From: "Jason Voegele" <voegele.6@osu.edu>
Subject: Re: (urth) Black hole vs. wormhole
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 00:02:00 

prion,

You're certainly right about how such a black hole could "guzzle" the Sun if
it were planted firmly inside of it.  However, I just do not believe that it
is necessarily such a fast process.  A small black hole still has a small
Swartzchild radius and would thus be slurping some amount of energy from the
Sun, but not necessarily guzzling the whole thing at once.

Jason Voegele
(who is admittedly arguing from a fading memory of his Astronomy course
several years ago)

-----Original Message-----
From: mary whalen <marewhalen@yahoo.com>
To: urth@lists.best.com <urth@lists.best.com>
Date: Thursday, July 02, 1998 11:39 PM
Subject: (urth) Black hole vs. wormhole


>This is Sean Whalen (prion).
>
>I'm afraid I must defend my remarks on the nature of black holes.
>
>Jason Voegele asserts that a black hole is not a guzzler, but has only
>the gravitational effect of any other object of the same mass.  This
>is absolutely true.  However, if a massive object were to be near
>enough to touch the sun, let alone be within it, without revolving
>around it at nearly the speed of light, the two would merge into a
>larger object consisting of both the components.  If the massive
>object were a black hole, in the merging the end result would be a
>large black hole, as no black hole can be destroyed by the addition of
>new mass or transformed into any other class of object.  The
>absorbtion effects are not limited to the Schwartzchild radius.  This
>measure is the size of the radius of a black hole in comparison to its
>mass; a ratio relationship. The SR is thus the size of a black hole of
>a specific mass; that is, the mass can be exactly determined by the
>size of the black hole. The SR is merely, then, the size of the hole,
>the distance from the center at which matter can only escape by moving
>directly away from the hole at the speed of light.  Anything closer,
>by definition, is inside of the hole.  It's gravitational effects can
>be felt over an infinite distance, which increases in area at the
>speed of light, which is also the speed at which gravity propagates.
>The sun is slowly sucking everything in the universe into itself, as
>is everything, but most things are moving away from it much faster
>than its gravity absorbs matter inwards.  In addition, Einsteinian
>mechanics and quantum mechanics are the sciences which describe some
>events of a black hole as opposed to Newtonian mechanics.  If you are
>far away from the hole, it will be just like a massive object of the
>same mass would be, as I meant when in my post I described that the
>distant Urth would be circling the black hole, not falling into it.
>However, if an object is close to a black hole and not moving away
>very quickly (as it would certainly would not be doing if the black
>hole were inside of it) it will be sucked in because of gravity, just
>as a bird falls to the Earth if it stops flying.
>
>prion
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
works
>*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/
ranjit@best.com
whorl@lists.best.com
>
>


*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/