Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Holes: nuclear, electric, magnetic, gravitational (black).


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
23 replies to this topic

#1 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 6 August 2009 - 11:44 AM

Black holes are objects, whose gravity field energy, outside of Schwarzschild radius, is equal to the rest energy, mc^2, - the energy of mass m, concentrated on the Schwarzschild sphere.
Magnetic holes are objects, whose magnetic field energy, outside of critical magnetic radius is equal to the rest energy, mc^2, the energy of mass m, concentrated inside the critical magnetic radius.
Magnetic holes were invented by alternative-physicists, as a result, this theory will not be accepted by orthodox-physicists, as a result, microscopic magnetic holes will be created soon (may be in November 2009)… Fasten your belts…

What is electric hole? ...Classical radius... Do not grow - do not dangerous...
Nuclear hole... no... semi-hole... They grow only till the equality between repulsive and attractive forces.

http://darkenergy.na...ru/magtren.html In English.
http://darkenergy.na...ru/magtrru.html In Russian.

#2 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 6 August 2009 - 02:30 PM

I have developed the idea of magnetic hole. It can be created at the Large Hadron Collider, and as a result, it can destroy the Earth.
I had written the letter to CERN and received the following answer:

--------------------------------

Dear Sender,


our service can not evaluate your theory. Any theory should be supported by calculations and should be submitted to the usual peer-reviewing process (see for example: http://www.iop.org/E...extra/-coll=rev. )
Moreover, for a theory to prove true, one needs to produce an experimental proof. This is the basic rule that distinguish science and science fiction/speculation.


Best wishes,

****************************************
CERN Ask an Expert Service...
---------------------------

The part of upper text was painted in solid by me.

I wrote the letters to President and to the Prosecutor’s Office of my country and received the responses that my letters were resend to the Russian Academy of Sciences. I think that my letters were thrown out into rubbish there.
Academic science does hate independent researches. That is why the idea of magnetic hole will never be accepted by official science, LHC will be switched on, probably in November 2009. As a result, the magnetic hole will be created. Don't think that it is the same as the gravity black hole! The magnetic hole is much more real and by 10^40 times stronger then black hole.

-------------------

From the other hand I think that CERN physicists are also afraid to switch on the collider, and they will try to make another trick in order to damage the collider again. But that is another crime. That is destruction of your common European property. They will again ask for your money in order to repair that machine of global dearth.

Dear citizens, rules in science are against us. Can we change them?

http://darkenergy.na...ru/magtren.html

#3 ydoaPs

ydoaPs

    The Oncoming Storm

  • Moderators
  • 10,506 posts
  • LocationLocal Group

Posted 6 August 2009 - 02:41 PM

I have developed the idea of magnetic hole. It can be created at the Large Hadron Collider, and as a result, it can destroy the Earth.
I had written the letter to CERN and received the following answer:

--------------------------------

Dear Sender,


our service can not evaluate your theory. Any theory should be supported by calculations and should be submitted to the usual peer-reviewing process (see for example: http://www.iop.org/E...extra/-coll=rev. )
Moreover, for a theory to prove true, one needs to produce an experimental proof. This is the basic rule that distinguish science and science fiction/speculation.


Best wishes,

****************************************
CERN Ask an Expert Service...
---------------------------

The part of upper text was painted in solid by me.

I wrote the letters to President and to the Prosecutor’s Office of my country and received the responses that my letters were resend to the Russian Academy of Sciences. I think that my letters were thrown out into rubbish there.
Academic science does hate independent researches. That is why the idea of magnetic hole will never be accepted by official science, LHC will be switched on, probably in November 2009. As a result, the magnetic hole will be created. Don't think that it is the same as the gravity black hole! The magnetic hole is much more real and by 10^40 times stronger then black hole.

-------------------

From the other hand I think that CERN physicists are also afraid to switch on the collider, and they will try to make another trick in order to damage the collider again. But that is another crime. That is destruction of your common European property. They will again ask for your money in order to repair that machine of global dearth.

Dear citizens, rules in science are against us. Can we change them?

http://darkenergy.na...ru/magtren.html

So, what is this magnetic hole theory? Can you briefly explain it?

Some possible experiments to test this theory would be nice as well.
  • 0
"Our integrity sells for so little, but it is all we really have. It is the very last inch of us. But within that inch we are free."-Valerie(V for Vendetta)

"For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love and whiskey."-Carl Sagan[revised]
 
"The universe is under no obligation to us not to be absurd."

#4 Xittenn

Xittenn

    Atom

  • Senior Members
  • 1,560 posts
  • LocationDelta, BC; Canada

Posted 6 August 2009 - 02:57 PM

http://www.amazon.ca...d/dp/0380790521

Not bad book..................something similar in nature? This one is more of a worm hole caused by the creation of a small high density mass aka. black hole!
  • 0
"He is their god! He leads them like a thing made by some other deity than Nature that shapes man better. And they follow him against us brats with no less confidence than boys pursuing summer butterflies, or butchers killing flies." - Cominius; Shakespears Coriolanus

#5 Klaynos

Klaynos

    Insert Witty Comment

  • Moderators
  • 8,399 posts

Posted 6 August 2009 - 03:11 PM

Going to merge.
  • 0
Klaynos - share and enjoy.

