🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <432e6778.2347565953@152.91.10.200>, xxx@xxx.xx (Octa Ex) wrote:
>On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 19:21:55 -0700, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <N:
>dlzc1 D:cox T:net@nospam.com> etched in cyberspace:
>
>>Dear Octa Ex:
>>
>>"Octa Ex" <xxx@xxx.xx> wrote in message 
>>news:432a19fc.2065574015@152.91.10.200...
>>
>>... neglecting Hawking radiation.
>
>Perhaps there is a size limit where the formation of appropriate
>particles becomes too improbable to continue the decay.  The decay
>could get stuck.
>For example coult the BH+ emit an e+ and leave a neutral BH in place?

Black holes "emit" particles by evaporating; the particles that they emit are 
random.

>As the BH lightens up its circumference would be proportionally
>smaller making an interaction less likely with the hawking radiation. 

It would evaporate faster the smaller it gets, meaning more radiation.

>>
>>> The mass would be much greater than protons though.
>>
>>Why?  Couldn't the BH have the mass of exactly one proton?

Again, it'd have to be a primordial BH with that mass, and I'd suspect one 
that small would have already evaporated.

>Yes I was wondering if protons were BH with a + charge and similarly
>electons a BH with a negative charge.  But they have too many other
>properties.

We know protons consist of quarks, so protons cannot be BH.

>
>>
>>>  So it could
>>> behave as a high density hydrogen.  There would be slight 
>>> shifts in
>>> the chemical properties due to the high mass of the "nucleus" .
>>
>>"Slight"?  Tritium is significantly different in behavior.
>the heavy BH+e- "atom" could be like a superheavy tritium.  Slow
>reactions, higher boiling, as well as high density.
>The change in chemical properties would not be a result of space
>curvature or time dilation,  but nulear mass.
>>
>>Note that an electron and a positron form positronium, which 
>>could look like *very* light hydrogen.  But isn't.
>>
>>David A. Smith 
>>
>>
>or you could do an electron and a meson.
>or a meson and a nucleus.
>
>
>X X
> X
>X X