Blackhole generators

Just an idea.. but creating a blackhole on a planet would be a fun option. The blackhole begins smalls and grows bigger with every passing minute. Basicly it will create a race against the clock to evac the planet and/or prevent your opponents to complete the evac

just no.

Yaaa...No....Smash planets, and making them explode is more fun then making them implode XD

I don't know for the main game, but I'd definitely want to play with that in mods, if possible. I'd see that as the result of a singularity supergenerator (so the price wouldn't make it an easy way to destroy a planet - even compared to asteroid strikes), which would give some more flavour to such a high-end generator. The black hole release itself would cause devastation as it would eat/turn into plasma local matter as it plunges into the planet's core.
A planet would probably slowly turn into a lava planet, then into an unusable planet (like after an asteroid strike, probably) before slowly shrinking until there is little more than a small black hole and possibly some stuff in close orbit. The same but less would probably happen with an asteroid.
A gas giant would probably shrink and heat, possibly ending up like a small star before disappearing, but don't quote me on that.
I wonder what should happen when dropping a black hole into a star. Would it end up exploding? Turning into a runaway red giant? Slowly fade out? If we don't know, I'd go with supernova just for fun. After all, when we are at a point where we shoot black holes at each-other, why not?
That's something I should definitely ask to an astrophysicist...

Interestingly, the orbital layer would be unaffected.

It could be used to make asteroid strikes harder to strike, as destroying the asteroid wouldn't still stop the black hole, though the planet busting would be slower then.
Note that a black hole in orbit would stay in orbit, so an orbital version of this generator could be interesting. Also, some ways to manipulate a released black hole would probably be necessary, which may or may not include neutralizing a black hole already in a planet's core. Culminating, possibly, with a black hole gun, as nothing would resist such projectile.

The timescales for a planet to be destroyed by a micro-black-hole would probably be far longer than any game (I'd bet years at least), but scales being stylized as they are, if this destruction happened in minutes, it would probably not be that shocking.

So this may or may not be possible or wise for PA itself, but I sure hope that it possible in "fun" mods.

I figure until we actually know what black holes are, and how they work, that we should keep them out of the game. Instead of playing with the science fiction that is currently presented as theory.

I would disagree with your conclusion that black holes are science fiction, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

That said, I don't believe they have any place in PA (for gameplay anyway, might make a nice backdrop), and if they do, it would be in the galactic war mode on a scale larger than any playable solar system.

Just a small point, ALL science is theory. Science can disprove theories by finding contrary observations or measurements, but it has no way of proving anything conclusively.

There is no way to properly test most gravitational theory's beyond observation with current technology. Observation of current objects is all fine and well but doesn't explain much of how everything within our solar system works together universally or even on a galactic scale. Unless somebody has a gravitational neutral lab somewhere to test a gravity centric idea..... Which I don't see being possible. The cool thing about gravity is that it seems operate at an instantaneous level far beyond the speed of light. There are things that can be proven as fact, however it needs a backing of evidence supporting the claims, observations, and lab testing to verify theory with publicly available results and the ability to duplicate.

Science Fiction: No matter at all can escape a black hole, not even light.

Science Fact: Black holes emit a incredibly powerful bipolar jets of matter.

Also Science Fact: You cannot create, nor destroy matter.

The last two completely disputes the current accepted function of black holes. They make plenty of excuses of why this happens but none of them make any logical sense.

Regardless of how real black holes work. It just doesn't sound like very good game play.

Both asteroid strikes and black holes exist to blow up planets. So aside from some differences in special effects, at the end of the day a planet gets wrecked.

With an asteroid strike you have to land on the thing, build engines on it, and send it at a planet. All the while protecting the asteroid from whoever you are crashing it into. I am picturing epic battles against the clock to take out a miniature base before it crashes into your planet.

I just don't see a black hole being that interesting. Especially since the only way to implement it is probably just going to be making a player build a really expensive building or unit, then pressing the "Black Hole" button.

Well, i wouldn't want a black hole superpower that keeps spreading endlessly and swallows the whole system. But if it only spreads to any orbiting bodies, sure.