#6 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 6 August 2009 - 04:57 PM

So, what is this magnetic hole theory? Can you briefly explain it?


There was my link http://darkenergy.na...ru/magtren.html
You can find there brief explanation of magnetic hole.

You can read also such my pages:
Reproduction of biospheres and civilizations. http://darkenergy.na...ru/civilen.html
Arguments proving that ... http://darkenergy.narod.ru/argen.html and so on.



Some possible experiments to test this theory would be nice as well.


You will fear it soon, after the launch of LHC.

Some other experiments (observations) you can learn from astronomy. Jets, axial symmetry, huge magnetic fields, magnetars…

#7 swansont

swansont

    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)

  • Moderators
  • 36,711 posts
  • LocationWashington DC region

Posted 6 August 2009 - 06:05 PM

Why, pray tell, would you add field energy together when you "imbed" neutrons? The field of a nucleus depends on the orbital angular momentum and spin — these are vectors; e.g. if you add two particles of opposite spin, you get zero. Helium-4, for example, has a zero nuclear magnetic moment. No field, no energy.

You can't make the rest mass disappear in the way you suggest.
  • 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum          To go to the fortress of ultimate darkness, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill.             Forget it, Jake — it's Crackpottown.

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea                                                           

 

 

                                                                                                                     

 

 


#8 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 7 August 2009 - 06:27 AM

... you add field energy together when you "imbed" neutrons?..


Neutron, captured by magnetic hole, rejects antineutrino.
Proton, captured by magnetic hole, rejects positron.
In any of this case the spin of magnetic hole becomes whole unity bigger.

The process of neutron’s “imbedding” was conventional and was used in order to compute the minimal possible mass of magnetic hole. Other methods give approximately the same result: about 300 a.u.m., or in the energy units – 0.3 TeV.

At Tevatron Collider the energy is bigger, but there we have proton-antiproton annihilation.
At collisions of cosmic proton with atmospheric proton we observe bigger energies, but the resulting holes have TeV-energies relatively atmosphere, as a result, they evaporate, immediately after the next collisions, making the observable particle showers.


You can't make the rest mass disappear in the way you suggest.


It do not disappear, - it goes into the construction of hole’s funnel.
The process of transformation of mc^2 into pB will be proved on collider. We will not be able to stop the collapse.

Try to explain to yourself: where does the mass of the matter, captured by black hole, go? How much time is needed, in order to capture a particle? Infinity? Contradiction?

But we really, do, observe explosions of stars in the sky.
That is not the nuclear explosion, because at the time of nuclear explosion only a small fraction of percent of mc^2 of reacting matter transforms into another form of matter.

My approximate computation shows that magnetic collapse leads to 2/3 of mc^2 transformation. This coincides with the astronomical observations.

#9 swansont

swansont

    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)

  • Moderators
  • 36,711 posts
  • LocationWashington DC region

Posted 7 August 2009 - 10:23 AM

Neutron, captured by magnetic hole, rejects antineutrino.
Proton, captured by magnetic hole, rejects positron.
In any of this case the spin of magnetic hole becomes whole unity bigger.


Any evidence that this reaction actually occurs? Given that this description violates conservation of lepton number.

Why would you assume this: We supposed that the electric current was created by the movement of the elementary charge along the circular orbit of radius R with the speed of light.?

And further, that adding two fields would not follow superposition of the field, but rather that this fictitious current would double?

The energy of dineutron’s magnetic field will increase by 4 times because of a the square over I^2

There is no justification for this at all.
  • 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum          To go to the fortress of ultimate darkness, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill.             Forget it, Jake — it's Crackpottown.

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea                                                           

 

 

                                                                                                                     

 

 


#10 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 7 August 2009 - 01:27 PM

Any evidence that this reaction actually occurs? Given that this description violates conservation of lepton number..


One of “great persons” cited on the page "The safety of the LHC", academician Rubakov is also the coauthor of the hypothesis “magnetic monopole catalysis of proton decay”.

In his article one can find the formula: p + M -- > e+ + M.
I would change his idea thus: “magnetic dipole catalysis of nucleon collapse on dipole”; and would rewrite his reaction in the form:

p + NS -- > e+ + NS.
p + NS -- > e+ + NS.
2p + NS -- > 2e+ + NS.
10p + 10n + NS -- > 10e+ + 10ν~ + NS.
100p + 100n + NS -- > 100e+ + 100ν~ + NS.
10000p + 10000n + NS -- > 10000e+ + 10000ν~ + NS.

p -proton; M - magnetic monopole; NS - magnetic dipole (hole); e+ - positron; ν~ -antineutrino.

…Why would you assume this: We supposed that the electric current was created by the movement of the elementary charge along the circular orbit of radius R with the speed of light.?..


I think that it was quite correct assumption; - I went from the flux of real current curl in the vacuum circle, embraced by circumference, to movement of imaginative charges along that circumference. Circulation of “1” around circumference is equal to flux of rot(“2”) through the surface... That was needed to make computation.


…And further, that adding two fields would not follow superposition of the field, but rather that this fictitious current would double?

The energy of dineutron’s magnetic field will increase by 4 times because of a the square over I^2

There is no justification for this at all.


No, try yourself to follow the formulas, try other methods...

The results, based on my another approaches, give the almost same value of the minimal possible magnetic hole.

