Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER

How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER - Physics Forum

How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-09-2008, 02:53 PM
dlzc
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER



Dear Sanny:

On Sep 9, 3:56*am, Sanny <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote:

No.

Black holes evaporate when their black body temperature exceeds the
CMBR temperature (or the temperature around them). Black holes with
the mass of a few atoms are very hot... called "fireballs" when they
have been previously created.


No.

The black hole may actually be a source, a framework, that lets a
galaxy form.

Of course I don't expect you to listen to reason...

David A. Smith
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-10-2008, 02:32 PM
Richard Tobin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...

In article <ZKPxk.188052$W71.14495@newsfe12.ams2>,
Androcles <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:


You know this is wrong.

-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-10-2008, 03:25 PM
Androcles
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...


"Richard Tobin" <[Only registered users see links. ].ac.uk> wrote in message
news:ga8lpj$2gue$[Only registered users see links. ].ac.uk...

I know you are a ****headed crank, but if you want to try to prove
otherwise,
answer this question:

Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img22.gif

Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?


Your answer goes here:

__________________________________________________ ______

Other answers have been:

According to Ian Parker:

"We are not talking about the speed of light here we are talking
classical stability theory." -- Idiot Ian Parker.
__________________________________________________ ____


According to cretin [Only registered users see links. ]

"Easy: he did NOT say that."
According to moron van lintel, Einstein did not write the equation he wrote.

__________________________________________________ ____

According to xxein:
It is an artefactual/superficially imposed yin-yang of sorts.
__________________________________________________ ____

According to Lamenting Shubert:
Why do you want to know?
__________________________________________________ ____

According to Imbecile Jimmy Black:

" In neither system (meaning frame of reference in modern-day terminology)
is the speed of light c-v or c+v. In both systems the speed of light is c."

According to the imbecile Jimmy Black, Einstein did not write the equation
he wrote.
__________________________________________________ ____


According to Dork Bruere
"I don't give a damn what Einstein wrote."
__________________________________________________ ____

According to Spirit of Truth:

that math is correct but WRONG
__________________________________________________ ____
According to constipated Eric Gisse
"I don't give a shit (fill in the blank ____________)."

__________________________________________________ ____

According to insane Einstein dingleberry Dave Burr
"No, that's utterly wrong."
According to the insane Dave Burr, Einstein did not write the equation he
wrote.

__________________________________________________ ____


'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
dare question it. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein



Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-10-2008, 09:46 PM
Richard Tobin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...

In article <NFRxk.7265$qs5.5258@newsfe30.ams2>,
Androcles <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:


Are you perhaps under the mistaken impression that c-v and c+v are
meant to be the speed of an object in some frame? They are not: they
are the rate at which the distance between two moving objects
decreases, and that obeys the simple addition rule and is not limited
to the speed of light.

If two particles are travelling towards each other at speeds of
u and v in your frame, then the distance between them (in your
frame) will decrease at the rate u+v. This does not mean that
the speed of one in the frame of the other is u+v.

So if light is emitted from one end of a rod of length l which is
moving along its axis at speed v, the light will approach the other
end at a rate of c-v, and reach the other end after a time l/(c-v).

Check: in time l/(c-v) the light will have travelled
from x=0 to x=lc/(c-v), and the far end of the rod
from x=l to x=l+lv/(c-v)=(lc-lv+lv)/(c-v)=lc/(c-v).

Similarly the reflected light will approach the first end at a rate
of c+v, and take a time l/(c+v).

None of this referred to the speed of light in the rod's frame,
which is of course c, not c+v or c-v.

In the collider case, if (in your frame) two protons are travelling in
opposite directions at .99c, then the distance between them reduces at
the rate of 1.98c. However, the relative speed of one in the frame of
the other is still less than c - about .99995c in fact.

-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-10-2008, 10:26 PM
Androcles
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...


"Richard Tobin" <[Only registered users see links. ].ac.uk> wrote in message
news:ga9f77$2o4v$[Only registered users see links. ].ac.uk...


No. Einstein distinctly said the speed of light from A to B is c-v.

"But the ray moves relatively to the initial point of k, when measured in
the stationary system, with the velocity c-v, so that
x'/(c-v) = t " -- Albert Einstein,

reference [Only registered users see links. ]

That's MEASURED, shithead.

