3
$\begingroup$

Could a kugelblitz be stored in a container lined with metamaterials to reflect back the outpouring of hawking radiation or would it require something more exotic? Could it be pinned in the center of such a container if it was charged or had a magnetic field?

Specifically dealing with a kugelblitz that has a Schwarzschild radius about the size of a proton so all the radiation it emits is in the form of gamma rays.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ The same way it is created duh... $\endgroup$
    – user6760
    Nov 4, 2016 at 3:35
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for asking a good question. The kugelblitz concept is attractive, and like many seductive ideas it needs to confront reality. I suggest you look at this article "Whatever Happened to Black Holes as Star-drives?" at crowlspace.com/?p=1509 This will help answer your question. $\endgroup$
    – a4android
    Nov 4, 2016 at 4:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user6760 Which means exactly what? Creating something doesn't automatically mean it can be stored practically. So? $\endgroup$
    – a4android
    Nov 4, 2016 at 4:18
  • $\begingroup$ @a4android Thanks for the link, I'm aware that manageable sized black holes emit enormous amounts of gamma. I'm operating under the assumption that the creators of such a black hole should be able to store it somehow. According to Jorge Perez the main issue would be that it would still radiate mass (energy) away in the form of neutrinos. $\endgroup$
    – Joe Kissling
    Nov 4, 2016 at 4:23
  • $\begingroup$ The main containment problem is the sheer volume of high-energy gamma radiation emitted. You would need to surround the kugelblitz with a perfect gamma-ray 'mirror'. I can't think of how to make one. The radiation will simply destroy any containment structures. A charged kugelblitz might be held by an extremely strong electric field, possibly a magnetic field if the kugelblitz was magnetic, but this machinery would soon be destroyed. You could handwave a kugelblitz with super-advanced 'magic' technology which would be scientifically inexplicable. Just say it works & don't explain. $\endgroup$
    – a4android
    Nov 4, 2016 at 4:31

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4
$\begingroup$

Kugelblitzes are like any other low-mass black hole: the smaller they are, the faster they evaporate. If you have a black hole large enough that it doesn't evaporate quickly, it'll likely destroy your nearby structures meant to contain it, and it'd pass right through regular matter - unless it was very charged, there'd be no way to hold it in place. If you get it small enough that it's gravitational field is sufficiently weak so as not to destroy your structure, it'll basically destroy itself in minutes to seconds, releasing energy on the level of an atomic bomb. Much of that energy will be in the form of light, which could theoretically be reflected, but there will also be tons of neutrons and other particles we couldn't just reflect back towards the black hole. Even if we could reflect all the regular stuff, including the neutrons, neutrinos released by the Hawking radiation would pass right through our meta material and the black hole would still evaporate.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So am wrong in thinking that a Hawking Radiation was strictly electromagnetic? PBS SpaceTime references one that weighs 800(thousand?) tons as a possible engine for interstellar travel, no mention of neutrinos. $\endgroup$
    – Joe Kissling
    Nov 4, 2016 at 1:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hawking radiation occurs when one member of a pair of virtual particles gets sucked into the black hole, and the other escapes. I see no reason why it wouldn't emit neutrons and other particles of that sort. Using a black hole engine is highly theoretical, and I believe it to be wholly impractical, even in comparison to wormholes $\endgroup$
    – Alecto Irene Perez
    Nov 4, 2016 at 1:35
  • $\begingroup$ That's my thinking, most particle-antiparticle pairs were photons and antiphotons (I thought), hence my thinking that it was electromagnetic. If it emitted neutrons that would be fine, there are neutron reflective materials. Neutrinos are the problem because there is no practical amount of density to block them. $\endgroup$
    – Joe Kissling
    Nov 4, 2016 at 1:42
  • $\begingroup$ Neutrinos are extremely light; they should be emitted in quantities comparable to photons $\endgroup$
    – Alecto Irene Perez
    Nov 4, 2016 at 1:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JorgePerez Hawking radiation is similar to of black body radiation which is exclusively Electromagnetic, you're right in the aspect that this radiation is generated due to virtual particles but you should note that only particles that move with the speed of light can escape from black holes gravitational grasp thus black hole only emits EM particles $\endgroup$
    – neo
    Jul 20, 2018 at 19:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .