Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It would take a long time for a tiny black hole to feed enough to be a problem.



I looked this up, and according to the most entertaining source I found (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nHBGFKLHZQ) the result of a tiny blackhole would basically be a gigantic nuclear explosion (it would evaporate rather than continue forming) -- so a big problem immediately, but not one that would prevent me from reading about it here in the US.


Yes, if physics behave accordingly the way we expect it would evaporate almost immediately, but it would be a tiny explosion because they'd only be a tiny amount of energy there in the first place.

The more fun version would be where black holes do not evaporate, at which point it will still be a very long time before it's a problem, we need to worry about Andromeda crashing into our galaxy and the sun becoming a red giant first.


That kind of timescale often makes me wonder, how do we know there aren't millions of tiny black holes all throughout the planet slowly growing?


And pertinently, if there were, is the timescale fixed, or are there externals events that might speed it up?

The Sun's dying and will become a red giant (about 5 billion years to go), but it's luminosity is currently increasing, so our rock will become a scorched Earth in around a billion years. Then there's the potential for meteors, climate-change, antibiotic resistance, or millions of tiny black holes to do us off first (how quickly do black holes grow, anyway?)

Colonising other planets and other solar systems seems the only viable solution to the long-term survival of the human race.


We don't, but I haven't seen any around.


Maybe they're just hiding in the dark.

Or maybe they are the dark.


It can only explode as much energy as you put in though. The particles the LHC collides don't have all that much energy.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: