i am thinking that the obvious way to do this would be to create a "matter void" around the whole thing.

this would mean that there is nothing for the black hole to take or work its forces on, so then there is nothing to make a black hole...

i know that i havent got the answer at all but i am hoping that you can get your heads together and think of what is needed to contain one...

thank you.
---------------------------------------------

theoretically of course

[This message has been edited by piggarro99 (edited 08-17-2002).]

Interesting theory, but that would only keep a black hole from absorbing more material, there being none around it. Because black holes actualy bend the space around them I do not think that it would be possible to 'contain' one. At least not with our current understanding of physics.

For more information on black holes visit www.discover.com . Especialy Black Holes Spin?

[This message has been edited by Prometheus (edited 08-17-2002).]

Scientist have been trying to figure out ways to hold open wormholes and blackhole so that they can study them and be certain that they exist.

Containing a blackhole would be next to impossible because they even take in light and warp space and even time around them.

Interesting theory you have though. Blackholes will be something we can always marvel at.

i think we can one day use black holes as a source of extreme energy thats all. i do love black holes. i feel that we will harness the power.

if you can not contain one, then could it be possible that you could stop one. stop me if i am way out of my depth here but if you was able to use the machine that the yanks created to make one, find the (for want of a better name) magnetic ripple direction, and then use the machine to create an opposite polarity.

this would then counteract the forces in it and make an equilibrium... in otherwords no black hole

Opposite polarity? That would be what? A white hole? Sorry, but no such thing exists. Antimatter might do it, but I doubt it. Once it gets to the point where it sucks in light too, the energy released from a matter-antimatter reaction would remain in the black hole.

Why would anyone want to destroy one anyways? They certianly arn't threating anyone with destruction.

As for harnessing the power, it could happen. In theory anyway. Just build a Dyson sphere around one that spins so that the rotation of space causes it to whip around at incredible velocitys, then build another one around it further out. Use the difference in rotational speeds to power the dynamo.

That would be a lot of effort though, and there aren't any known black holes in our neighborhood.

i must have used the wrong phrase in saying polarity.

i was thinking that you could counteract the magnetic forces of the black hole, after all that is all i think they are...

sorry, what would be the correct word other than polarity

Magnetic fields? Gravitational fields are what holds together a black hole.

And the nature of gravity is one of the biggest current questions in physics. Currently there is no known way to counteract gravity.

there for neither of us are wrong, on what grounds can we be wrong on something that may never exist..

check out my post on gene splicing please

Postive energy gravitates.
Negative energy antigravitates.

Thankfully no black holes are in our neighborhood to damage our lives. And as Sir Roger Penrose and his cosmic censorship hypothesis said: Let there be no naked singularities.

Fuck. That didn't pertain at all...

Everyone just go read How to Build a Time Machine by Paul Davies.

All we have to do is figure a way to de-implode the stars that created the black holes.. not hard.. just turn back time in a specific area. Sha!

The idea of creating an opposite black hole is a very good one. In principle it would work. If you got them to face each other like this < > then they might cancel each other out.

I also think that it would be possible to contain a black hole. However the enegry needed to do so would be far beyond our limits.

Couldn't you use magnetic fields to contain one?

Opposite black hole. That's funny.

How would you contain a black hole? Details appreciated.

And finaly, magnetic and gravitational fields are not interchangable.


Just from the evidence I would say you don't know squat about the subject.

The only way I can see an opposite black hole working is if it is placed within the black hole, not next to it. Perhaps having some sort of device surrounding the black hole spinning in the opposite direction of the black hole might work. You would need something that has the same density and mass of the black hole though so that the pull on the black hole and this device create a standstill.

I don't know. I really don't see a way to contain a black hole. If you could somehow figure out a way for a device to enter the event horizon without being pulled in and negate the black hole's effects from there (or even from outside the event horizon) you'd probably be exerting a lot of gravitational force, thereby making the effort useless (getting rid of one huge gravity well only to create another).

In theory anyways, it might just be possible to destroy a black hole. If there were a negative form of gravity (repels rather than attracts) and it could be harnessed, you could accelerate time in it's vacinity. Time decelerates in a gravity well, so time should accelerate in an antigravity well. By accelerating time near a black hole the rate of evaporation of subatomic particles would accelerate. So depending on the rate of accelerated time, the black hole would evaporate in a few billion to a trillion years.

But this is just theory with no practical application.

we can not prove or disprove anything said about the black holes...

There's a black hole close by at the center of the Milky Way. I'm sure we can fly a few probes out there to be sucked in and destroyed. Not that it would help, any lightwaves of data would never reach us. What we need is someone who can die and be reborn harnessing all memories of their former life.

We can prove or disprove certain things said about black holes based on the current understanding of them. Or at least we can assume things to be true or false. Like we know that wrapping a black hole in a metal sphere wouldn't work but we don't know about the effects of antigravity on a black hole.

The Dyson Sphere idea sounds like fun, and it's a good excuse to make one. Don't know about the structural integrity of something like that, though.

If gravity is caused by gravitons, then a super-dense mass of antigravitons would be a white hole, no? If the particle theory is true, that could be a possible solution.

I like this one though:

If the singularity acts as a wormhole, spitting out the energy/mass elsewhere (the other end would be a white hole, right?), the solution is simple. Determine how the "target" hole is created (gotta be some mathematical explanation for it), then make your own black hole. Put it head-to-tail with the other, forming the universe's largest circle-jerk. The thing is, though- if this worked and created a self-sustaining loop, that would create a perpetual energy source. Therefore, it must destroy the black holes...

I don't claim to understand your logic.

If gravitons attract each other, wouldn't anti-gravitons repel each other? It would be very difficult to contain them in a mass.

Then again, perhaps anti-gravitons attract each other, but repel regular gravitons.

Who even says there is such a thing.

I dunno. Pure speculation.

Fact is, even if gravitons exist, we don't know exactly how they act. If they acted on each other, then wouldn't the whole big bang be collapsing into a single black whole? Maybe they don't act upon each other, and maybe a collection of antigravitons would have strong repulsion without blasting itself apart.

Maybe I just made that post so that I could say "circle-jerk" in a scientific context.

Prometheus, would you like to provide me (or us) with an explanation of what a dyson sphere is? I looked online but the definition I found was a bit above my level of thinking of my tired mind. A simplified version would be good.

big spinny ball...

watch event horizon

Freeman Dyson got this wierd idea into his head that we could harness all the energy of the sun (or any other star), rather than the tiny percentage that earth normally absorbs. He figured that enough solar collectors could be arranged in a spherical fashion around the star to soak up all of the radiation, thus providing an extraordinary amount of usable energy. Sci-fi writers expanded the idea to create a solid sphere, having living space on the inside between the collectors. A sphere with the same radius as earth's orbit would have a surface area about 600 million times that of earth. No more overcrowding for awhile, huh? The third iteration called for an extremely thin membrane to be used for the sphere, supporting its shape by the solar radiation pressure or "wind".

Basically, the idea is to construct a matrix of solar collectors around a star to collect nearly all of its radiated energy.

All Galaxys have Black holes. No Black holes, then no Galaxys. They are the Engines of the Universe. They Might even be the original mass that created the Galaxy that surrounds them. Thats my Theory anyway.

How much of this surface area would be taken up by the solar collectors?

I haven't the slightest clue how much available surface area would be inside. I suppose it would depend on the efficiency of the collectors.

You probably wouldn't want to live on the surface. Unless artifical gravity is invented there would be no way to hold an atmosphere to the shell.