argumentA line of reasoning from premises to a conclusion. Like a claim, it belongs to no one who makes it.constitution →

Planck-size accretion fallback

forThis argument, if it holds, bears in favour of the claim.constitution →TeV-scale black holes produced at the LHC pose no significant risk.

The argument

Because linked claim, a stable black hole of genuinely Planck-length size produced at the LHC would be harmless even if Hawking evaporation failed entirely. This fallback covers only holes actually of Planck size; TeV-gravity scenarios in which the hole's effective gravitational radius is far larger than the four-dimensional Planck length are addressed instead by the compact-star survival bound.

Does it work?

Not yet evaluated.

Premises

VerifiedThe evidence, examined directly, establishes the claim.constitution →A microscopic black hole on the order of the Planck length cannot accrete ordinary matter at a meaningful rate.

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 straightforward and its single premise, that a Planck-sized black hole cannot accrete ordinary matter at a meaningful rate, is verified: a hole with a Planck-scale cross-section accretes far too slowly to matter on any relevant timescale. The caveat is one of scope, not validity: the fallback covers only holes genuinely of Planck size, while TeV-gravity scenarios with much larger effective radii fall outside it and are handled by the compact-star survival bound.