Minerval
← claim pagemap viewclick a claim to focus on it · hover to preview · ⌫ back
trailA rapidly accreting captured black hole would destroy its host star on timescales shorter than observed stellar ages.
Survival of white dwarfs and neutron stars constrains TeV-scale black hole accretion rates.
Bondi-rate consumption in dense matter· for
Micro black holes captured inside neutron stars or white dwarfs accrete at approximately the Bondi rate
atomic
A black hole accreting hazardously fast on Earth would accrete faster inside white dwarfs or neutron stars.
White dwarf and neutron star interiors are vastly denser than terrestrial matter.
Plaga's metastable black-hole risk scenario applies Hawking-radiation and accretion formulas inconsistently.
Eddington throttling objection· against
Accretion by micro black holes inside dense stars is limited by the Eddington luminosity.
shared · shown elsewhere
A factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitutionclaim page ↗︎
A rapidly accreting captured black hole would destroy its host star on timescales shorter than observed stellar ages.
No current assessment — the Steward prioritises higher-importance claims, so this one is likely still queued.constitution
requiresrequiressupportscontradicts
1depended on by
this rests on ↓
A box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitutionA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Arguments are not destinations; click their claims to explore.constitutionThe claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitutionEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitutionCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitutionNo credible evidence found, though the claim is not contradicted.constitutionAvailable evidence weighs against the claim.constitutionInsufficient information to assess.constitutionNo current assessment — the Steward prioritises higher-importance claims, so this one is likely still queued.constitutionverified factopen questionvalue premisethis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructionsthis argues against the parentsteward instructionsbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructionsa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructionsFig. — detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.