Are you under the mistaken impression that Einstein did not say that, you
****ing idiot?

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-10-2008, 10:57 PM
Richard Tobin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...

In article <AQXxk.675$eJ.274@newsfe17.ams2>,
Androcles <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:


What exactly are you having trouble understanding? Is it just Einstein's
use of "relatively" and "velocity" when referring to the change of
distance between two objects both moving in some frame?

When people say that the relative speed of two objects can't exceed
c, they mean the speed of one object measured in the frame of another.
The relative speed in the sense you quote above can be up to 2c.

-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-10-2008, 11:23 PM
Androcles
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...


"Richard Tobin" <[Only registered users see links. ].ac.uk> wrote in message
news:ga9jd0$2poc$[Only registered users see links. ].ac.uk...


I'm having trouble with understanding your snipping, you stupid ****.
(Well not really, I'm used to it, cunts like you cant answer my question.)

Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img22.gif

Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?


Your answer goes here:

__________________________________________________ ______

Other answers have been:

According to Ian Parker:

"We are not talking about the speed of light here we are talking
classical stability theory." -- Idiot Ian Parker.
__________________________________________________ ____


According to cretin [Only registered users see links. ]

"Easy: he did NOT say that."
According to moron van lintel, Einstein did not write the equation he wrote.

__________________________________________________ ____

According to xxein:
It is an artefactual/superficially imposed yin-yang of sorts.
__________________________________________________ ____

According to Lamenting Shubert:
Why do you want to know?
__________________________________________________ ____

According to Imbecile Jimmy Black:

" In neither system (meaning frame of reference in modern-day terminology)
is the speed of light c-v or c+v. In both systems the speed of light is c."

According to the imbecile Jimmy Black, Einstein did not write the equation
he wrote.
__________________________________________________ ____


According to Dork Bruere
"I don't give a damn what Einstein wrote."
__________________________________________________ ____

According to Spirit of Truth:

that math is correct but WRONG
__________________________________________________ ____
According to constipated Eric Gisse
"I don't give a shit (fill in the blank ____________)."

__________________________________________________ ____

According to insane Einstein dingleberry Dave Burr
"No, that's utterly wrong."
According to the insane Dave Burr, Einstein did not write the equation he
wrote.

__________________________________________________ ____


'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
dare question it. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein








Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-11-2008, 12:45 AM
hanson
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...

..... AHAHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA...
Andro, you remind me of the fisherman who throws
his (A to B is c-v...)-bait out into the pond, ... and then
when the Einstein-Dingleberry-carps come along to
sample, hits'em over the head and kills 'em with an
old fashioned Newtonian club... AHAHAHAHAHA
ahahaha... ahaha... Happy Fishing!... Carry on!...
& thanks for the laughs.... ahahaha... ahahahanson
"Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote in message
news:_FYxk.2901$hr.918@newsfe27.ams2...


Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-11-2008, 04:04 AM
Androcles
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...


"hanson" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:TSZxk.902$Af3.162@trnddc06...

You have it right. Blind faith and bigotry, the enemies of science,
epitomized by Tobin. Knock 'em dead.


Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-11-2008, 09:10 AM
Richard Tobin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default After the LARGE HADRON COLLIDER proves worthless...

In article <_FYxk.2901$hr.918@newsfe27.ams2>,
Androcles <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
[Repetetive junk deleted]

Androcles's problem is that when he encounters something he doesn't
understand, he assumes it must be wrong. And when he's decided that
something is wrong, he just ignores any explanations and instead
posts endless obscenities. So he makes no progress. He'll be posting
the same drivel for the rest of his life.

-- Richard

--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
black , collider , created , hadron , holes , large


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER John J Physics Forum 21 09-15-2008 02:29 PM
How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER John J Physics Forum 2 09-10-2008 08:18 PM
How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER The TimeLord Physics Forum 0 09-10-2008 02:30 AM
How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER guskz@hotmail.com Physics Forum 1 09-09-2008 09:07 PM
How are black holes created? LARGE HADRON COLLIDER hanson Physics Forum 2 09-09-2008 06:19 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.18406 seconds with 16 queries