Besides, other authors say that the mass of Higgs boson is about 0.3 TeV (or about 300 a.u.m.).
This is not another proof, but led me to think…

Besides, the island of stability of transuranium elements is also thought to be about of 300 a.u.m.
I would rename “the island o stability” into “the precipice for brainless humankind”…

#11 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 4 September 2009 - 09:02 AM

From correspondence in another forum:

Also, if you put a north-monopole and a south-monopole together, I'm pretty sure they'd just annihilate each other.


If I put a positron with spin 1/2 and an electron with spin 1/2 together, they annihilate making a photon with spin 1. (You can change the upper signs simultaneously.)
If I put a positron with spin 1/2 and an electron with spin -1/2 together, they annihilate making a new electron-positron pair. Imagine these movements along the semi circumferences. Two semi circumferences compose one circumference. If you look at that circumference from up side you can see the North pole; if you..

These electron-positron pair can be imagined as boson (Higgs boson ?) with zero spin but with non-zero magnetic moment.

Bosons are collectivists and magnetic hole can grow, capturing the ordinary matter and transforming it into its proper magnetic field.

Black hole must spend much more time than million years in order to capture the whole Earth, consequently, they are safe (if we will not pay attention at Otto Rössler’s hypothesis).
It is possible, that is why the CERN specialists do not fear the mBHs.
But magnetic hole must spend only about a thousand of seconds in order to capture the whole Earth. Because of the creating of the plasma bubble around the MH, the needed time can be greater by several days or years. CERN do not know about MHs.

#12 swansont

swansont

    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)

  • Moderators
  • 36,711 posts
  • LocationWashington DC region

Posted 4 September 2009 - 10:02 AM

From correspondence in another forum:



If I put a positron with spin 1/2 and an electron with spin 1/2 together, they annihilate making a photon with spin 1. (You can change the upper signs simultaneously.)
If I put a positron with spin 1/2 and an electron with spin -1/2 together, they annihilate making a new electron-positron pair.


The annihilation never gives one photon, because that violates conservation of momentum. If you have the singlet state (antiparallel spins), you get two photons. The triplet state (parallel spins) gives you three photons.
  • 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum          To go to the fortress of ultimate darkness, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill.             Forget it, Jake — it's Crackpottown.

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea                                                           

 

 

                                                                                                                     

 

 


#13 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 4 September 2009 - 02:42 PM

The annihilation never gives one photon, because that violates conservation of momentum. If you have the singlet state (antiparallel spins), you get two photons. The triplet state (parallel spins) gives you three photons.


Thank you. The second your sentence I would write thus: Under sufficient energy of two colliding particles in the singlet state (antiparallel spins), we get two photons with opposite spin and one magnetic hole with zero spin (Higgs boson?).
---
From the correspondence in another forum:

Could you please try to enlighten me on the matter of magnetic holes? Or are you trying to be unbelievable smart, simply. Just asking. Was it something like a skip zone, where you'll have no radio reception?


Hi!

OK. But first, could you please try to enlighten me on the matter of nucleon: proton and neutron?
The matter of magnetic holes is just analogues to the matter of proton but without the elementary positive charge and as a result it is not a fermion, but boson.
The matter of magnetic holes is just analogues to the matter of neutron but without the antineutrino.

Boson is a quantum of force field. Bosons try to have the same quantum level.

Proton and neutron are fermions and, as a result, they have different quantum numbers in the nuclei.

Bosons in magnetic hole have the same quantum numbers.

Proper magnetic moment of the proton (neutron) is its resistive characteristic to decay.
When the value pB becomes equal to mc^2, proton (neutron) decays, ejecting positron (antineutrino), where: p - proper magnetic moment of proton (neutron), B - magnetic strength, created by flying by proton, or of already created magnetic hole. Minimal possible magnetic hole must have strength B=10^{16}Tl in the circumference of proton’s Compton wavelength. The “average integral” value B=10^{16}Tl is also can be created by two flying by protons with the energy 0.3 TeV in the system of collider.

In order to grow, the created magnetic hole must have small velocity relatively the matter of Earth. That is possible in head-on collisions of protons in collider. If it has TeV-velocities, as we observe in the case of collisions of cosmic particles with atmospheric particles, the hole evaporates, making the showers of particles.

The smallest possible mass of magnetic hole, able to lead the proton to decay, is about 0.3 TeV in energy units. The Tevatron collider had already overcome this boundary and did not make any magnetic hole. But we know that at Tevatron we have proton-antiproton collisions, leading to annihilation. At LHC we’ll have the proton-proton collisions.

#14 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 12 September 2009 - 05:43 AM

Magnetic trap of Devil. Calculation.
The first approach. Nucleon Embedding.
Introductive amendment.


