Question
Asked 13 October 2020
  • Advanced Ignition SL

Exists a small black hole in the center of the Earth?

If the Earth going through space would be close to a black hole, it would be gone to the center of it. Perhaps it is surrounded by low-density air
My questions are:
1. Could exist a black hole there without eating Earth surrounded perhaps by vacuum?
2. If it is possible that the black hole generates a lot of energy in the out border of the event horizon that could explain that the Earth heating is about twice the received sun power?
3. If it could explain the Earth magnetic field
4. It's mass
5. How to detect it
6. If it is true, perhaps earth temperature is higher than several million years before. It is known what was the Earth temperature then?
I make these questions because I am worried about the danger of generating a stable black hole in a scientific test. If one of them were created, it would go to the center of the Earth eating earth generating a thin tunnel.

Most recent answer

1) It is possible to orbit a black hole like any mass. A BH only "eats" when matter passes through its event horizon, so staying far enough away prevents this. The necessary speed of the orbit (distance r) about black hole (mass m) may be calculated through sqrt(G*m/r).
2) Earth heating is not from a black hole, it is from solar radiation and thermal energy stored beneath the surface. The latter is predominantly from radioactive decay, and to a lesser extent stored from Earth's origin I believe.
3) No. Magnetic fields are related to the motion of charged fluids. Though not fully understood, search "Earth's dynamo" for more information and the latest research, e.g:
4) Black hole masses may vary, and I believe evolve with time. For a black hole to form from a star, there is a minimum mass required which is known as the Chandrasekhar limit, approx 1.4 * mass of our Sun.
5) *N/A, there is no black hole in the Earth*
6) *N/A, there is no black hole in the Earth*
Note: I would not be worried about the generation of black holes on Earth. The masses/energies required are well beyond human capabilities, certainly in our lifetimes. Be worried about more immediate concerns, such as climate change or water scarcity!
1 Recommendation

All Answers (13)

