truckers.

[sooey]

And then, presumably, Superman would swoop in, crush the black hole in his super-palms, and fly it to center of the solar system where he's blow it into the gravitational pull of the Sun with his super-breath.

Actually, I don't believe in such childish notions as superheroes, I'm surprised that you appear to.

OK. At least we're clear that neither of us believe that the thing you're claiming could happen, could happen.

You don't appear able to differentiate between someone putting a hypothetical argument for the sake of debate, and someone putting a heartfelt, fervently believed argument, despite having been told in previous posts. Never mind it has enabled you to put your counter arguments (it takes two to tango). For your sake I will now make myself clear, I do not believe there is enough energy available to create a black hole big enough to be dangerous, even if cern could tap into the whole planets energy supply. Even if there was enough energy, I don't believe that the large hadron collider is anywhere near big enough to do the job by several orders of magnitude. That is what I think, right or wrong.

Please show me where I used the words "pop out of existence" that you've attributed to me.

Hands up, you didn't use those words, although I think the meaning was there.

Yes, I do really believe that you think we're all doomed, because of this:

sooey wrote:
tim west wrote:
Thats the big switch on at Cern.

Maybe that will be the big switch off for all of us, if they somehow create a black hole.

Yet I had already told you that that was a whimsical post, implying that I didn't believe it would actually happen, I told you again later that I was trying to play devil's advocate, again implying that I didn't actually believe it would happen. I also told you that, like you I was glad to see these experiments going on. So, are you now saying that I am a liar? or do you think that I am a suicidal maniac who wants to take everybody else with me, and can't wait for the big red switch with dire warnings to be thrown?

 

[Softus]

Actually, I don't believe in such childish notions as superheroes, I'm surprised that you appear to.

Next you'll be claiming that there's no such thing as Santa Claus. Perhaps you should lighten up.

You don't appear able to differentiate between someone putting a hypothetical argument for the sake of debate, and someone putting a heartfelt, fervently believed argument, despite having been told in previous posts. Never mind it has enabled you to put your counter arguments (it takes two to tango).

You never put forward a hypothetical argument - just a lump of easily dismissed modern-day alchemy.

For your sake I will now make myself clear, I do not believe there is enough energy available to create a black hole big enough to be dangerous, even if cern could tap into the whole planets energy supply. Even if there was enough energy, I don't believe that the large hadron collider is anywhere near big enough to do the job by several orders of magnitude. That is what I think, right or wrong.

I think you're right. But I don't see the point in your "Bobby Ewing is still alive it was all a dream" style revelation that you never believed the ludicrously unscientific points that, up until now, you were putting forward.

Hands up, you didn't use those words, although I think the meaning was there.

That interpolated meaning was not there. I wrote exactly what I meant, and I meant exactly what I wrote.

Yes, I do really believe that you think we're all doomed, because of this:

Maybe that will be the big switch off for all of us, if they somehow create a black hole.

Yet I had already told you that that was a whimsical post, implying that I didn't believe it would actually happen, I told you again later that I was trying to play devil's advocate, again implying that I didn't actually believe it would happen.

So, which is true? Which of the two conflicting views am I supposed to believe? I certainly don't believe in this "devil's advocate" device that you claim to be using. The reason I don't believe in it is because it was never a credible debating point. Someone arguing from the POV of Devil's advocate presents a successful and plausible argument. You never did that - it was riddled with shaky premises and misinformation.

I also told you that, like you I was glad to see these experiments going on. So, are you now saying that I am a liar?

I'm saying that you're presenting conflicting views. You're the one that said one of them isn't true.

...or do you think that I am a suicidal maniac who wants to take everybody else with me, and can't wait for the big red switch with dire warnings to be thrown?

There is no big red switch. "Delusional" is the word that springs to mind.

 

[sooey]

Maybe that will be the big switch off for all of us, if they somehow create a black hole.

I think you've been reading too many comic books.

