Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!su-ai.arpa!REM%IMSSS
From: REM%IMSSS@SU-AI.ARPA (Robert Elton Maas)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: antimatter -> black hole
Message-ID: <8603181749.AA05299@s1-b.arpa>
Date: Tue, 18-Mar-86 12:57:17 EST
Article-I.D.: s1-b.8603181749.AA05299
Posted: Tue Mar 18 12:57:17 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Mar-86 03:01:11 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 19

Although fusion isn't very efficient (compared to antimatter/matter
anihilation), and antimatter/matter anihilation may be very difficult
to engineer, dropping matter into a black hole is both efficient and
relatively safe/simple once you have a black hole handy.

Unfortunately the more matter you drop the more massive the hole gets.
Fortunately the only part of the matter that ends up really in the
hole is the part not converted to energy, so the more efficient you
can engineer the system the slower the hole gets massive, so with
close to 100% efficiency the hole lasts close to forever.

What is current expert opinion on the existance of small black holes
in the centers of asteroids, which you can discover by shoving the
asteroid away suddenly leaving the hole in approximately its original
orbit? What is current expert opinion on making black holes from
scratch by some kind of microscopic implosion followed by feeding it
some additional mass to bring its blackbody radiation temperature down
to room temperature so it will be stable during storage before
spaceship launch?