Hi all,

(firstly thanks to you for answering my last post re BEC)
(secondly i hope this is the rght place for this post, as my last one was moved to here!)

I've been thinking more about BEC and Fermionic condensates, and i was wondering if the density of such matierials was huge?

and if is, then can we make a microscopc ' Black Hole' (theoreticaly)?

i was thinking that the merged cloud of atoms in BEC/FermC, if of a critical density, would collapse further into a black hole? i'm not sure if this would work as i was also thinking that maybe black-holes had FermC in them already and it couldn't be collapsed further. ??

If so, what mass of matrial at room temperature would (when cooled etc (assuming none was 'lost' in the process)) make a mini black-hole?? (i cant find the density of bec etc anywhere on the net...)

Thanks again to all those clever people answering my simple questions that you've probably already thought about, and discounted as 'a stupid idea'!!!

Cheers

Jules

'physics isn't just awesome, it's everything!!!'

That's a pretty good intuition, actually. So-called 'boson stars' can collapse to form black holes under the right conditions.

Here is one paper that describes these possibilities.

thanks for the link Guiding Light!!
Is there any way you could paste the article/summary here? i'm not a member of the AJS or similar (i'm a furniture maker), so i can't access the paper.
thanks for the reply, anyway i'm chuffed you thought it was a reasonable idea!
nice one
Cheers
Jules

Hi, again, Jules -

The abstract doesnt give much info, but the density shouldn't be that crazy high, anyway. The reason is that while the atoms in the BEC end up all adopting the same quantum spin state, they don't "collapse" into the same space, so while the density is pretty high, it's because of the extreme cold and confinement, than anything else. A bosonic star would be in the trillions of kg, anyway.

Hey, what types of furniture do you make? I'm looking for (reasonably priced) chairs to go w/ a mahogany dining room table (griffonclaw, custom leaf, seats 12) that was made by some semi-retired master carpenters over here in the US - New Hampshire.

I can email you the paper directly - lemme know - but it's heavily math dependent - zB, they begin by discussing Einstein-Klein-Gordon equation (essentially, a modified form of the GR eq.) and reasonably difficult matrix/quantum stuff. I, for one, had to look a bunch of things up and still stink at rank-2-tensor manipulation.

Lemme know!

- gleefully spinning solids

The paper suggests several conditions for collapse, the most obvious being when the particle number exceeds some value. The more interesting cases of course were the stable solutions (i.e., the boson stars). Anyway, not a frequent occurrence; otherwise we'd be seeing lots of black holes...

Hi solidspin,



Yes, you are right. Black holes forming as stellar remnants start with degenerate fermions (neutrons) rather than bosons. I think boson stars are just theoretical constructs, assuming an unknown dark matter STABLE massive boson still out there, like an axion.

Unfortunately, I don't think is what the boson star is about. As Guest said, a theoretical massive stable boson is assumed. A BEC of atoms under gravitational collapse would lose its BEC status through heating. (Normally this BEC is low density, as solidspin mentioned). Eventually the atoms are broken up, then the electrons become degenerate (white dwarf) then the neutrons (neutron star). At each point, white dwarf or neutron star, the equilibrium of degenerate pressure vs gravity stops collapse. But the black hole forms if the degenerate pressure fails. Anyway I think your intuition and thinking was in the right direction, just need the boson to do it!

Thanks for the reply SolidSpin,

I'm ok for the abstract now, i've done a google search on boson stars! loads of stuff, and i'm no Mathmatician!! - shame really as everything seems to have some awesome mathmatical symetry. I do feel like i'm missing out on a lot of beautiful ideas because of my poor maths skills
re Furniture, I make cool tables from Stainless steel and wood! sorry no chairs yet, you can see them here,www.Bespoke-Tables.co.uk

Cheers GuidingLight too, I'm thinking its a good thing we can't make blackholes (yet!), can you imagine the chaos!
Do you know if anyone has seriously tried to make mini blackholes yet?

