Same-physics coverage (Giddings–Mangano)
The argument
Because linked claim and linked claim, any black hole capable of Eddington-limited accretion and radiation would also arise and be retained inside compact stars. Given that linked claim, and because linked claim, such black holes fall squarely within the regime the compact-star survival bounds constrain, so the claim follows.
Does it work?
Not yet evaluated.
Premises
- SupportedThe evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →If TeV-scale black hole production is possible in particle collisions, cosmic rays striking white dwarfs or neutron stars would produce such black holes.
- SupportedThe evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →Stable microscopic black holes produced by cosmic rays striking white dwarfs or neutron stars would be stopped inside those stars, whether charged or neutral.
- SupportedThe evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →A black hole accreting hazardously fast on Earth would accrete faster inside white dwarfs or neutron stars.
- SupportedThe evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →Survival of white dwarfs and neutron stars constrains TeV-scale black hole accretion rates.
Where it is made
Passages where sources make, criticize or mention this argument. They record where it appears, not how strong it is, and none has precedence over another.
No source is recorded as making it.
Earlier ratings
- Jul 19, 2026
The inference is valid: if such black holes arise in compact stars, are retained there, and accrete at least as fast as they would on Earth, then stellar-survival bounds cover the Eddington-capable scenario. All four premises now stand supported, and the weight falls on the two calculational legs, the stopping of charged and neutral black holes inside compact stars and the density-scaling comparison, since cosmic-ray production and the survival constraint itself face no substantive published challenge. A refereed rebuttal of either calculational leg would be what unseats the argument.