I don’t think theories about strange matter that coverts all matter to strange matter when they interact existed at that time as that is the only way an experiment on earth can impact life on mars and eventually the entire universe.
Even turning earth into a black hole won’t impact life on mars.
Really? Would not have guessed this.
Mass stays the same. Even the moon would just continue to orbit a tiny black hole that orbits the sun. The creation itself will generate radiation but I don’t think it would be significant compared to the Sun because of the sizes involved.
I don’t think this is correct. I think it would likely affect the gravitational orbits of at least anything within 1 AU from Earth
Nope, like dutch said the mass would be the same so the gravity would be the same in this hypothetical situation where the earth was condensed into a black hole.
Not a physicist, but even though the mass stays the same wouldn’t the distance from some of the mass differ and thus it would have slightly less gravitational pull? For instance the moon is x distance from the surface which weighs so much and x+y from the core which also weighs so much and x+y+y from the opposite surface. In the case of a black hole it would just be x+y from the entirety of the mass. Would that not have any impact?
No. I’ll let others elaborate
I think I was correct, but maybe not for the exact reasons I thought
That person needs a physics degree.
Here is the equivalent question of the sun suddenly turning into a black hole not impacting the orbits of the planets:
https://esahubble.org/videos/hubblecast43g/
The only impact earth turning into a black hole would have is that there would no longer be tides and tides do have an impact on the moon.
x center of mass of the earth stays the same. x+y and x-y as mass on the surface cancel each other out as that is how we get the center of mass. Black hole ends up at the center of mass location not on the surface.
It is complicated, but yeah, it’s not as simple as it’s the same. I think it’s fairly easy to prove this. Say you take all the particles on Earth and condense them to a point mass that is 4000 miles away from you (that’s the radius of the Earth). You have a certain gravitational attraction that is the sum of the attraction of you to every particle in that condensed point. Now imagine you took one little point particle away from that condensed block and put it one inch below your feet directly in line between you and the rest of the particles. You’ve just increased your attraction in that direction because the attraction between you and that particle is greater than it was before you moved it.
But, your attraction to the center of the Earth is pretty complicated because it’s the sum of your attraction to every particle, but they are all in different directions from you. Moving all those particles to being all in the same direction would increase your attraction, but then moving some of them further away would decrease it, but then you’re moving more than half the particles closer to you, so surely you would have a greater attraction to the point mass Earth.
I think that just shows that your attraction is in the direction of the center of mass, not that the magnitude is the same.
(the difference would be negligible for Mars or any object far from Earth relative to the radius of Earth - but non-zero.)
True for someone on earth surface. But the moon
Yeah, you beat my edit…(but I didn’t see if first)
Think we agree that the articles about orbits becoming totally unstable is nonsense. The biggest impact change would come from tides.
Also true for electric force and other inverse square law stuff. They make you prove it in a calculus based intro to physics or electricity and magnetism course.
I wonder if the effects could be preserved by having the black hole oscillate back and forth in the direction of the common center of mass with the moon. It seems like that must happen if you form the black hole while conserving momentum.
Simple question. Why would a massive star collapsing in on itself and therefore creating a black hole be any different if its mass doesn’t change?
The way I understand it, a black hole occurs when any mass large enough and/or is compressed enough to create a singularity
Take a space satellite orbiting the Earth. If the Earth were to collapse into a small enough volume of space to create a singularity, the satellite would not maintain its same orbital trajectory. The Earth would condense to the size smaller than a marble. If the satellite were orbiting at a latitude north of the equator, its apogee would immediately change and it wouldn’t keep the trajectory and continue orbiting above the location of the singularity. The orbit would start descending towards the singularity until it got sucked in
Would the moon and Venus be sucked in as well? Probably not because the earth isn’t massive enough to create that powerful of a black hole. But the disappearance of its mass (or the re positioning of it), should at least cause some instability or disturbance of Venus’ own orbit around the Sun
Full disclosure, I’m not an astrophysicist or even a scientist. I’m just someone high on gummies who thinks this stuff is interesting af!
Why?
There’s no sucking going on. There’s just gravity, which hasn’t changed. (Ignoring whatever magic happened to form the back hole.)
I bet it would mess up the orbits of low-orbit satellites, but have no detectable impact on Venus for sure and probably barely detectable impact on the moon (not that there would be anyone to detect anything).