[Col. Fishguts]

Yeah...but so does the moon.
If the moon was sucked up by a tiny black hole, it would probably circle Earth exactly like the moon does now.

[Ashrak]

and keep sucking up whatever gets close dus get bigger etc?

[kasperl]

Does the moon collide with the earth?
No.
Then a black hole with the mass of the moon will act the exact same as the moon.

Mass!=volume. For stuff like orbits, only mass matters. Yeah, and volume once you start having things so close that the surfaces intersect, but that's very rare. If the mass stays constant, then the orbit remains constant. (Not completely true, but in this case, yes).

[Carl]

Originally posted by Ashrak
and keep sucking up whatever gets close dus get bigger etc?

yes, but no more than the moon would.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Ashrak
and keep sucking up whatever gets close dus get bigger etc?

The moon is in a vacuum. What exactly is it going to suck up? I don't think that solar wind is going to result in any enormous changes in mass on anything other than a geological scale.

[aldo_14]

[Zarax]

I'm sure some smart ass would try to use such a black hole to dump various kinds of waste...
The human civilization can surely kill itself by confusing a black hole with an unlimited recicle bin

[Ace]

On the bright side, if this is true then the "naked singularity" theory has been proven false. Meaning that when the black hole exposes its singularity after it has evaporated the universe gets fried.

[Unknown Target]

What?

[Ford Prefect]

Soooo... who's read Hyperion?

[Rictor]

So you're telling me that if the moon was replaced by a black hole with the same mass as the moon, nothing would really change?

Science may be on your side, but my common sense rebels against such a conclusion. Its just so...wierd.

[Styxx]

Originally posted by Ford Prefect
Soooo... who's read Hyperion?

First thought that crossed my mind when I saw this thread.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Rictor
So you're telling me that if the moon was replaced by a black hole with the same mass as the moon, nothing would really change?

Science may be on your side, but my common sense rebels against such a conclusion. Its just so...wierd.

Absolutely no difference except that it would be darker at night.

Every other effect the moon has on the Earth is a due to gravity. Gravity is a function of mass and the distance from the center of that mass. Since neither of those two have changed you couldn't possibly notice any change unless you went closer to the new centre of mass than the radius of the moon. Only then you would start to notice a difference.

[Rictor]

Well that, and no more werewolves. Which I think everyone can agree would be a big relief.

[Flipside]

I prefer not living a few million k from a singularity though, I sleep easier at night knowing it's the moon and not singularity, in fact

It's all very clever and groundbreaking, but other than a way of rendering material beyond the realms of recycling and remove it from Earths resources permanently, what purpose does it serve?

[delta_7890]

It could be the ultimate military weapon. Why bomb a country when you can just suck it out of existance?  XD

[Flipside]

Well, wasn't the point of the 'Gay Gas' to make it suck itself out of existence?

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by Rictor
So you're telling me that if the moon was replaced by a black hole with the same mass as the moon, nothing would really change?

Science may be on your side, but my common sense rebels against such a conclusion. Its just so...wierd.

There was a short story written about this not too long ago (1999).  Next time you're in the library, look for "How We Lost the Moon" by Paul J. McAuley in any of the recent science fiction collections.  It's quite entertaining... reads rather like Douglas Adams.

[adwight]

Originally posted by karajorma
It lasted billionth of a second and then disappeared again. As long as you're careful with them quantum black holes are actually quite a good energy source. Feed them matter and they spit out gamma rays. Much better than anti-matter because you only need one black hole. No need to go through a produce-destroy cycle (Which suffers from the fact that it takes more energy to make anti-matter than we get out of it anyway).

Actually it was a million, billion, billionth of a second, that's a REALLY short time.

[Grey Wolf]

Anyone read "The Compleat McAndrew" by Charles Sheffield? Rather interesting way to use black holes in that book....