The creation of a magnetic hole is similar to composing of nuclei from nucleons.
Posted Image
Let the mass of nucleon consists from two parts: the field mass of nucleon and the condensed mass of nucleon. Look at the fig. a: the field mass is depicted by the brown dots; the condensed mass - by blue circle. The field mass corresponds to the field of p-mesons, or to gluon field in more fresh interpretation. The condensed mass corresponds to the mass of naked nucleon or to the total mass of quarks in the nucleon.
The sum of masses of two free nucleons (proton and neutron) is bigger than the mass of deuteron, made from proton and neutron. The difference between the initial and final states corresponds to the binding energy of the created nuclei, deuteron. If we neglect the kinetic energies of particles in the initial and final states, then we can say, that the binding energy of nuclei is equal to the energy of emitted photons. In order to restore the equality of masses between initial and final states, we can put the interacting particles into a box with mirror walls. Thus we can add the mass of emitted radiation into the side of equation, corresponding to the final state.
At the process of further connecting of nucleons, we'll see, that the specific condensed mass of the resulting nuclei will be diminishing, and the field mass will be growing. The box will also be filled by more photons. Look at the fig. b and c, where blue circles becomes smaller, but the density of brown dots becomes bigger.
If there were only the nuclear forces inside the nuclei, then the moment will come, when the condensed mass would achieve the zero value. That is showed at the fig. d, where the radiuses of blue circles are already zero. But in the nuclei there are also the repulsive electric forces. These forces give no possibility to create the infinitely big nuclei. These forces are responsible for the iron peak in the periodical system of elements and for the existence of the final stabile element in periodical system. If there were no electric repulsive forces, then all nucleons would drop into the growing "nuclear hole", which would have no the limit of growth.
The growth of magnetic hole is similar to the growth of "nuclear hole". But here the proton, capturing by the hole, emits a positron; the neutron, dropping into the hole, emits an antineutrino.
Proton and neutron can be imagined as current pretzels with three poles:

u, u, d in proton Posted Image

and d, d, u in neutron Posted Image.

If the nucleon enters into a magnetic field, its current pretzel is undergo to the straightening forces. The more field - the more straightening forces - the more field mass - the less condensed mass. At last, when the field riches the critical value (10^16 Tl), the nucleon undergo decay - its current pretzel with three mixed poles transforms into a vacuum current vortex, which is shown on the following figure in the form of a ring with two magnetic poles N and S.
The "memory about the proton's knot" is brought out by positron.
Posted Image

The "memory about the neutron's knot" is brought out by antineutrino.
Posted Image
In the above process the couple of photons are also emitted.
It is possible to compare the growth of the "nuclear hole" with the growth of the gravitational black hole.

Posted Image
The blue circles are masses, dropping to the event horizon, or moving around it on circumferences. If they are dropping, then their radiuses becomes less, and the density of brown dots will grow in the center of our figure. In this case the density of brown dots corresponds to the "power and depth" of a gravity funnel of eternally forming black hole. It is known that there are no completely formed black holes in the Universe. From the point of view of external observer, the object drops into the black hole infinitely long. So, it is possible to say that the mass of eternally forming black hole consists of two parts: the constantly diminishing mass of dropping objects (condensed mass, blue circles) and the mass of a black hole's funnel, or mass of BH's gravity field (field mass, brown dots). It is clear that at the time of a gravity collapse there will be the emission of photons, but I can not say now the fraction of it.
In the case of magnetic hole there are two eternally growing funnels, corresponding to N and S poles. The bottom calculation shows that at the time of magnetic collapse, the one thirds of rest energy of the captured matter goes into the growth of magnetic hole, and two thirds of captured energy are spent on radiation and on kinetic energy of emitted shell.

Calculation.

To define the minimum mass of a magnetic hole precisely is not possible, because we do not know the magnetic moment of a particle, which will remain after the capture of the nucleon by magnetic hole.

Below I will talk about "imbedding".
Imbedding of nucleon into another nucleon, should not be taken literally. This is an approximate calculation. Magnetic hole is not composed of nucleons. It captures a neutron, and emits an antineutrino. It captures a proton, and emits a positron. In both these cases it can spend its energy on the kinetic energy of these ejected leptons and on radiation of photons. Magnetic hole consists of bosons, quanta of magnetic field. The magnetic moment of this boson is of course different from the magnetic moment of nucleon. Therefore, our numerical result is an approximation.
Nucleon has a magnetic field. Consequently we can divide the energy of nucleon per two parts: the magnetic field energy and the energy connected with the restlet of nucleon, - condensed energy. The condensed energy is connected with its condensed-mass m_R. The total condensed-mass of several connected particles depends from their quantity. Compare: the rest-mass of nucleus is also depend from the quantity of its nucleons, and this dependence in not linear.
At some critical number of captured nucleons, the hole's condensed-mass can be turned to be zero. In this case all its energy is concentrated in its magnetic field. That will be the minimal possible magnetic hole. It can be created at once, in the collision of two particle, but here we create it stage by stage, successively imbedding nucleons into it.
Let's neglect the rest mass of emitted positrons and neutrinos.
Let's imagine the nucleon as a ring contour with an electrical current, creating the magnetic dipole moment, equal to experimental value of a nucleon's dipole magnetic moment, p.
The energy of a ring contour is E = pB.
It is concentrated in a magnetic field
B = \frac{\mu_0I}{2R}.
Magnetic dipole moment is
p = IS.
After a simple transformation we can write the energy of magnetic field
E = \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2}.
We supposed that the electric current was created by the movement of the elementary charge along the circular orbit of radius R with the speed of light. (The radius R is by p/p_n times greater then the Compton radius of nucleon. Here p_n is the nuclear magneton.)
Let's take a single nucleon. Its rest mass consists of two parts, m_{mag.field} - the mass of magnetic field and of the condensed mass of nucleon m_R:
m = m_{mag.field} + m_R.
The energy of a nucleon is also consists of two parts:
mc^2 = \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2} + m_Rc^2.

