@EvilSOB: It seems that you misunderstood me a litte. My definition of a black hole, is EXACTLY the same as yours (an object with so much gravity that even light can't escape).

And I do know that antimatter is not the same thing as black holes. But I did read and hear that small, unstable black holes are going to be created in the LHC. That's why some people think that because of the LHC we are all doomed. (Funnily, the first run with first energy is planned for 2012, which may make them think they are right :D).



Then black holes would be impossible, but this would also mean that Einsteins theroy of gravity is wrong.

Nah Lucas, I started typing my post before yours was posted.

My post wasnt a reply to anyone, it was a general "to whoever cares to listen" post.

And I dis-agree with 'that' statement by Damocles too.
If space cannot bend that far, then pretty much all of astro-physics is screwed...

For the record, light can be bent. We see some stars which should hide behind objects straight in our line of sight. But those objects are sometimes very heavy, bending the light of the star behind it around its body, and we see the star anyway on a different spot.

But this is not what damocles meant I think. Damocles means that matter may not be able to bend light enough that it will never escape. I would disagree on intuition but have no arguments right now.

The best evidence supermassive blackholes exist is otherwise our galaxy wouldn't hold together. The center is supposed to have one big supermassive black hole.

Also if we replace our sun by an equally heavy black hole (disregarding the needed mass here) nothing strange would happen other than that light disappears. The earth will still revolve around our new black hole, and the moon around the earth. Gravity remains the same.

No, a theory must not be wrong. Just not correct in extreme situations.

The same applies to Newtons theory of gravity.
It is not correct, but also not wrong, as it explains
all of the "everyday" phenonema.

The theory of Relativity is (as everyone knows) lacking
to explain phenomena at quantum level. Thus it must be
an incomplete theory.

And gravity beeing "a bend in spacetime" is just a
visual approach, - another way to explain its mechanics.
It is not an explanation! of what it really is, just what it
does.