peter@baylor.UUCP (Peter da Silva) (07/26/85)
Procyon's Promise, by Michael McCollum. Del Rey 1985.
Ugh. Not only does he have such obvious boners as antimatter black holes
and alien species that act totally irrationally for no apparent reason,
but he hasn't ever heard of copying a file, secure networks, or propogation
delay. A good read if you can forget everything that's happened since
1920... too much suspension of disbelief needed for me, I'm afraid. I
don't remember the prequel (Life Probe) being so shoddy, but that could
just be a selective memory.
--
Peter da Silva (the mad Australian)
UUCP: ...!shell!neuro1!{hyd-ptd,baylor,datafac}!peter
MCI: PDASILVA; CIS: 70216,1076hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (07/31/85)
In article <320@baylor.UUCP> peter@baylor.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: >Procyon's Promise, by Michael McCollum. Del Rey 1985. > >Ugh. Not only does he have such obvious boners as antimatter black holes > ... > Peter da Silva (the mad Australian) > UUCP: ...!shell!neuro1!{hyd-ptd,baylor,datafac}!peter > MCI: PDASILVA; CIS: 70216,1076 Very obvious boner. Stephen Hawking made the same "boner". A black hole can be "made" of just about any type of matter, antimatter included. Hutch
ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac) (08/01/85)
> In article <320@baylor.UUCP> peter@baylor.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: > >Procyon's Promise, by Michael McCollum. Del Rey 1985. > > > >Ugh. Not only does he have such obvious boners as antimatter black holes > > ... > > Very obvious boner. Stephen Hawking made the same "boner". A black hole > can be "made" of just about any type of matter, antimatter included. > > Hutch Indeed. Only there is *no* difference between an antimatter black hole and one made of matter. Hence the "boner". -- "Don't argue with a fool. Ethan Vishniac Borrow his money." {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan Department of Astronomy University of Texas
levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) (08/02/85)
hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) <1491@shark.UUCP>: > >>Procyon's Promise, by Michael McCollum. Del Rey 1985. >> >>Ugh. Not only does he have such obvious boners as antimatter black holes >> ... >> Peter da Silva (the mad Australian) >> UUCP: ...!shell!neuro1!{hyd-ptd,baylor,datafac}!peter >> MCI: PDASILVA; CIS: 70216,1076 > >Very obvious boner. Stephen Hawking made the same "boner". A black hole >can be "made" of just about any type of matter, antimatter included. > >Hutch I wonder... If a black hole were made out of antimatter, would it be possible to annihilate it by throwing enough ordinary matter into it? And vice versa? Actually I guess that wouldn't do much good, since the resultant energy would still be trapped within the black hole. Comments, net.physics? -- ------------------------------- Disclaimer: The views contained herein are | dan levy | yvel nad | my own and are not at all those of my em- | an engihacker @ | ployer, my pets, my plants, my boss, or the | at&t computer systems division | s.a. of any computer upon which I may hack. | skokie, illinois | | "go for it" | Path: ..!ihnp4!ttrdc!levy -------------------------------- or: ..!ihnp4!iheds!ttbcad!levy
draughn@iitcs.UUCP (Mark Draughn) (08/06/85)
As I understand it, black holes can be made of matter or anti-matter,
or whatever, but it doesn't matter. From outside of the black hole
all we can detect is its mass, its charge, and its spin. We can't tell
whether the stuff inside originally went in as matter, antimatter,
energy, or whatever. Antimatter black holes might exist, but we couldn't
know if they were.
Mark T. Draughnalan@drivax.UUCP (Alan Fargusson) (08/14/85)
> As I understand it, black holes can be made of matter or anti-matter, > or whatever, but it doesn't matter. From outside of the black hole > all we can detect is its mass, its charge, and its spin. We can't tell > whether the stuff inside originally went in as matter, antimatter, > energy, or whatever. Antimatter black holes might exist, but we couldn't > know if they were. > Mark T. Draughn I have always been a little confused about matter/anti-matter stuff. Does anti-matter have negative mass? If it does then wouldn't a black hole made of anti-matter have negative mass? I'm a programmer jim, not a physicist. :-) -- Alan Fargusson. { ihnp4, amdahl, mot }!drivax!alan
gjerawlins@watdaisy.UUCP (Gregory J.E. Rawlins) (08/18/85)
In article <205@drivax.UUCP> alan@drivax.UUCP (Alan Fargusson) writes: > >I have always been a little confused about matter/anti-matter stuff. Does >anti-matter have negative mass? If it does then wouldn't a black hole made >of anti-matter have negative mass? > >I'm a programmer jim, not a physicist. :-) >-- > >Alan Fargusson. > >{ ihnp4, amdahl, mot }!drivax!alan No, anti-matter is just "matter" made up of anti-particles. Anti-particles are particles with the same mass as their (more normal) counterparts but with opposite charge or magnetic moment. The only reason a distinction is made is because "particles" are much more prevalent than "anti-particles". For example, the anti-particle of the electron is the positron (a particle with the same mass as an electron but with positive charge) a particle which caused much consternation when first discovered; as it turns out all "particles" have corresponding "anti-particles", the reason why they weren't discovered earlier is that in our neck of the woods particles are the rule and whenever an anti-particle is created it immediately combines with its corresponding particle and vanishes in a puff of energy. Particles with negative mass (whatever that means) are as of now pure speculation. Hope this helps. ("Jim, I'm a programmer not an encyclopaedia!") (-: greg :-) -- Gregory J.E. Rawlins, Department of Computer Science, U. Waterloo gjerawlins%watdaisy@waterloo.csnet gjerawlins%watdaisy%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa {allegra|clyde|linus|utzoo|inhp4|decvax}!watmath!watdaisy!gjerawlins