I know black holes atr infinitely small and undoubtly powerful...but they're made of a mass of non-nuclear particles...what would happen if we detonated an A-bomb inside the event-horizon?  Because after you enter the event horizon, time changes around you, would it be even possible to even detonate an atomic bomb in a black hole?  And if plasma can escape the gravitational pulls of black holes, then can we use plasma energy sismilar to the ones from supermassive blackholes to escape their "ever dooming" vacum?
129315
Yes and No, Since a black hole is made of particles, anti-matter could counter and destroy it, on the other hand, most believe it is an actual hole in the fabric of space/time. So can you repair it, not as of yet. 2nd an A-bomb is nothing to a black hole, so it wouldn't do much. 3rd, I've never heard of plasma being able to escape a black hole, theoretical energy, thermal energy, and certain virtual particles are the only thing I know that have been thought that could escape a black hole. 4th, Black holes can merge into 1 really big one, so they continue to live even through themselves.
566011
Keep in mind that as you approach a black hole, its apparent schwarzschild radius will contract. Light that doesn't escape still does make it a finite distance before it is infinitely redshifted. The "official" schwarzschild radius means  that as seen from an infinite distance, nothing that passes that point can escape. \n\nThe universe could well be inside of its own Schwarzschild radius;  this is the very definition of a closed universe! (It looks like it isn't closed, but who knows for sure?). Once inside the Schwarzschild radius, all that is guaranteed is that all paths will eventually lead to the singularity (the eventual "big crunch" in a closed universe).\n\nRemember, a singularity inside of a black hole is really only a mathematical construct that exists when you apply only general relativity. . . and our incomplete knowledge of particle physics.  We don't really know if there are more forms of degeneracy that support matter at a finite size.  Even more fundamentally, we can reasonably talk about distances and time (and consequently, gravity as described by general relativity) once you reach sizes of order the Planck length. This is a finite spatial scale (larger than a singularity).\n\nAsserting  that certain mass densities smaller than certain sizes become singularities is reckless. The singularity in black holes is merely the extrapolation of a very accurate theory (General Relativity) to an extreme condition where it probably breaks down.  This is the kind of question that quantum gravity theories can address, but not pure gravity theory.
140457
A black hole isn't necessarily big or heavy. Any mass M which is compressed to \n\nSchwarzschild Radius: R = 2*G*M/c²\n\ngravitational constant: G = 6,6742/10^11 m³/(kg*m²)\nspeed of light: c = 2,9979*10^8 m/s\n\n\nwill collapse and form a black hole, theoretically. If you have such a thing and want to carry it around you have to isolate it from surronding matter because everything touching the event horizont R will fall into it. But that's science fiction. Rumours say that romulans use tiny black holes for their warp drives and call them quantum singularities.\n\nHawking Radiation\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
564531
It would do nothing.  In 1994, a comet (Shoemaker-Levy) crashed into Jupiter.  I don't have the exact numbers on the equivalent to a nuclear bomb, but it was much more powerful than any bomb.  Jupiter kind of sat there and shrugged it off without much effect.\n\nEdit:  Found a site that says *one* fragment of the comet was the same as 225,000 megatons.  The biggest fragment was the same as 6 million megatons.\n\nhttp://www.isc.tamu.edu/~astro/sl9/cometfaq2.html
528306
Any mass contained in a radius smaller than its schwarzschild radius,\n\nr_s = (2GM/c^2) with\n\nc= the speed of light, G = the gravitational constant and M is the mass of the object.\n\nThe schwarzschild radius scales linearally with mass (an object twice as massive will have twice the schwarzschild radius) and to get you started, an object the mass of the sun (2x10^30kg) has a Schwarzschild radius of 3 km. In otherwords, if you jammed the sun into a sphere 6km across, it would be a black hole. The schwarzschild radius indicates a volume of space where the escape velocity from the mass in question is the speed of light or greater. Using the linear scaling, an object the mass of the earth (6(?)x10^24 kg would have a schwarzschild radius of about 1/300,000 of 3km, or 1 cm.\n\nBlack holes have some peculiar properties, such as evaporation, extremely strong tidal forces near their central singularity (but weak tidal forces at the schwarzschild radius of a supermassive black hole). Things can happen inside of the schwarzschild radius too. For instance, if our universe was closed (not expanding enough to continue expanding forever) it is technically inside of its own schwarzschild radius (we would be living inside a huge black hole.)\n\nIt is called a black hole because no light that crosses the schwarzschild radius can completely escape the mass to an infinite distance. (This does mean that if you are just outside the schwarzschild radius yourself, you CAN see light that is emitted from within it, or passes within it as long as it is not too close; only an observer at d= infinity cannot.) Thus this volume of space appears "black." You can read more about black holes on wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/black_hole....\n\nThe concept of an object with gravity so great was first conceived by a little known geologist named John Michell. The better known Simon Laplace took the idea and ran with it in a book years later and so is often credited with coming up with the idea.