Let's "imbed" two nucleons, one in one.
Neglect polarization and related changes in the dipole moment.
The energy of dinucleon's magnetic field will increase by 4 times because of a the square over I^2. In the right side of the equation, we must add the energy of emitted photon, which is equal to pB=\frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2}. It's origin: acceleration of one nucleon's magnet by another nucleon's magnet; growth of kinetic energy and the loss of condensed mass; transition of kinetic energy into the energy of the emitted radiation in the moment of nucleons collision.
2mc^2 = 2^2 \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2} + m_Rc^2 + \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2}.

Let's "imbed" the third nucleon. The energy of the thee-nucleon’s magnetic field will increase by 9 times. In the right side of the equation, we must add the energy of emitted photon, which is equal to p\cdot 2B. The energy of this photon is two times bigger than the energy of the first photon.
3mc^2 = 3^2 \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2} + m_Rc^2 + \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2} + 2 \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2}.
Let's "imbed" the N-th nucleon. The energy of magnetic field of N-nucleon will increase by N^2 times. In the right side of the equation, we must add the energy of emitted photon, which is equal to p (N-1) B. The resulting condensed mass, m_R, becomes equal to zero.
Nmc^2 = N^2 \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2} + \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2} + 2 \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2} + ... + (N-1) \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2}.
mc^2 / \frac{\mu_0pRI^2}{2} = (N^2 + 1 + 2 + 3 + ... + (N-1)) / N.

Further absorption of nucleons can not lead to an increase in the magnetic field, because the total condensed mass will be negative. Consequently, we had received the value of critical magnetic field. The further capture of nucleons by magnetic hole leads to the growth of the radius of a magnetic hole.

The right side in the last formula for large N is equal to \frac{3}{2}N. Therefore, we can write
N = \frac{2}{3}mc^2 / pB;
B_{max} = NB.
2/3 of nucleon’s energy goes to the growth of the hole.
1/3 goes to radiation.
The last corresponds to the binding energy of the magnetic hole.
If we use the received formula for protons, we'll receive the total energy E, needed to create the minimal possible magnetic trap, and E will be equivalent to the rest energy of N protons. In this case N=510 and E=510mc^2, or about 255mc^2 per colliding proton.
If in the received formula for p we will use the magnetic moment of neutron then N=350.
The formula for N can be transformed to N=\frac{4}{3} \frac{p}{p_n \alpha}, where \alpha is the fine structure constant, 1/\alpha = 137.036. If we suppose that the magnetic moment of resulting boson is equal to the nuclear magnetic moment, then the total energy, needed to create the minimal possible magnetic hole will be N = \frac{4}{3\alpha} = 183a.u.m.
The results shows that the minimal possible magnetic hole can be made at collisions with the energy about one-thirds of TeV per particle.
This energy is three times smaller than can be achieved at Tevatron!
Why it was not been received yet?
Here are some possible explanations.
1. We do not know the magnetic moment of the resulting boson.
2. It is possible that magnetic hole could be born in a collision of two quarks.
3. At the Tevatron they collide the protons with antiprotons and this lead to the annihilation of the baryon number.
4. We do not know the magnetic polarization dependence.
5. It is not excluded that microscopic magnetic traps were already created, and they are growing now somewhere inside the Earth.

The second approach. Creation of Magnetic Holes.

Let's find the value pB, where p is dipole magnetic moment of the first proton, and B is the magnetic induction, created inside the first proton by the second proton, flying beside the first proton. Let's solve the problem in the coordinate system, connected with the first proton. Magnetic induction is the variable value in time and in space.

B = \frac{\mu_0qv\sin{(v,r)}}{4 \pi r^2}

Let's the second proton fly along the straight line, lying in the plane of the contour S of the first proton. The minimal possible distance r_{min} between the line and the border of the contour is defined by the equality of kinetic energy to the potential energy of two elementary charges E_{kin} = \frac{q^2}{4\pi\epsilon_0r_{min}}.
The formula E = pB must by changed by the following one
dE = p (BdS) / S.

Let's create a computer program and the computer will compute and will sum up all dE, giving us in the result the total energy pB of magnetic field and its ratio to the rest energy.
At high energies the kinetic energy is the product of the particles momentum into the velocity of light, E_{kin}=Pc.
E^2 = m^2c^4 + P^2c^2;
E^2 = m^2c^4 + E_{kin}^2;
E_{kin} = \sqrt{E^2 - m^2c^4}.
The bottom figure corresponds to quite small energy of flying by proton, E = 1.3mc^2.
Posted Image
The next figure: v=0.968c, E=4mc^2.
Posted Image
The next figure: v=0.999999998c, E=160000mc^2. In the coordinate system of collider: E'=  126mc^2, or slightly more than 0,1 TeV.
Posted Image

It was found (look tables at my page http://darkenergy.na...ru/magtren.html ) that magnetic hole can be creared at E_{total} = 510mc^2, which was received in the first approach for the total minimal energy, needed to create the magnetic trap. Dividing this energy by 2, we'll receive the energy per one colliding proton in the collider, E' = 255.2mc^2. In the system of resting proton the flying-by proton must have the energy 65107mc^2.