And i assume you would have to build the generator at the place you want the black hole? So if you want to consume a planet you need to build a generator there or at a orbeting moon, (but if you build it at the moon it would take some time for it to reach the planet so the enemy would have time to escape).

Would be a nice "fail safe", if you have one on a good planet and the enemy is about to win. Offcourse it shouldent be unbeatable either, the enemy would just have to send some attacks at it early and it would have to be very expensive and slow to build so you cant just build one on a enemy world within seconds.

... maybe we have enof super weapons now when i think about it. Mini experimentals, nukes, astroid projectiles and death stars are all confirmed...

I think this would be so jarringly different from reality that it could potentially detract from gaming enjoyment. The sheer size and power of real black holes would mean they'd instantly devour the whole solar system. Which is kinda not fun.

OK, discussion for realism: Based on above mentioned knowns, we could assume that a black hole created by a compression of a mass and energy to the point where all nearby matter is attracted by gravitational forces that outmatch the various sub atomic repulsive forces. This then generates a highly unstable point that would dissipate through gamma ray expulsion (high enough energy to escape). This is probably why (without understanding most of the physics behind such things, not that many people do) no one with any sense was worried about the creation of black holes with the LHC - if contained they simply vanish in a burst of energy.

Seeing as how it will be the future and all, and we're dealing with science FICTION, does it really matter how realistic such a thing is? If we can make a black hole that can be sustained until let loose, we can probably make an anti-matter warhead that would blow it up before it gets too dense (hopefully not destroying the whole planet in the process...unless that's what you're aiming for). So sure it would require a lot of resources to make, but, given the right technology and a little bit of creative thinking, it need not be as devastating as sending a small moon at the planet (a lot harder to deflect once it's shielded and on course).

Anyway, who cares. Seeing all someone else's hard work being sucked into oblivion would be AWESOME!! ... !!!!!!!!!!! (i felt the need to emphasize that)

There are various other scenarios also:
-Need to build satellites around a star and cause it to go nova/super nova/implode and devolve into a neutron star/implode and suck everything nearby in (would require some depiction of star size and mass when setting up each system)

-Need to build the singularity in zero gravity before doing anything with it due to instability. The singularity can then be converted for interstellar travel (wormholes are fun or weaponised

-Taking influences from star trek, they can be natural phenomenons that pass through you're system, causing planetary instability. This might be a useful idea for a scenario where you have to build your base on a dying planet and defeat the enemy, all before it tears itself apart. You'd get blown up if you win or not, but you get to taste victory or defeat before you go.

No. It would not be awesome to see an opponent's base vanish into a black hole. I'd much rather see it go up in a thermonuclear explosion or any other way that does not involve it vanishing without sound/visuals... (Really, 13 exclamation marks?)

Devolving a star into a neutron star does not magically increase it's gravitational pull. A star that's converted into a neutron star/black hole keeps the same mass, so nothing is sucked in that wasn't already on a course into the star.

There is no such thing as zero gravity. Also, it hasn't been confirmed there's going to be battles over multiple stars. (I do not believe it to be necessary, there's plenty of rocks in a single planetary system.)

Random things: BAD in my opinion. Look for random weather effects on this forum, there's been plenty of discussion on it.

To be honest, implosions can be just as awesome as explosions, if done right. Those that include sucking objects in especially. You just don't see if often.

Yes, I'm sure that when scientists with world reputation describe how black holes most likely works it's complete bulldust, and when they explain by which mechanisms they can produce bipolar jets of matter, it's pitiful excuses. They are only scientists with world reputation, after all, and are concerned by little more than keeping said reputation...

Wouldn't work, the black hole would eat the moon and happily continue to orbit the planet without affecting anymore than the moon itself did. If you turned the Moon into a black hole right now, it would hardly change anything here on Earth (apart for darker nights). The tides, for example, would remain the exact same.
Black holes aren't black magic.

And this is why it may not work in PA, though it would have its place in "fun" modes.

I doubt anyone suggested that you can generate stellar black holes. Now that would indeed be jarring. But there is nothing impossible to generate micro-black holes, with, say, the mass of a mountain. You'd need something bigger than the LHC for that, but if you can build planetary thrusters, you would most probably have both the technology and the industrial capabilities to build a micro-black-hole generator.
On the other hand, if said micro-black-hole acted like a stellar black hole, or even worse as a Space Vacuum Cleaner OF DOOOM!!! that eats entire star systems, now that would be murderously stupid.

