🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3%pWe.253220$E95.218326@fed1read01>,
   "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <N: dlzc1 D:cox T:net@nospam.com> wrote:
>Dear Octa Ex:
>
>"Octa Ex" <xxx@xxx.xx> wrote in message 
>news:432a19fc.2065574015@152.91.10.200...
>> On 14 Sep 2005 03:41:47 -0700, hog.badger@mbox.bol.bg etched in
>> cyberspace:
>>
>>>Before replying off the cuff, consider a planck-sized BH that 
>>>has an
>>>electric charge of -1.
>>>I cannot see it participating in the shared electron cloud of a
>>>covalent bond, but might it balance up, say, an ammonium ion, 
>>>allowing
>>>the crystalisation of Ammonium BH?
>>>
>>>How about a planck-sized BH with an electric charge of +1. 
>>>Could it
>>>substitute for a hydrogen nucleus?
>>>
>> In theory it could.
>
>.... neglecting Hawking radiation.
>
>> The mass would be much greater than protons though.
>
>Why?  Couldn't the BH have the mass of exactly one proton?

It'd have to be a primordial BH with that small mass, and wouldn't one that 
small have evaporated by now?
>
>>  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.
>
>Note that an electron and a positron form positronium, which 
>could look like *very* light hydrogen.  But isn't.
>
>David A. Smith 
>
>