RaGeZorZ

I have to agree, regardless that just means its still a massive undertaking and we still have to go larger, it's far from easy, but it's still easier than others and (with some give and take) within our reach.

My guess would be that because of it accumulating mass along the way, it 'might' actually slow itself down along the way, but further still I did throw in another possible means of dealing with this which was to launch a second one down in such a way that it either kicks the 2nd out completely and slows itself to a relative standstill or have them gravitationally separate due to interactions with the earth itself this "should" leave them with low enough momentum to keep them roughly within the confines of the earth without much additional effort (seeing as we've already built whatever machine we decide is best to make singularities with) a final option would be to make a second on the exact opposite side of the earth and send that on the same path so as to force them to collide (how to ensure that what they're eating up doesn't steer them off-path is far beyond me.

well if ya want to go with technicalities, then the easiest way is just simply to wait.

well, just like unexplained fires... that's a matter for the courts But you sir are right, and again I point out if we put all our top minds on it I bet we could come up with something we are after all working with hypothetically all of earths resources

Correct... however Further still. There are other , similar to those for other applications, which are not as specific.

Hey I was talking within Human capabilities, the LHC is only one possibility, the fusion reactor is probably more likely.. It'd Be a massive undertaking regardless, but it's a metric ****tonne easier than deorbiting a moon (for example) you're right it would (sorta) have to overcome local gravity, but that's why I suggested sending it to the core, so that the local gravity would actually be assisting it (similar to how removing the sand from the bottom of an ant-lion pit drags the sand around it down) But that being said being a black hole means it's compressed enough that it would easily overcome the local gravity if put in close enough proximity and the larger it gets the the more stable it becomes, by the time it reaches the core it should be sufficiently large enough to withstand the gravity pulling from all sides without much hindrance, again, exact numbers are not my problem... simply proposing a broad solution to a complex, and specific problem. Further still I wasn't thinking economically feasible, like the xkcd What if?'s I was thinking, hypothetically

Destroying the earth may be easier than most people think, now I'm going to start off by saying I'm not a trained professional by any stretch of the imagination, but I do know a little bit about physics and I think I have one that's within our technological reach (not developed fully but could be if this was for whatever reason necessary[don't ask me why]), but basically the concept revolves around essentially creating a micro-singularity(miniature black hole) and forcing it to the center of the earth, which would cause the core to collapse and (atleast hypothetically) cause the crust to either get thrown off into space or collapse inwards... So problems= 1.Creating a micro-singularity (miniature black hole) Surprisingly... not really that far out of our grasp, we already know that the LHC is capable of producing black holes not even remotely strong enough to destroy anything at all mind you, and they dissipate so fast that it's as if they were never there, but that's not all we know for a fact that we can use magnetic fields to crush matter together to fuse, so all we really need is a massively scaled up Fusion reactor(like this) with additional power or... a massively scaled up version of the LHC to accommodate now this will certainly require some effort to fine tune, but it's most certainly not outside of our reach. 2. Stabilizing the micro-singularity to avoid premature dissipation. For this all we really need to do is scale up, more material, more energy... essentially a larger black hole should do the trick.. how large is problem... but not my problem... I'm sure if (for whatever reason) we're doing this, that we're using the top scientists and well... they'll figure it out 3. Getting it to the center of the earth... This I'm not sure about, my assumption is that it'll sorta pull itself down there and that gravity will do a damn good job of pulling it in, but the most mass it accumulates the more matter will actually distance itself, so we may end up (if I'm not overthinking this) with a sorta bowling ball finger hole in the side of the earth. So once the black holes formed we may have to give it a good magnetic kick in the pants to get it to the core. 4. Once at the core.. we run into another problem... keeping it there and can we make it large enough to cause the core to collapse as opposed to just boring a nice big tunnel, again I Suspect gravity may be a help here, but for stopping it... perhaps just let it go and let the accumulating mass slow it down... or potentially send two down in such a manner that they gravitational interact and launch themselves off in opposite directions (hopefully the increased mass from the 2nd pass would cause them to crash into each other on the 2nd pass) 5. Motivation... Because F**k you, that's why! and finally we have it we 'should' have made the earth essentially go either nova or black hole-i-fied