Conclusion. The global catastrophe can be switched by magnetic trap, which can be made at proton collisions with 0.25TeV energy per proton.

#15 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 21 September 2009 - 08:11 AM

From the forum http://www.physforum...showtopic=26582
---------------
Hi all!

Dear physicists, details of my person do not deny the conclusions, made by me on the basis of logic and computation. Have you a single argument, proving that my conclusions are wrong?

What will happen if pB will be equal to mc^2, where p – magnetic moment of a proton; B – magnetic field, created by another flying by proton (or the field of already made magnetic hole) mc^2 – the rest energy of proton?

At what energy of collisions the equality pB=mc^2 is valid? My answer: 0.255 TeV.

Note 1:
Simplest definition of magnetic hole can be made on the following comparison:
Newtonian black hole: GMm/r = mc^2/2;
Magnetic hole: pB=mc^2/2.

Note 2:
The time needed the microscopic black hole capture the whole Earth is mach greater than million years. Consequently, they are safe for now living people on the Earth.
The time needed the magnetic hole capture the whole Earth is about 1000 seconds. Consequently, magnetic holes can explode the Earth and Solar system.

Note 3:
We know two types of explosions chemical and nuclear.
Astronomers see the third type of explosions – collaptical.
At nuclear explosion only few thousand’s parts of explosive rest energy is realized in the form of radiation and kinetic energy of fragments.
At some stellar collaptical explosions about a half of rest energy of the star is realized in the form of radiation and kinetic energy of the rejected stellar shell.
What type of collaptical explosions do astronomers observe: gravitational into black hole or magnetic into magnetic hole?
Is it possible to switch the magnetic collapse at collider?
My answers: The observed collapses are magnetic ones. Magnetic collapse can be switched on by powerful colliders.
Your answers: …

Physicists, what will happen at pB=mc^2, or at 0.255 TeV–collisions of protons at LHC.

This energy is smaller than can be achieved at Tevatron!

- Why it was not been received yet?
Here are some possible explanations.
1. We do not know the magnetic moment of the resulting boson.
2. It is possible that magnetic hole could be born in a collision of two quarks, for example by d and d.
3. At the Tevatron they collide protons with antiprotons and this lead to the annihilation.
4. We do not know the magnetic polarization dependence.
5. It is not excluded that microscopic magnetic traps were already created, and they are growing now somewhere inside the Earth.

LHC will be switched on in the mead-November; the first collisions are waited in a few weeks later. Do we survive or do we start into outer space?

Computations: http://darkenergy.na...ru/magtren.html
Reproduction of biospheres and civilizations: http://darkenergy.na...ru/civilen.html
Arguments proving that..: http://darkenergy.narod.ru/argen.html

Letters to presidents and authorities. http://darkenergy.narod.ru/prezid.html This page is in Russian. You can translate it with the help of Google. I wrote these letters because i fear the creation of magnetic holes.

The starter of this topic is “Very Affraid By Ivan Gorelik's Theory On Lhc”.
I also fear of my theory, I fear it drastically. I see that it is almost impossible to deny the launch of the LHC, or to prevent our common global suicide. According to my assumptions the probability of global catastrophe, switched by LHC, is about of dozens of percents.

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged
From the forum http://www.physforum...showtopic=26582
---------------

Dear physicists, you repeat the biggest error of Steven Hawking.
Here is an excerpt from the article “The safety of the LHC”
http://public.web.ce.../Safety-en.html

"The world will not come to an end when the LHC turns on. The LHC is absolutely safe. ... Collisions releasing greater energy occur millions of times a day in the earth's atmosphere and nothing terrible happens."

Prof. Steven Hawking, Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, Cambridge University


This error will cost us the life of our Civilization.

The biggest error is in the comparison of A and B.
A. Collisions of protons at LHC;
B. Collisions of cosmic protons with atmospheric protons.

Similarity: Energies in A and B are sufficient in order to make microscopic magnetic holes.

Difference: Velocities of created holes relatively surrounding matter are drastically great.
A. Magnetic holes, made on LHC, can have very small velocities.
B. According to conservation law of 4-momentum, cosmic holes have relativistic velocities.

Result:
A. LHC’s holes capture slowly moving particles and grow. The bigger hole becomes – the bigger its rate of growth.
B. Atmosphere particles move relatively holes with relativistic velocities and, correspondingly, they have TeV kinetic energy, relatively holes. As a result, magnetic holes evaporate immediately. Such collisions lead to creation of showers of secondary particles. Physicists observe such showers.

Analogy:
Let’s compare the behavior of “nuclear semi-hole” with the behavior of magnetic hole. Let’s investigate two cases:
A. Bombarding particles are neutrons, having the kinetic energies, equal to several in eV.
B. Bombarding neutrons have kinetic energies, equal to several TeV.

Approximate result:
A. p+n -> d; d+n -> t; t -> He3+e; He3+n -> He4; He4+n -> He5; He5+n -> He6; He6 -> Li6+e; Li6+n -> Li7; Li7+n -> Li8; Li8 -> Be8+e; Be8+n -> Be9; Be9+n -> Be10..
B. TeV-energy neutrons will ruin the nucleus.