Rishi Raj
St.Xavier's School
Respected sir,
I begin by answering your questions one by one. The answer to the first question is that if any object enters into the gravitational field of a black hole it will move in a specified trajectory getting nearer to the black hole every now and then.
Coming to your second question; the simple fact is that black holes release energy in very small quantity and if earth gets near the event horizon, earth will be burnt to ashes when it will hit the firewall present at the event horizon so there's no chance of black holes emitting heat twice as the sun does for us. I do not understand your third question so please pardon me. in the fourth question I assume that you are asking about the mass of the black hole. The mass of a black hole is calculated by the formula MBH/MSUN = (vsat/vearth)^2 (rsat/rearth); where MBH is mass of the black hole, MSUN is mass of the sun, vsat is the velocity of the satellite from which the black hole is being observed, vearth is velocity of earth and rsat and rearth is the radius of the satellite and the earth, respectively. It can be detected by the photon ring at the event horizon and there are indeed some other procedures but currently I am unable to recall them. I hope that yo last question is related to global warming on earth which has cause rise in earth's temperature. So after making this assumption I can say that before humans were able to practice farming and developed agricultural techniques earth had an optimum temperature of about 17 degree Celsius.
I would like to mention that if you are afraid of creating a small black hole in a scientific test then I don't think it will survive more than 1 second. But then also if you can approximate the mass of the black hole which you fear can be formed in the experiment then you can calculate many of its properties from this site: https://www.vttoth.com/CMS/physics-notes/311-hawking-radiation-calculator .
I hope that my answer has provided a solution to your question.
Yours Sincerely,
Rishi Raj
1 Recommendation
Javier Luis López
Advanced Ignition SL
Sorry, I said that the Earth surface emits double the energy received by the sun (I read that some time ago). I wrote about a black hole very very small with a mass much less than 1/1000 of the earth (if not it would be detected). As long as you said the black holes emit low energy levels the question is answered: it does not exist such a black hole. I will use the hawking calculator to see that.
1 Recommendation
Horst Stöcker has a patent for converting mass into energy with mini black holes. The idea is to collide normal matter, e.g. from the garbage bin, with a mini black hole. The Hawking radiation that comes out can be used as a heat source.
Mini black holes can be manipulated (fixed, accelerated) with electric fields, if charged.
Regards,
Joachim
2 Recommendations
Sergey Viktorovich Pushkin
North-Caucasus Federal University
I agree with dear Joachim Pimiskern
If we recall the TOKOMAK project, then a black hole can be artificially created. Skeptics see this end of the world.
2 Recommendations
Javier Luis López
Advanced Ignition SL
The Tokamak cant creates black holes because the pressure and energy density are too low. Perhaps the Collider has enough energy density.
There is another energy source: matter can compress and fuse generating a lot of energy before being included in the BH
Using the calculator the black hole diameter for a BH 1/10 earth it would be 1.77 m in radius, I think it is impossible to generate so much energy in so low diameter without evaporating all around it and eating it in microseconds.
1 Recommendation
Javier Luis López
Advanced Ignition SL
A black hole can increase the pressure over 1000 megabars that is needed for fusion, so a lot of heat would be created. It would be needed what is the distance of a black hole of 1/10 to 1/100 of earth mass to reach 1000 megabars and look if enough energy can be generated to heat Earth surface to 17º, accordingly Rishi Raj . Then the black hole not would eat everything as long as all space between the fuel and the BH would be fully ionized by so intense radiation, so it would reflect all the electromagnetic energy, and perhaps matter.
The only problem is that BH half-life is one second unless it is regenerated again and again, like a hearth.
Javier Luis López
Advanced Ignition SL
Sorry, could somebody explain why a Black Hole os 1/10 Earth mass (6e23kg) calculated using the calculator ( https://www.vttoth.com/CMS/physics-notes/311-hawking-radiation-calculator ) emits so low energy and is evaporated in a few seconds?. Accordingly that the energy at the BH is mc^2, which is large enough to destroy all the Sun planetary system if evaporated in 1.4 seconds, but Hawkins energy is 2.5e-76 watts only. Somebody must made a mistake
1 Recommendation
Rishi Raj
St.Xavier's School