75928
The A-bomb generates its massive amount of energy using fission.  When intense pressure is applied to the radioactive material, the nuclei of the atoms within split apart, releasing tremendous amounts of energy.\n\nThe H-bomb generates its energy through fusion.  An A-bomb is required to start the process.  When the A-bomb goes off, tremendous pressure is applied to a hydrogen core, which causes the hydrogen atoms to fuse into helium atoms.  The reaction results in a reduction of mass.  The 'lost' mass is converted into energy, which results in a huge explosion.  The H-bomb is considerably more powerful than an A-bomb.\n\nThe theoretical next step would be a carbon-bomb, which would require an H-bomb to induce fusion in a carbon core.  These bombs could be powerful enough to blow a hole through the crust, revealing the mantle beneath.
26558
*puts on cokebottle glasses*\nTechnically, black holes haven't been proven to exist, their existence is just extremely well supported, like the theory of plate tectonics.\n\nAlso, black holes don't actually move faster than the speed of light.  Nothing can move faster than the speed of light in a vaccuum. What you're probably thinking of is their gravitational pull is so intense that their escape velocity (the speed you have to be traveling at to break free of their gravitational pull) is faster than the speed of light.\n\nI think it's awesome in the biblical sense.  Black holes have always intrigued me- something that you can get stuck in and never, ever escape.  The way they distort light also is very interesting.\n\nI sometimes pretend that the inside of the event horizon of a black hole is where Hell is.  You can't escape it so you would be stuck there for eternity (the slow Hawking radiation notwithstanding) and you would be ripped up into your individual subatomic particles.  Plus, the rules of Classical Physics don't work in the way you would expect them to.\n\nCloyvin.
174945
first of all, what u consider as dark matter is wrong. dark matter is not some hi-fi stuff which is highly radioactive or has some special properties. its just ordinary matter which cant be seen. secondly to ur question.. the outer limit of a black hole is called schwarzchild radius. when any matter approaches this limit, it cant escape whatsoever. ok, now our matter is in the black hole. first of all, 50% of the mass of the material gets converted into x-rays and other high energy radiation. of the remaining half, some part is used up in the fusion process, while the remaning part is used up in the expansion of the black hole. \nand because black hole is just an ordinary star with extraordinary high density, there is no such thing as a whilte hole. if u meant to say something like blackhole made up of antimatter which attracts matter and mutually anhilates, then may be ur question (2) makes sense.
623674
Ok, this may take some time.  Let's go back and review.  In the beginning of the scientific universe, there were large areas of gas and matter kinda drifting around.  As these clumps started to collide and grow larger, the core area began to become more and more dense.  When these areas finally collapsed, they created black holes and quasars around these black holes.  These black holes fed on their quasars like a huge vacuum machine.  This suction led to an acceleration of particles in a circular fashion.  This continued until the black hole completely consumed the quasar.  When the quasar was gone, the black hole was unable to feed on local matter anymore.  The circulation, however, is still going.  This circulation compresses and glows brighter, obscuring the black hole from view.  When some particles in this compressed disk reach the force needed to escape the gravitational pull of other objects it shoots out at near the speed of light.  Imagine it this way . . . you have a pillow case and in this pillow case is a toaster, an object of mass.  You start spinning this toaster and pillow case over your head.  Your hands and the foce you're using to swing the pillow case and toaster are similar to the forces of the black hole and the pillow is acting as the hole's quasar.  When you release the pillow, you have demonstrated the black hole's consumption of the quasar.  For a period of time (remember scale here) the toaster will stay in orbit around you.  On earth, it's a fraction of a second and a short distance, but in the big picture, its billions of years and in terms of lightyears.  When the toaster finally leaves orbit, it and some of the matter that's attached to it will leave at a high rate of acceleration.  That's why.  Even though the force of the black hole is powerful enough to suck it in, the rotational force and the object's distance from the black hole are enough to keep it from being drawn into the black hole.  I hope this helps.
241271
What is meant is the radius of the event horizon. You are right in stating that black holes behave like a gravitational point source, however this gravity is extremely strong. Let us examine what happens if you're standing on a planet and trying to get off:\n\nIf the planet is the size of an Oreo, getting off is ridiculously easy - you just jump. This is because the gravity of this tiny planet is very small, and the speed you need to escape (the escape velocity) is equally small.\n\nTo get off the planet Earth is a lot harder than jumping. That's because Earth is heavier, and the escape velocity is pretty large. 11.2 km/s to be precise. Any rocket wishing to leave the Earth's gravity must have at least that speed.\n\nNow, if the rocket was launched 5000km AWAY from the Earth, it wouldn't need so much speed to get away, because the gravity of Earth becomes weaker the further away you get.\n\nOK, now. Black holes. They are insanely heavy and have a huge gravitational pull. It turns out that if you were standing "on" a black hole, your escape velocity would have to be much, much larger than the speed of light - which, according to Einstein, is the highest speed in the universe. In other words, you cannot escape. Nothing can. Not even light.\n\nWhat makes things even worse is that even though you find yourself at a certain distance from the black hole, you could STILL be in the same situation that the escape velocity was greater than the speed of light. Light, and everything else, is stil trapped.\n\nYou can draw a sphere around a black hole of a certain radius (depending on the mass of the black hole), which is the "point of no return". On one side of this sphere, the escape velocity is less than the speed of light, and you're safe (kinda) - but on the other, the escape velocity becomes greater than c, and everything becomes trapped.\n\nThis sphere is referred to as the "event horizon", and when talking about the size of a black hole, it's the size of this event horizon which is referred to.\n\n----\nThis has been a Snogledk RealAnswer(tm). There has been no copy-pasting from other sources.