Nuclear collapse is impossible because the repulsive electrostatic forces of protons. That is way, I named nucleus by “nuclear semi-holes”.
Magnetic collapse has no limit. Magnetic hole will grow till there is the food, - the matter of planet or star.

#16 swansont

swansont

    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)

  • Moderators
  • 36,711 posts
  • LocationWashington DC region

Posted 21 September 2009 - 09:55 AM

I don't see the value in linking to another bulletin board where they all agree that your proposal is rubbish.

Can we observe these "magnetic holes" now, before the LHC is turned on? Why haven't physicists observed them already?
  • 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum          To go to the fortress of ultimate darkness, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill.             Forget it, Jake — it's Crackpottown.

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea                                                           

 

 

                                                                                                                     

 

 


#17 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 22 September 2009 - 07:33 AM

Can we observe these "magnetic holes" now, before the LHC is turned on? Why haven't physicists observed them already?


Yes, we can observe these "magnetic holes" now:
Posted Image

I don't see the value in linking to another bulletin board where they all agree that your proposal is rubbish.


No. Some of them do not think so.
Some made errors.
For exaple, here is my last post there:
-------
Dear Free Thinker, I want to stop at one sentence from the text of Fausto Intilla, which you quoted above:

Monopoles could be produced in the LHC. [Ref. 1] .CERN's calculations indicate that one monopole produced in LHC could destroy 1.018 (US notation 1,018) nucleons but it will quickly traverse the earth and escape into space.


There are several errors here.

I. In [Ref. 1] one can see the number 10^{18}, but not 1.018 in author notations, or 1,018 in US notation. The number 10^{18} in scientific notations is 1000000000000000000 in children’s notation.
II. The second error is made by the authors of [Ref. 1]. They wrote:

magnetic monopoles can catalyse proton decay. Can this be a problem?
At each catalysis event energy is released by the decaying proton, causing the monopole to move. It is straightforward to estimate the number of protons that could be destroyed before the monopole escapes the Earth. Monopoles are expected to have a strong cross-section with normal matter. As a result the mean free path of a monopole moving through iron is given by (formula)..
In each collision a nucleon is destroyed so the escaping monopole will destroy 10^{18} nucleons: negligibly small compared to the total number of nucleons.

The author’s logic would be correct only in the case of isotropic medium. But the Earth has it’s own gravity field and it’s own magnetic field. Both these fields are not isotropic. Created monopoles will not go far from the attracting places. They will randomly move around these places till destroy all protons of the Earth. So the correct number is not 10^{18} but 10^{51}, divided by the number of created monopoles.
III. The third error is hidden in the formula of monopole catalyses of proton decay
M + p = M + e^+.
More correct formula must contain the number n:
M_n + p = M_{n+1} + e^+.
This number shows the number of x-bosons in magnetic monopole (one more type of magnetic holes). These bosons have the equal quantum numbers. Magnetic hole works as laser. The word laser originated as an acronym for Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. Laser creates the same photons, which are bosons with zero mass energy. Because of zero mass, photons fly away from laser with the speed of light. Magnetic trap creates x-bosons, which have non-zero rest mass. These bosons do not fly away but becomes the constituent part of magnetic hole. The bigger the number n – the bigger the rate of magnetic collapse of ordinary matter into magnetic hole.
IV. The fourth error is hidden in poor imagination of authors, who had investigated the possible dangerous particles, which can be created at colliders. Here I do not stop on mBHs, strangelets, vacuum bubbles. I’ll stop only on magnetic traps.
Magnetic traps are dangerous objects, which are connected together mostly by the magnetic forces. I tried to investigate some of them:
1. neutron liquid;
2. neutron hole;
3. magnetic hole;
4. magnetic monopole.
The most real ones, from my point of view, ere magnetic holes. Computations had lead me to the conclusion that magnetic holes can be of such types:
1. magnetic dipoles with poles N and S;
2. electromagnetic dipoles with mixed poles N^+ and S^-, or with poles N^- and S^+;
3. vacuum electromagnetic oscillator;

i. …with mixed electro-magneto-weak poles…

region of strangelets.
By the way, computations show that frequency of vacuum electromagnetic oscillator approximately corresponds to the frequency of pulsars with corresponding mass.
But the simplest magnetic holes are magnetic dipoles.
Computations are here: http://darkenergy.narod.ru/magtren.hml

Prometheus wrote:

There is no theoretical or experimental support for what Ivan Gorelik is saying whatsoever.


The simplest theoretical support is comparison of Newtonian black holes and magnetic holes:
\frac{GMm}{r} = \frac{mc^2}{2};
pB = \frac{mc^2}{2}.

The simplest experimental support of possible manmade collapse is here: Posted Image

Edited by Ivan Gorelik, 22 September 2009 - 07:35 AM.
Consecutive posts merged.


#18 swansont

swansont

    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)

  • Moderators
  • 36,711 posts
  • LocationWashington DC region

Posted 22 September 2009 - 01:28 PM

Yes, we can observe these "magnetic holes" now:
Posted Image


The image file is named "sn1987.jpg" making me think this is a picture of the remnants of supernova 1987a. Is there any objective evidence (i.e. not just your say-so) that this is a "magnetic hole" and not a supernova which conforms to standard physics?

I was hoping for a citation rather than a picture, and for evidence closer by. Like on the earth; we are bombarded by high-energy particles all the time.
  • 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum          To go to the fortress of ultimate darkness, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill.             Forget it, Jake — it's Crackpottown.

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea                                                           

 

 

                                                                                                                     

 

 


#19 insane_alien

insane_alien

    Genius

  • Senior Members
  • 10,094 posts
  • LocationScotland

Posted 22 September 2009 - 01:58 PM

http://images.google...=N&hl=en&tab=wi

yep, thats exactly what it is
  • 0
Tired of waiting around for a reply on the forums? Use IRC, 'I don't know how' is no longer an excuse.

"Special" Relativity, stupid ideas seem smarter when they come at you really fast.

#20 Ivan Gorelik

Ivan Gorelik

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 45 posts

Posted 24 September 2009 - 03:01 AM

swansont: I was hoping for a citation rather than a picture, and for evidence closer by. Like on the earth; we are bombarded by high-energy particles all the time.


Yes, we are bombarded by high-energy particles all the time. Look attentively at the comparison of A and B.

From the discussion at http://www.physforum...60
---------

AlphaNumeric: I work in the theoretical physics community, along side people who have or are working at CERN, and none of us fear the LHC at all.

Ivan Gorelik: Did you try to test the formula mc^2=pB?

Free Thinker: For God's sake AlphaNumeric please test his formula, so we can all sleep at night if it's proven to be wrong.

Matador: it will be tested when the LHC is up and fully running? lol

RobDegraves: Rpenner has pointed out his basic mistakes time and time again... No scientist is discussing Ivan's theories because he's a loony...

Free Thinker: All right, but what about testing that formula?..
It would make me (and a lot of other non-scientists) sleep a whole lot better...

RobDegraves: You cannot test something that doesn't exist...

rpenner: ...cosmic ray collision... ...the collapse of the moon, stars, Sun, etc... ...white dwarf stars and binary neutron stars... ...Cosmic Ray argument...


Dear physicists, you again and again repeat the biggest error of Steven Hawking.
In the CERN's article “The safety of the LHC”
public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/Safety-en.html you can find dozen comparisons with cosmic rays.

Hawking: "The world will not come to an end when the LHC turns on. The LHC is absolutely safe. ... Collisions releasing greater energy occur millions of times a day in the earth's atmosphere and nothing terrible happens."


This error will cost us the life of our Civilization.

The biggest error is in the comparison of A and B.
A. Collisions of protons at LHC;
B. Collisions of cosmic protons with atmospheric protons.

Similarity: Energies in A and B are sufficient in order to make microscopic magnetic holes.

Difference: Velocities of created holes relatively surrounding matter are drastically great.
A. Magnetic holes, made on LHC, can have very small velocities.
B. According to conservation law of 4-momentum, cosmic holes have relativistic velocities.

Result:
A. LHC’s holes capture slowly moving particles and grow. The bigger hole becomes – the bigger its rate of growth.
B. Atmosphere particles move relatively holes with relativistic velocities and, correspondingly, they have TeV kinetic energy, relatively holes. As a result, magnetic holes evaporate immediately. Such collisions lead to creation of showers of secondary particles. Physicists observe such showers.

Analogy:
Let’s compare the behavior of “nuclear semi-hole” with the behavior of magnetic hole. Let’s investigate two cases:

A. Bombarding particles are neutrons, having the kinetic energies, equal to several in eV.
B. Bombarding neutrons have kinetic energies, equal to several TeV.

Approximate result:
A. Collapse:
p+n -> d;
d+n -> t -> He3+e;
He3+n -> He4;
He4+n -> He5;
He5+n -> He6 -> Li6+e;
Li6+n -> Li7;
Li7+n -> Li8 -> Be8+e;
Be8+n -> Be9;
Be9+n -> Be10;
...
U235+n -> X+Y+2n
X+n ->...; Y+n ->...
two branches;
...
four branches;
...
eight branches;
...

B. Evaporation. TeV-energy neutrons will ruin the nucleus in the backward order in crude approximation.

Nuclear collapse is impossible because the repulsive electrostatic forces of protons. That is way, I named nucleus by “nuclear semi-holes”.
Magnetic collapse has no limit. Magnetic hole will grow till there is the food, - the matter of planet or star.

Physicists, did you see the difference?

Look here: Posted Image
That is an image of remnants of exploded star.
You can see there three beautiful semi axial rings.
Axial symmetry says us that there was the magnetic collapse, but not the gravity collapse.
Magnetic hole has axial symmetry because it is a compact magnetic dipole.
Black hole must have spherical symmetry, if it is not rotate.

The Earth after the magnetic collapse will transform into a small region of exited superconducting vacuum. This region’s diameter is about 10 meters. The thickness is about 2.5 meters. The strength of magnetic field in this region is about 10^16 teslas. Because of the strong magnetic interaction, this small magnetic hole will move on spiral trajectory to the Sun. As a result, the Sun will explode and astronomy amateurs from neighbor stellar systems (alien free thinkers) will observe novae or supernovae phenomenon. Alien steven hawkings will say: “The world will not come to an end when the LHC turns on. The LHC is absolutely safe. ... Collisions releasing greater energy occur millions of times a day in the earth's atmosphere and nothing terrible happens”




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users