@Javier Luis López, you nedd to find the Schwarzschild Radius of the earth in order to find aboit the nature of a black hole whose mass is equivalent to the mass of earth. It turns out that the Schwarzschild radius for a black hole with mass equal to that of earth is 8.87×10^−3 m and its hawking temperature is 0.0205415 K and its luminosity is 9.98369E-18 W and it evaporates quickly in 1.79237E58 seconds and this is the special property of black holes. The smaller the radius the faster it evaporates and if a black hole has its Schwarzschild radius equivalent to the radius of earth then its temperature is 2.86020E-11K and its lifetime is 2.10391E77 years. The problem with the calculator is that we need to adjust our units with respect to the data we enter there. If we are chosing solar mass then we need to take lifetime in the unit years.
I hope that this solves your doubt.
Javier Luis López
Advanced Ignition SL
So if the disintegration of a BH of 6e23kg generates 9.98e-18 watts during 1.8 seconds that is 17.96e-18 Joules, you should need 17.9e-18 joules to compress the earth in a BH of 8.87 millimeters....are you sure? Not use QM only, accordingly Newton, a simple m*g*h account gives different magnitudes order, but in the exponential part.
BH does not disintegrate and they are really dangerous so must be taken into account seriously
Rishi Raj
St.Xavier's School
The luminosity generated by the disintegrating BH of mass 6e23 kg is just 9.98*10^-18 watts and when we write it in decimal notation it turns out to be 0.00000000000000000998 watts which is very small. Similarly the energy is also very low and it is just 17.96 × 10^-18 joules. (equivalent to 0.00000000000000001796 joules in decimal notation.) And this is the case when the BH collapse when time is defined by tcollapse and there is burst of hawking radiation. The gravitational collapse of a body is only possible when, after the collapse, its time extend up to future infinity and space is compressed into a singularity. For a body like earth, we can find out the Schwarzschild Radius by using the formula R=2GM/c2 and this can say gives us the measure of the event horizon of the BH (as when this radius is equal to 0 then we say it is a singularity and the above conditions are satisfied). This is a much more geometric picture and says that collapse of a body to a BH is only possible when it continues to shrink under its own gravity unless its time is extended to future infinity and space is bent to a singularity. That's the reason why we need to make the earth smaller in size to make it a BH and not to apply an energy of 17.96 × 10^-18 to make it a BH.
Now coming upon the disintegration in black holes. As far as I know and as I had mentioned in my earlier answer also that "smaller the black hole, the high is its radiation". This is why a BH of size 8.87 mm will radiate quickly and the information stored at its singularity is probably lost. (I don't know so far that anyone has provided a complete answer to the Information Loss Paradox in Black Holes) That's why disintegration is possible for the black hole but not for its singularity. This causes loss of information, as an observer can no longer see the event horizon of the BH after the evaporation of the particular black hole. Also it is to be noted that the BH's singularity has infinite curvature and gravity and cannot go to collapse further.
1 Recommendation
No singularity, No Big Bang, No Black Hole, No wormhole, No time traveling, No mechanical Gravity, No trampoline factor, No empty space, No mechanical energy, and No mechanics atom. All these are result of some "scientists " idea that they did not know anything about universe.
Our universe is a complete well organized , and the accurate entity that is working much precise than swiss watch.
Deleted research item The research item mentioned here has been deleted
regards
Javier Luis López
Advanced Ignition SL
Javad Fardaei, there are a lot of stars around the center of our galaxy, where a giant mass attracts them to make work that Swiss watch.
1 Recommendation
1) It is possible to orbit a black hole like any mass. A BH only "eats" when matter passes through its event horizon, so staying far enough away prevents this. The necessary speed of the orbit (distance r) about black hole (mass m) may be calculated through sqrt(G*m/r).
2) Earth heating is not from a black hole, it is from solar radiation and thermal energy stored beneath the surface. The latter is predominantly from radioactive decay, and to a lesser extent stored from Earth's origin I believe.
3) No. Magnetic fields are related to the motion of charged fluids. Though not fully understood, search "Earth's dynamo" for more information and the latest research, e.g:
4) Black hole masses may vary, and I believe evolve with time. For a black hole to form from a star, there is a minimum mass required which is known as the Chandrasekhar limit, approx 1.4 * mass of our Sun.
5) *N/A, there is no black hole in the Earth*
6) *N/A, there is no black hole in the Earth*
Note: I would not be worried about the generation of black holes on Earth. The masses/energies required are well beyond human capabilities, certainly in our lifetimes. Be worried about more immediate concerns, such as climate change or water scarcity!
1 Recommendation