550667
Hi. Yes, every particle does it to a minuscule amount. When you get a lot of particles packed VERY close together the effect becomes not only noticeable, but dangerous. That WHAT a black hole is and WHY it is.
4996
There are theoretically two ways in which black holes can form.  Stellar (star) sized black holes have to be above the Chandresekhar limit of 3.2 solar masses, and are formed through the gravitational collapse of stars. They can form whenever conditions are right. These are the types of black holes that astronomers infer from binary X-ray sources and the like.\n\nMicro black holes, on the other hand, can only have been formed in the initial moments of the Big Bang, when intense pressures during cosmic expansion could have collapsed masses smaller than our sun into singularities.  According to Dr. Stephen Hawking's theory of black hole evaporation, all singularities lose mass, through a type of evaporation (the actual mechanism, having to do with vaccum energy and particle/antiparticle pairs is a bit complicated) with smaller black holes evaporating faster than large ones.  By this logic, most micro-holes would have evaporated out of existence in the thirteen billion years the universe has been around, while the larger micro-holes (things with the mass of, say, Neptune) should still be around, though hard to spot.
422120
The photon sphere is the area around a black hole where photons travelling at a tangent to the sphere will become trapped in orbit. (link1) Inside the photonsphere it is impossible to orbit the hole, but you can still escape from it, and you can even hover between the Schwarzschild radius and the photonsphere - if you accelerate hard enough!\n\nWithin the ergosphere (but outside the event horizon) it is impossible to stand still - the gravity and rotation of the hole drag you arround even if you are travelling at lightspeed. But the rotation means that you can still escape, so long as you do not cross the event horizon.\n\nThe event horizon is the real 'do not cross' boundry of the black hole. Within the event horizon the escape velocity is greater than the speed of light, so if you get in there, you're stuck. Outside the event horizon, you can escape if you try hard enough.\n\nThe second link has a lot of good info on blackholes.
526788
Very good question, which has no definite answer.\n\nThere are, however many theories about what exactly is inside a black hole.  The most common of which is that a black hole is a singularity.  A single point in spacetime that all vectors entering the black hole would lead to.  \n\nIf this is the case, entering a black hole would be an interesting experience.  As you cross the event horizon (the "surface" of the black hole), your body will be stretched.  You will get much thinner and much taller.  As you approach the singularity, your entire three dimensional space would be reduced to a single point.  Every direction would be the same direction (if you tried to point up, you'd point in every direction concievable).  \n\nThe interesting thing is what someone else would see as you enter the black hole.  As you approach the event horizon you, yourself would cross, but the observer would not see that.  He would see you get closer and closer to it, but never see you get there.  Instead, you would seem to fade away, because less and less light would be reaching the observer, until you eventually vanished.\n\nHope this helps.
518033
you should see the nova on blackholes, it was on last week\n\napprently only to much can actually get to the center at a time, and most matter/energy gets bounced around within the event horizon, never to escape, but not actually getting all the way in\n\nand anyway blackhole emit particles of hawking radiation and would eventually expell there mass and kinda evaporate away\n\nand if one black hole had the whole universe in it, sounds prime for  big bang to me
646152
A black hole is not actually a hole, but a physical object in space, consisting of ultra compact particals, contained in such a small area that thier gravitational pull is much stronger than any other celestial body of comperable size....  Basically you put all the matter and gravitational pull from a large star into the volume of a small moon... particles captured by a black hole are crushed and added to its composition. This in theory includes photons (light and other energy)as well.  As for whether black holes are hoax's or not.. the answer is no... we can see their effects on star near them, including gases that are syphoned, and other gravitational interactions.  Additionally when matter approaches a black hole and is accellerated, it reaches an energy level at the even horizon where xrays are emited, but not captured, which in turn we can also detect.  Though there is much we do not know about them, they definately exist, and most likely in much greater numbers than we oringinally thought.
78871
Like all gravitationally-formed objects, a black hole is roughly spherical in shape (like planets and stars, a rotating black hole will be slightly flattened at the poles.)  According to Hawking's theory, black holes do emit radiation (and therefore mass) in accordance with quantum rules.  Theoretically, given enough time a black hole could radiate away enough of its mass to disappear completely.  When its mass drops below a certain critical threshhold, the remaining mass of the black hole would disappear in a final violent burst of gamma radiation.  Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) the best estimates we have for the time it would take for a black hole to explode in this way is far longer than the current estimated age of the universe, so it is not likely we would be able to test this theory through direct observation.