Current scientific theory supports the idea of black holes being frequenly created all around us, but that are tiny and thereby exist for merely a fraction of a second. This is what CERN is aiming to replicate, but in laboratory conditions.

It was only a whimsical notion, and I'm not too bothered about this personally, but here's one way of looking at it.
I'm all for scientific research, and don't read comics, but given that a singularity is a place where all scientific theories break down completely, don't you think it's a tad risky to try and create one here on Earth? For instance, at what size would one become self sustaining? I don't think that we have enough energy available to make one big enough, but I don't see how the scientists can be sure, seeing as they don't really know what they are dealing with.

This was my first reply to you, perhaps in an effort to provoke a debate on a subject which, I personally take a passing interest in, with somebody who obviously does likewise. I think I made it clear there where I stood.

You never put forward a hypothetical argument - just a lump of easily dismissed modern-day alchemy.

This is a very arrogant statement, given that you must base your so called dismissals on one version of current scientific theory, there are other theories, what makes you think that you have chosen the right one? or that there is a right one yet, and why do you think that you are in a position to be able to "dismiss" other peoples arguments so "easily"?

I think you're right. But I don't see the point in your "Bobby Ewing is still alive it was all a dream" style revelation that you never believed the ludicrously unscientific points that, up until now, you were putting forward.

I've already addressed the bobby ewing thing, see my first post again, as for the ludicrously unscientific points, which ones would that be?

So, which is true? Which of the two conflicting views am I supposed to believe? I certainly don't believe in this "devil's advocate" device that you claim to be using. The reason I don't believe in it is because it was never a credible debating point. Someone arguing from the POV of Devil's advocate presents a successful and plausible argument. You never did that - it was riddled with shaky premises and misinformation.

Again see my first reply, regarding the shaky premises and misinformation, can you be specific?

There is no big red switch. "Delusional" is the word that springs to mind.

Lighten up yourself is the phrase that springs to mind.[/b]

 

[joe-90]

You tell us about black holes and space then softus. (he won't)

joe "hewon't" 90 strikes again. YAWWWWWWN!

(he didn't)

 

[Thepcpolice]

I'm sorry but I cannot allow the continued use of the word "black".

You are permitted to describe them as "none white holes" or "multicoloured holes". I know this makes no sense, so it fits in nicely with most things in this country.

Joe-90, you have on many occasions spoken like a effing idiot, please explain why you are not ( he is unable)

 

[joe-90]

I love it when posters don't have the guts to take me on under their usual alias. They know they'd get their butts kicked so they create a sock puppet.

 

[Softus]

Maybe that will be the big switch off for all of us, if they somehow create a black hole.

I think you've been reading too many comic books.

It was only a whimsical notion, and I'm not too bothered about this personally...

...as for the ludicrously unscientific points, which ones would that be?

Read all of your posts between the one where you wrote "whimsical" and this question from you. If you find any theories that you yourself don't believe - they're the ludicrously unscientific ones. Some of them were quite entertaining, mind you; I especially enjoyed the idea of a black hole "eating" it's way to the earth's core like some invisible and indefatigable Pacman.

You never put forward a hypothetical argument - just a lump of easily dismissed modern-day alchemy.

This is a very arrogant statement, given that you must base your so called dismissals on one version of current scientific theory, there are other theories, what makes you think that you have chosen the right one?

It doesn't matter what makes me think it, I've clearly said that it's my opinion, and at no point have you said that you think I'm wrong, or that the theory I support is wrong.

...and why do you think that you are in a position to be able to "dismiss" other peoples arguments so "easily"?

Not all other peoples, and not all arguments, just those that you've put forward on this topic.

I think you're right. But I don't see the point in your "Bobby Ewing is still alive it was all a dream" style revelation that you never believed the ludicrously unscientific points that, up until now, you were putting forward.

I've already addressed the bobby ewing thing, see my first post again...

Maybe so, but I hadn't addressed at, so permit me to have my say about it, which, to reiterate, is that I fail to see the point of you putting forward theories that you don't believe and don't hold water. If you think it has achieved something, then I'm happy for you, and I politely request that you allow me to be content with my belief that it hasn't.