Similar questions and discussions

Neural Life, the Simulated Universe, and Everything
Discussion
Be the first to reply
  • Rodney BartlettRodney Bartlett
General relativity says a light ray sent from a star and passing by the Sun is deflected 1.75 arcseconds from its original path by the Sun’s gravity. Also, Isaac Newton knew of gravitation’s effect on light more than 300 years ago. Like the “lock and key” mechanism in biological organisms of molecules engaging with cells’ receptors, gravity may deflect light because the latter’s photons are a key fitting into the former’s graviton-locks. This makes sense if trillions of Mobius strips make up a photon, and trillions of figure-8 Klein bottles make a graviton. Photons and gravitons fit together because Mobius strips and figure-8 Klein bottles fit together – the second topological shape can be called a Mobius Doublet since it’s a joining of two strips.
A backup to this topological concept is the Yale University experiment which was published in the journal “Nature Photonics”
(Mo Li, W. H. P. Pernice & H. X. Tang, “Tunable bipolar optical interactions between guided lightwaves”, Nature Photonics 3, 464 - 468 [2009]).
This experiment demonstrated that, on nano-scales, light can attract and repel* itself like electric charges or magnets. This is the Optical Bonding Force. One proposed explanation for the flyby anomaly is that it’s a topological effect. Continuing with this line of thought, my outline proposes a mathematical universe – this is based on the work of well-known scientists such as John Wheeler, Max Tegmark, Erik Verlinde, Ed Fredkin, Rafael Sorkin, and Melvin Vopson. ** A universe that is mathematical in its foundation is required since the gravitational-electromagnetic unification spoken of in connection with the Yale experiment is proposed to function topologically (using the Mobius strip and figure-8 Klein bottle). In attraction, a pair of Mobius strips can fit together and form a Klein bottle). Trillions of bottles form a graviton, the quantum of gravity (when a graviton dissociates or separates into Mobius strips, the building blocks of photons that travel along divergent paths, light repels itself).
* George Yuri Rainich wrote
This states that Albert Einstein's equations say gravitational fields carry enough information about electromagnetism to allow James Clerk Maxwell's equations to be restated in terms of these gravitational fields. The Yale experiment shows electromagnetism’s light waves can attract and repel on nano-scales, so it’s very likely gravitational waves also attract and repel. Attraction between the gravitational component of a spacecraft and an astronomical body results in increased velocity of the spacecraft. The Yale-University paragraph shows that repulsion is also possible, causing slowed speed – attraction and repulsion could even cancel, producing a flyby speed that agrees with prediction.
** The term Holographic Principle is used most often in physics in relation to the way the information contained in black holes can be directly related to a two-dimensional (2D) surface that surrounds the outside perimeter of the black hole. This has no direct connection with the universe being a computer simulation. This article says the 2D surface doesn’t only surround the black hole but is the Mobius strip which composes everything in the universe according to the following details - the real+imaginary numbers of Wick rotation represent the 4th dimension of time and are built into the 2D Mobius strips which are constructed from the 1D binary digits of 1 and 0 (the digits are identified as Hidden Variables compatible with quantum entanglement). Two strips join to create a figure-8 Klein bottle and trillions of strips and bottles respectively form the photon/graviton (the Klein bottles are immersed in the 3rd dimension). This refers back to a paper published by the great physicist Albert Einstein which asks if gravitation plays a role in formation of elementary particles of matter.
(A. Einstein [1919]: “Spielen Gravitationfelder im Aufbau der Elementarteilchen eine Wesentliche Rolle?” [Do gravitational fields play an essential role in the structure of elementary particles?] Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, [Math. Phys.], 349-356, Berlin)
His paper doesn’t only include gravitation’s quantum units of gravitons. It speaks of electromagnetism’s photons as involved in particle creation, too. The Mobius strips help form the entire cosmos and they result from electronics’ BITS (BInary digiTS) of 1 and 0 which draw, program, or encode them. Consequently, the universe would be a simulation.
Yesterday (when all my troubles seemed so far away), I wrote about a backup to my topological concepts in the form of the Yale University experiment which was published in the journal “Nature Photonics”
(Mo Li, W. H. P. Pernice & H. X. Tang, “Tunable bipolar optical interactions between guided lightwaves”, Nature Photonics 3, 464 - 468 [2009]).
Today, I'll use published writings of Albert Einstein that say experimentation (even meticulously designed and exhaustively interpreted experiments), while extremely valuable, does have limits and should not be regarded as infallible -
According to Special Relativity, experiments are overrated by modern science since the truths revealed by experimentation are necessarily restricted to one frame of reference. Regarding the question of length contraction in Special Relativity - Einstein wrote in 1911 that "It doesn't 'really' exist, in so far as it doesn't exist for a co-moving observer; though it 'really' exists, i.e. in such a way that it could be demonstrated in principle by physical means by a non-comoving observer." (Einstein [1911]. "Zum Ehrenfestschen Paradoxon. Eine Bemerkung zu V. Variĉaks Aufsatz". Physikalische Zeitschrift 12: 509–510)
Demonstration "in principle by physical means by a non-comoving observer" is the same meaning as "demonstration by experiments performed by scientists not moving at the speed of light".
Now relate the previous paragraph to this quote - “While an observer stationary with respect to an electric charge will see it as a source of electric field only, a second observer moving relative to the first will see the same charge as a source of both electric and magnetic fields in a way dictated by special relativity.”
(Penguin Encyclopedia 2006 - edited by David Crystal - 3rd edition, 2006 - ‘electromagnetism’, p. 443)
So, if a co-moving frame of reference is adopted, we’d need to revise James Clerk Maxwell’s propagation of electromagnetism by oscillating electric and magnetic fields. * In addition to electric-magnetic duality not existing, the unification of all things in space and time (perhaps via quantum gravity) means wave-particle duality would not exist in all frames of reference. It would only exist for a non-comoving observer: it could be demonstrated “… by experiments performed by scientists not moving at the speed of light". If looked at from the frame of reference of an observer co-moving with the universe (in tune with it), the weirdness of wave-particle duality vanishes and quantum mechanics becomes as understandable as the macroscopic world (gravitational and electromagnetic waves interact to produce a momentum and pressure which can be interpreted as a particle - see Einstein's 1919 paper in my previous comment).