Cheers all
Jules

Jules -

NIIIIIICE tables - likely out of my price range, though. Beautiful craftsmanship.

ss

Hi all, i've been googling again, and found this interview with Andreas Ringwald. RE: my question 'Is anyone trying to make Black-Holes?'

it seems people at the LHC may produce Black-holes when the LHC gets going!
Wow! (even though they are microscopic and will evaporate very quickly)

article below:
URL=http://www.esi-topics.com/blackholes/interviews/AndreasRingwald.html]full article[/URL]

Unfortunately, experimental detection of Hawking radiation from real, massive astrophysical black holes seems impossible, since the corresponding temperature, as seen by an outside observer, is tiny, e.g. 10^{-7} Kelvin for a solar mass black hole. For comparison, the temperature of the cosmic microwave background photons—the relic radiation from the big bang—is 2.7 Kelvin and thus 10 million times larger.

This is different for hypothetical microscopic black holes: they would evaporate within a very short time in a particle radiation flash. According to the Standard Model of particle physics, such microscopic black holes can be produced in principle in particle scattering experiments with center-of-mass energies of order 10^{19} GeV, about 15 orders of magnitude larger than what will be available at the CERN's Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in around 2007.

Recently, however, it was pointed out that in extensions of the Standard Model of particle physics, which involve, in addition to the usual three spatial dimensions, a number of extra spatial dimensions in which gravity can act, above-microscopic black hole production may occur copiously already at center-of-mass energies available at the LHC or in cosmic ray and neutrino interactions.

Therefore, if these extensions of the Standard Model are right, they open a window to study black hole production and evaporation experimentally for the first time and within the next decade.

Do you think this is what will happen??

cheers
Jules

32 days left.

Status: 19.04.08 - 32 days left.
www.notepad.ch
Save the universe.

Timeline

ISSUE Large explosion: 2005
ISSUE Magnet failure: 2007
TEST Test Sector warmup/coopdown cycle: 2007
QA ISSUE 7 of 8 segments failed cool-down tests
CANCELLED Complete warmup/cooldown cycle, Low power runs
INIT System init (1. Time Beam injection): 21. May 2008
INIT Cold Date: 1. June 2008
INIT (1. Time Protons used): 15. June 2008
DOCU New safety report not released
START System activation (1. Time Circulating beams): July 2008
RISK Black hole (First collisions: August 2008
PROD System ready: October 2008
HIGH RISK EXPERIMENT Elevated black hole risk: 21. December 1212

Important note:
These are not official dates. No official dates where available to us yet. CERN should publish them.
These dates are based on news, opinions and insider info. Additionally, I try my best. I am not a scientist - just a citizen. I will update this information and all information on www.notepad.ch as soon as new information becomes available. The blogs at www.notepad. have been created on the 14 of April, that is the date I realized that the black hole danger at the CERN's LHC is for real. My goal is to let you decide if there is an issue with the 'go to prod' of the LHC - or not. That is the reason this site consists just of News, opinions, forum messages etc. I always named the source of the quote, did mention in each article that this is a quote from etc. My assumption is that this is the legal and fair way to quote without changing the context. Please tell me if I am wrong and I will immediately correct it. Thank you.

XX days refers to the initialisation of the LHC. This is the date I currently think is right, but may be corrected at any time. It was pointed out that at this date the risk of black hole creation will not be elevated yet, which is through. In XX days I'm referring to the start date of the potential risk to create a black hole. I also wanted to have a real date, in order to put some urgency on the issue. Which it has.

www.notepad.ch

Quote from http://www.notepad.ch

What it is like to work here

The following quote is from a blog at Cernwatch.com, apparently from an insider at CERN LHC:

'I am writing this blog becuase I am seeing some strange things that I have not seen before. I notice higher levels of security, and more US military presence. I hear strange rumors and weird Jokes. I think that there is more going on that what is being let out. i will report to you everything I hear and see.'

Quote from http://www.notepad.ch

It is unwise to create such a thing within our atmosphere due to the gravitic nature of it though it is a readily used technology worldwide.