Again see my first reply, regarding the shaky premises and misinformation, can you be specific?

I'll give you one example:-

ergo any CERN black hole will be hugely less potent than our those in our cosmic environment whose existence we survive with boring regularity.

Space is a big place, obviously there aren't any in our immediate vicinity, or we wouldn't be here to talk about them.

The clue is in the use of the word "obviously". In my experience, most people use this word as a substitute for fact and reason - it's an infallible litmus test for the presence of wishful thinking.

You've used the word, or a variant of it, at least three times on this subject.

Lighten up yourself is the phrase that springs to mind.

You seem to like instructing me to lighten up when I challenge your serious points and you have nowhere else to go. So be it. I'm happy to regard anything you write on the subject of black holes as being purely whimsical.

You can't get lighter than that.

 

[Thepcpolice]

Don't avoid the question, explain why you are an idiot. (he can't)

 

[Trazor]

THE CERN EXPERIMENT DID PRODUCE A BLACK HOLE AND IS NOW SUCKING EVERYTHING IN we are all doomed.

 

[joe-90]

That's very funny.

 

[joe-90]

Don't avoid the question, explain why you are an idiot. (he can't)

No communication with sock puppets is allowed. Forum rule 101.

 

[Trazor]

Well, anyone can safely state, "No Black Hole will be produced", they will not be brought to task if they are wrong, will they.....

 

[sooey]

Read all of your posts between the one where you wrote "whimsical" and this question from you. If you find any theories that you yourself don't believe - they're the ludicrously unscientific ones. Some of them were quite entertaining, mind you; I especially enjoyed the idea of a black hole "eating" it's way to the earth's core like some invisible and indefatigable Pacman.

OK, let's start with this, it would be better for this thread if you would kindly explain your understanding of the science which led you to dismiss this point, instead of just rubbishing it without the said explanation. I'll start by giving you my laymans understanding, or misunderstanding if you like of the science involved. Lets keep it in context though, the black hole referred to in the above point was not one of the extremely sub atomic black holes postulated by scientists, which are supposed to appear and disappear in nano seconds, if I understand them right. No the above black hole, to do what I said it would, would be a solar mass black hole, ( I say solar mass because as far as I am aware black holes are formed from the remnants of supermassive stars at the end of their lives). I once read that if one of these things existed it would have an event horizon about the size of a football. That is to say it would be an object with the mass of our sun or greater, squashed down into an area of space possibly smaller than an atom, and if anything came within say a footballs diameter of it, that would be swallowed. That is my understanding of these things, and it follows that if one of them was at the earths surface, it would immediately begin to sink to the core, Having reached the core, where it would be in equilibrium with the earth's gravitational pull it would swallow it's immediate surroundings. If the Earth was a stationary object, it would possibly just sit there, having swallowed whatever was in range. In actual fact what you would have in that situation is a black hole and a star (our sun) orbiting each other. The Earth would be pulled this way and that according to gravitational influences, and so new parts of the Earth's interior would be constantly brought into range of the black holes gravitational field, This would continue until the Earth was history. Now, that is my explanation of why I believe a black hole could "eat it's way to the Earth's core". Kindly explain why it is ludicrous, please try to keep it simple, I have already said that I have an interest, but only a laymans understanding of these things, and if I have misunderstood the science behind them I would really appreciate a proper explanation. Then perhaps, we can talk about your other points if you like.

 

[Thepcpolice]

Joe, I thought my question was quite simple, explain why you are an idiot,

you seem to have read it as confirm. (he has)

 

[Trazor]

The gravitational force of a Black Hole, would be the same as the solar mass it was formed from, as it contains the same mass.
I'm sure the event horizon would be massively bigger than a football.

If a Black hole did go to the earths centre, it would increase its mass, thus increasing its gravitational pull, thus it would pull in more mass etc. etc. until the Earth was consumed.