity, spacetime geometry, relativity and a bit of quantum mechanics...but it's a bit advanced. Still little in the way of math.
4) http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/natureslaw/students/blackhole/types3.html Black Holes: A Theoretical and Experimental Summary (website)
5) http://other.cerrocoso.edu/studenthelp/astronomy/Schwarzschild/schwarzschild.htm
Schwarzschild Radius Calculator site. Plug in the mass...for instance the mass of an electron...pop out the radius of the event horizon.
There's no such animal as a dumb farmer. The first person that comes along and calls a farmer dumb deserves that the farmer ask them to go out and see if they can grow a farm full of food to feed a few hundred (or thousand) people for a season. I'm not a farmer - but I'm the first generation in my family who aren't farmers.
Give me a couple of days to ponder some good, basic and understandable sites and books for you to read.
Right off the top of my head I would recommend a couple of books for you that are available at any major cookstore or on Amazon:
1) "Relativity: The Special and General Theories", Einstein, Albert.
Get the paperback edition for about $10.00. The "perfesser" himself wrote the book. It is a popular science treatment with very little math. The book is very readable and contains an excellent explanation of both parts of Einstein's relativity.
2) "Six Not-so-Easy Pieces", Feynman, Richard.
Again, get the paperback edition for about $10.00. This book contains six of Feynman's early 1960's lectures from Cal Tech. They include some calculus but you can skip the math. He has one excellent chapter on relativity and the nature of "absulute motion." This book is a bit more advanced but it's still somewhat of a popular science treatment. Feynman intended the lectures to be his lesson plan for a survey course in physical sciences to be delivered to Cal Tech freshman. He was such an excellent lecturer and the classes were so "fun" that they had to move the class to a hyge lecture hall. He discovered that even the professors were cutting their own lectures to attend his survey class in physical science. His students couldn't find a seat in the original classroom.
You could buy the whole series of lectures. It's a classic textbook used worldwide...for only $135 - $150. Ouch! (Yeah - I bought it. And the DVD set of the live recorded lectures.)
3) "A Journey into Gravity and Spacetime", Wheeler, John A.
This one is still a popular science explanation of gravity, spacetime geometry, relativity and a bit of quantum mechanics...but it's a bit advanced. Still little in the way of math.
4) http://www.scholars.nus.edu.sg/natureslaw/students/blackhole/types3.html Black Holes: A Theoretical and Experimental Summary (website)
5) http://other.cerrocoso.edu/studenthelp/astronomy/Schwarzschild/schwarzschild.htm
Schwarzschild Radius Calculator site. Plug in the mass...for instance the mass of an electron...pop out the radius of the event horizon.