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!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!ucbvax!brahms!desj
From: desj@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: antimatter -> black hole
Message-ID: <12499@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Thu, 20-Mar-86 05:12:30 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12499
Posted: Thu Mar 20 05:12:30 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 22-Mar-86 05:28:06 EST
References: <8603181749.AA05299@s1-b.arpa>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: desj@brahms.UUCP (David desJardins)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 15

In article <8603181749.AA05299@s1-b.arpa> REM%IMSSS@SU-AI.ARPA
(Robert Elton Maas) writes:
>... dropping matter into a black hole is both efficient and
>relatively safe/simple once you have a black hole handy.
>
>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.

   I give up.  I don't have a clue what you are talking about.  How
is dropping things into black holes supposed to create energy (at
"close to 100% efficiency")??

   -- David desJardins