* According to this comment, saying light travels is merely convenience, like saying the sun rises and sets when we know Earth is rotating. If we shift our understanding of the universe from one based on experiment to one in which observers and objective reality are united/entangled (one in which we’re in harmony with the universe and therefore co-moving with it), electric-magnetic duality would no longer be perceived. It would then be better to say,
“particles (photons) of light and microwaves etc., that ‘travel’ through space-time would have relatively little movement themselves. It’s the disturbances from the sources of electromagnetism (ripples in space-time called gravitational waves) that travel. As a result of the gravitational-electromagnetic unity discussed regarding formation of mass and the Yale experiment, a gravitational wave can't travel light years but only the quantum-scale distances between photons and gravitons. As disturbances travel/reflect/refract/are absorbed etc, they excite the pre-existing photons and gravitons that fill space-time and matter and mass. These particles then re-transmit the vibrations or disturbances they received, similar to the way an electric impulse travels from one nerve cell to the next. Neurons' electric impulses use chemicals called neurotransmitters - spacetime's gravitational and electromagnetic waves use BITS (the binary digits of 1 and 0) which act as transistors to boost the waves' strength and prevent power loss as the light years are crossed. This agrees with John A. Wheeler's geon - an electromagnetic or gravitational wave which is held together in a confined region by the gravitational attraction of its own field energy. Maxwell's electric and magnetic oscillations would, at least in a comoving frame, "be heId together in a confined (subatomic) region". If there is little movement of photons and gravitons, the universe could not be expanding (or contracting) but its space and time is static. The Big Bang has impressive points … leading to the idea that it’s a necessary stepping-stone. For example, the Big Bang’s supposed origin from quantum fluctuations is reminiscent of bits switching between 1 and 0.”
【NO.16】How the View of Space-Time is Unified (2)-Where Does the "Length Contraction and Time Dilation" of SR occur?
Discussion
8 replies
  • Chian FanChian Fan
Two electrons, A at rest and B moving at high speed. According to the theory of relativity, there is a "Length Contraction and Time Dilation" effect in the space-time of the electron moving at high speed, but not in the electron at rest. Now if electron B is moving with velocity v, towards stationary electron A, at the moment of their collision:
(1) assuming that they are both point particles*, what is the measure of spacetime at the moment of their collision, where exactly is the measure? and is the spacetime of A and B the same spacetime?
(2) Assuming that they are structured particles‡, how is spacetime measured at an interface at the instant before their "collision"?
(3) Is the "Length Contraction and Time Dilation" effect¶ of SR absolute or relative ? Note that no matter how you set up the inertial systems, the spacetime of all inertial systems is a common spacetime that overlaps, and the difference is only in the relative coordinate values.
(4) What causes the "Length Contraction and Time Dilation" effect? Is it the "motion" itself, or is it the increase in "energy-momentum" caused by the motion? If the cause is energy-momentum, then it is consistent with GR?
A realistic example is the "gold-gold (Au + Au) collisions" at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) by the Solenoidal Tracker at RHIC (STAR ) Collaboration[1][2]. Two gold (Au) ions move in opposite direction at 99.995% of the speed of light. As the ions pass one another without colliding, two photons (?) from the electromagnetic cloud surrounding the ions can interact with each other to create a matter-antimatter pair: an electron (e-) and positron (e+). When two Au particles pass one another, approaching two times the speed of light, how is space-time measured here? And whose spacetime measure is it? This example gives the answer to the relationship between the speed of light and the platform of the light source, how the speed of light is interfaced with the speed of the Au. Light does not change its speed when Au keeps changing its speed, so what determines the difference in speed in between? It must be their spacetime measure. That is, we always have: Δx/Δt = c, assuming that Δx and Δt express spatial and temporal measures, respectively.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
* During Einstein's original proof [3], objects were considered as point particles, or independent of the structure of the object.
¶ The "Length Contraction and Time Dilation" effect in SR is not shown where exactly it manifests itself.
‡ Regardless of the structure, the electric field of the electron is radially dynamically diffuse and it is part of the electron.
-----------------------------------------------------------
References:
[2] Adam, J., L. Adamczyk and etl. (2021). "Measurement of e+ e− momentum and angular distributions from linearly polarized photon collisions." Physical Review Letters 127(5): 052302.
[3] Einstein, A. (1905). "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies." Annalen der physik 17(10): 891-921.

Related Publications

Article
Full-text available
We propose a model with the left-handed and right-handed continuous Abelian gauge symmetry; $U(1)_L\times U(1)_R$. Then three right-handed neutrinos are naturally required to achieve $U(1)_R$ anomaly cancellations, while several mirror fermions are also needed to do $U(1)_L$ anomaly cancellations. Then we formulate the model, and discuss its testab...
Preprint
We rely on Monte Carlo (MC) simulations to interpret searches for new physics at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and elsewhere. These simulations result in noisy and approximate estimators of selection efficiencies and likelihoods. In this context we pioneer an exact-approximate computational method - exact-approximate Markov Chain Monte Carlo - th...
Article
Over the next decade hadron colliders will play an important role in the investigation of fundamental questions of particle physics. The high collision energy of the Fermilab Tevatron pbar p collider and the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC) will allow to probe physics in a new energy domain. In addition, important precision measurements in the area...
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.