Its possible to have small volume super dense matter (neutron stars for instance put multiple solar masses into something not much bigger than a city). But, if infinity stones are small sized super dense objects like neutron stars material, won’t the stones themselves create a significant gravity and magnetic field and basically be imposible to carry in septers or orbs or whatever? Would they not simply destroy anything within a few meters of them anyway?
(Put this in GQ rather than CS because I want an actual answer about the possible physics,not a movieland one).
Even our moon , and this planet, terra aka earth … has accretion,
Even asteroids the size of your room have accretion…
Accretion is where the debris that it comes near is stuck to it …
One way to decide if an object near a massive object is stuck, is if does not have escape velocity.
Suppose you had a stone A near another stone B, and wanted to shoot A away from B, to unstick it ? Well the energy required to boost a supermassive stone to escape velocity is simply totally enormous, you can then calculate how much damage that energy can do to the stone… (break it apart, heat it up due to tides ,etc).
Well anyway yes neutron stars and black holes (whatever they , even if they are simply very massive neutron stars… ) do suck in matter due to this effect, they suck in stars and dust clouds and so on.
The law of gravitational attraction still applies, and the math isn’t too hard. The only difference between a chunk of neutron star and some other far less dense object is that it’s possible to have the distance between M1 and M2 be much smaller.
Suppose we have a 5-cm sphere of material from a neutron star, and I place a 1-kg mass 10 cm away. By my math, the attractive force between them is 161,596 N, or 36,325 pounds. That 1-kg mass had better be very strong and very well-braced to avoid collapsing toward our supermass and flowing out onto its surface. A solid steel sphere of appropriate alloy might have the strength to resist destruction when brought near the supermass, but most other things will collapse when subjected to that kind of force.
If you are holding a scepter with this supermass at its tip you will feel a very strong attractive force on your body. Moreover, it won’t be a constant force in a constant direction: your body will be subjected to tidal forces that will shred it as it collapses toward the center of the supermass. The supermass, being so heavy, won’t move toward your body; instead, your body will move toward the supermass, while the supermass itself accelerates wildly toward the center of the earth.
I wouldn’t expect any magnetic fields unless the material in the supermass is magnetic and flowing.
Sorry to get all vague in General Questions, but you’re asking about something from a comic book universe…
They’re described as “singularities,” which has two main definitions:
the state, fact, quality, or condition of being singular.
a point at which a function takes an infinite value, especially in space-time when matter is infinitely dense, as at the center of a black hole.
So the Mind Gem, for example, was formed from the mind “singularity” which existed before the Big Bang. Before the Bang, that singularity possessed all the Mind Control power in the entire universe. Likewise the other singularities possessed all the power of their spheres of influence for the entire universe. After the Big Bang, there are other things which have that type of power, but it’s nowhere near as much bang for the buck. Doesn’t mean it’s super-dense, just super-powerful.
And while we’re at it, the entire stone might not be composed of the ultra-dense stuff (if that’s even what they are). Maybe most of the stone is just a container of sorts, with the real mojo being in something the size of a pinpoint in the very middle.
That depends on how you define “appreciable.” The law of gravitational attraction says that the attractive force varies with the inverse-square of distance: double the distance, 1/4 of the force, for example. So if a 1-kg mass at 10 cm gives 36,000 pounds of force, moving it to 100 cm (10X the distance) should give 360 pounds (1/100 the force). Moving it to ten meters (100X the original distance) should give 3.6 pounds (1/10,000 the force).
If we’re talking about you (rather than an arbitrary 1-kg mass), then the distance is more difficult to define, at least until you are sufficiently far way so that the distance is large compared to any linear measure of your body. Other than that, the force scales with mass, so at ten meters, an 80-kg man would expect about 288 pounds of force pulling him toward the object. If there was a floor strong enough to hold you, you’d have difficulty standing on it. if 3 pounds of force is the definition of “not having any appreciable effect on you,” then you’d need to be a good 100 meters from the object.