{"id":3072,"date":"2012-01-27T04:45:24","date_gmt":"2012-01-27T12:45:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/?p=3072"},"modified":"2014-05-09T04:17:15","modified_gmt":"2014-05-09T11:17:15","slug":"to-settle-the-pendulum-of-mbh-decayaccretion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/2012\/01\/to-settle-the-pendulum-of-mbh-decayaccretion","title":{"rendered":"Factors on the pendulum of MBH decay\/accretion &amp; Aggregation"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I write this post on specific request from Anthony, who kindly asked that I write a bottom line summary of what I found through my research which leads me to suggest the points should be cleared up in research and\/or a safety conference on the LHC.<\/p>\n<p>1. As HR is an unproven theory, it may prove to be ineffective compared to the math model. This regardless of Rossler\u2019s Telemach theorem which attempts to prove this.<\/p>\n<p>2. The G&amp;M calculation on theoretical MBH accretion rates is fundamentally flawed, as it bases the analysis on one single MBH and fails to consider about MBH aggregation.<\/p>\n<p>3. As HR is an unproven concept, it cannot be relied upon to detect MBH. The only method to be certain no MBH are created is to monitor unaccounted loss of mass\/energy.<\/p>\n<p>As concerns raised in the public domain were not being answered sufficiently, there is a moral duty for a public safety conference to discuss likely MBH decay\/accretion rates.<\/p>\n<p>I dismissed what I would consider the more colourful risks. I\u2019m considering writing a follow-on whitepaper on the topic of MBH aggregation. If two MBH aggregate at any point it would halve the G&amp;M calculated time-frame, and further aggregation would reduce the accretion time-frame accordingly. If frequent MBH aggregation was a typical expected occurrence, then you would have a run-away effect, so this requires an analysis.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I write this post on specific request from Anthony, who kindly asked that I write a bottom line summary of what I found through my research which leads me to suggest the points should be cleared up in research and\/or a safety conference on the LHC. 1. As HR is an unproven theory, it may [\u2026]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":196,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1507,30,12,48,410],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3072","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-environmental","category-ethics","category-existential-risks","category-particle-physics","category-transparency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3072","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/196"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3072"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3072\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3072"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3072"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lifeboat.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3072"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}