Talk:Black hole starship

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spaceflight Low‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Math Issues

Greetings, In this article, and in the 3^rd source, it says that a black hole that would survive a 3.5-year journey "would have a radius of 0.9 attometers, would have a mass of 606,000 tonnes, and a power output of 160 petawatts." However, I did the math and got different answers. Using the mass of 606,000,000 kg as a standard, I solved $r_{s}={\frac {2GM}{c^{2}}}\;$ for the radius and got the same 0.9 attometers, but I got a power output of ~27 GW when I solved $P={\frac {\hbar c^{6}}{15360\pi G^{2}M^{2}}}\;$ and a lifespan of ~567 years when I did $t_{\operatorname {ev} }={\frac {5120\pi G^{2}M_{0}^{3}}{\hbar c^{4}}}\;$ . My answers may be incorrect, but I really think that the values are false whether my answers are right or wrong and I think this merits immediate attention. Carbon6 ^talk 20:06, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've calculated 25.6 gigawatts and 593 years. — Reatlas (talk) 03:24, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed, I've calculated the mass of a black hole that would last 3.5 years, and it's 109,522.7 tonnes. It has a radius of 162.625 zeptometers, and a power of 29.7072 Petawatts.

in all honesty, the 29-PW black hole is probably the better option of the two if the technology to pump matter into it is available. If the reflector could handle it, I'd even argue that 10,000 tonnes is a good size, as it allows for a much better Thrust/weight ratio of ~120, assuming ideal efficiency. At that point, you could maintain 1 G acceleration on a craft of 1.2 megatonnes mass.

Even if you want a larger ship, as long as it can handle the thrust, it's better to have multiple black holes powering it over a shorter period.

As for the power from the 606 kt hole: L=1/M^2*hbar*c^6/15360/pi/G^2, so we get 97 Terawatts, with the correct diameter already listed.207.62.170.211 (talk) 17:47, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional

IRIC, fictional Star Trek's impulse engines rapidly generate micro black holes that evaporate just as fast. The ship 'rides' the resulting gravitational disortions. The hawking radiation from the evaporation of each black hole is used to help created the next black hole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.106.46.59 (talk) 02:50, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to the StarTrek Technical Manual, impulse engines are pretty standard fusion rockets (I know, booooring!), no exotic physics required.178.15.151.163 (talk) 14:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Who

Also fictional use of black hole, see http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Eye_of_Harmony please add with quality standard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.89.75.46 (talk) 09:13, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hello

i did the math about black hole evap time with the hawking radiation formula and it gave me 600 years instead of 3.5 years. i read the reference and im still confused. >:(

any help is aprecciated ! :D 46.97.176.251 (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moving the blackhole

Regardless of the method of extracting energy to make the ship move, what makes the blackhole move with the ship?

You can’t push it (it eats whatever cones into contact with), and you can’t pull it (unless you’re lowering a weight into near-contact, and even that will give you a miserable acceleration).

You could use a magnetic field to pull a rotating charged blackhole, but you’ll probably be subjecting the crew to a huge EM signal… and it’s still a very heavy thing to pull. 81.84.206.158 (talk) 00:08, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to ask the exact same thing. How do you hold on to it? 92.6.145.235 (talk) 20:42, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]