Note that black holes need to be at least as massive as a dust particle, or they evaporate. Though I'd say that you'd want something heavier than that to have effect on a reasonable time scale.
Also, blowing it up with antimatter warheads wouldn't work. It would either absorb the warhead (antimatter is the same thing than matter for it) or absorb the energy (photons are like matter for it, simply moving faster).
On the other hand, as it's soft-SF, we can imagine some black hole evaporator, something that force the evaporation by <technobabble> it with <technobabble>. You'd expect it to release the same energy than an antimatter warhead of the same mass, but maybe it wouldn't be the case because <technobabble>

Also note that if anything, something eaten by a black hole is not something "without visual or sound". The tidal forces would generally break it apart, heat it and turn it into bright plasma before absorbing it.
If it's an entire planet, you can expect it to last for a long time with lots of visuals.

Too much science people.. I was inspired by the following youtube movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXzugu39pKM

What I had in mind is the option to build a device which consumes more and more energy over time untill it reaches a point where the blackhole forms and starts doing its thing.. Basicly you end up building more and more energy generators to avoid running out of energy otherwise you can't keep up with your enemy in building new units.

While the planet is consumed the race to evac the planet is on but also to prevent the opponent to evac. The device is difficult to build and defend because it is not wise to build it right in your own base (it will be consumed first) but I doubt the enemy will allow it to be build in his base :mrgreen:

If destroying planets is an option in the game we need multiple options to do this or else it gets boring and you end up watching for the same signs to detect if the enemy is trying to destroy the planet.

Stochastically, that's what happens. If it were to absorb enough mass before going poof, then it won't go poof and we'd have a nasty problem. Fortunately, the time frame for going poof is in the order of femto-seconds (maybe hyperbole there, but it's really small), and the chamber they'll be made in is in near vacuum.

I dont think that black hole generators would fit with what Uber are trying to achieve, in the context of how they have been suggested the role is more or less filled with converting an asteroid into a KEW, and there is a lot more gameplay elements that can take place surrounding that concept.

On top of that I would find it a bit jarring. Even a small blackhole would become larger from taking in extra mass and I would find a blackhole that stayed static and only devoured a planet a bit odd.

It also seems to run counter to the rest of the grades of tech depicted in the gameplay visualisation. Everything from transport to warfare is achieved with "Bigger and better" conventional ideas. Tanks and rockets, even unit cannons and KEW are just an ACME style escalations of conventional concepts. It is all high tech implimentations of conceptually low tech goals (KEW = throw a REALLY big rock at your opponent) and something that generates a blackhole would seem to stand counter to that.

You could say this about any of the fundimental interaction forces. All we can do is observe, and when we experiment we observe the results, the only difference is that we can be assured of some of the variables. It is like Zordon showed with the hypothesis testing diagram. In science we should apply Occams razor, and trust our observations until other observations override them. Not conclude that they are all wrong because there is testing still to be done.

Wrong, the speed of influence of gravitational fields is still in contention for a precise speed but it is widely accepted at this point to propagate at the speed of light. There are many things that we can observe, confirm and not lab test. This isnt highschool rules of science. You could apply that and talk about the existance and mechanics of stars, galaxies, and other aspects of astronomy. We cant reproduce such things in a lab but we have a pretty damn good idea of how they work, and our understanding improves all the time.

I wont argue the details of black holes specifically, because there is a lot of contested theory and observations yet to be made and I am not an expert of the physics of black holes but I did want to address this.

You absolutely can. Nuclear weapons gain their destructive force from destroying a small amount of matter and releasing a LOT of energy. Likewise if you use enough energy you can produce matter. E=MC^2. Energy equals mass times the square of the speed of light.

The only thing that can't be destroyed is information. Even in black holes the information is not lost. Some even think we are already destroyed and what remains of us is the information which can be seen at the event horizon of that black hole..

Oke.. now we are going too offtopic

Based on his posts regarding science, sleepwarz is a handy counterexample to this principle. His brain seems to very efficiently destroy any information that comes into contact with it.