Paper detail

Universal charge-mass relation: From black holes to atomic nuclei

The cosmic censorship hypothesis, introduced by Penrose forty years ago, is one of the corner stones of general relativity. This conjecture asserts that spacetime singularities that arise in gravitational collapse are always hidden inside of black holes. The elimination of a black-hole horizon is ruled out by this principle because that would expose naked singularities to distant observers. We test the consistency of this prediction in a gedanken experiment in which a charged object is swallowed by a charged black hole. We find that the validity of the cosmic censorship conjecture requires the existence of a charge-mass bound of the form $q\leqμ^{2/3}E^{-1/3}_c$, where $q$ and $μ$ are the charge and mass of the physical system respectively, and $E_c$ is the critical electric field for pair-production. Applying this bound to charged atomic nuclei, one finds an upper limit on the number $Z$ of protons in a nucleus of given mass number $A$: $Z\leq Z^*=α^{-1/3}A^{2/3}$, where $α=e^2/\hbar$ is the fine structure constant. We test the validity of this novel bound against the $(Z,A)$-relation of atomic nuclei as deduced from the Weizsäcker semi-empirical mass formula.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author5 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Authors

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.