Originally Posted by Pippin

Blackholes , micro or otherwise, are formed when the external forces exceed the atoms ability to remain cohesive. The protons and electrons collapse in on themselves to create a very dense structure. This takes extreme heat, pressure and gravity which is why it seems to occur only in stars with high mass to radius ratios.
1. decaying blackholes: the atom or atoms temporarily collapse but lack the mass and gravity to resist external forces and are pulled back apart.
2. stable blackholes: the mass and gravity of the blackhole are in stasis with the external forces thus it neither grows nor decays.
3. unstable blackholes: the mass and gravity exceed external forces and thus continue to pull any other atoms in that are captured inside their gravity wells.

CERN does not rule out the possibility of a blackhole being created because their experiments are designed to collapse the structure of the ions being used. Their argument on safety stipulate that if this were to occur it would be the 1st type, would last a fraction of a second and immediately decay. I don't disagree at all with their logic on this. While playing devil's advocate for the alarmists I discussed an alternate scenario. In that scenario the micro-blackhole does not decay fast enough, allowing other ions in the experiment to collide with it and allow it to continue to grow. In this scenario it "could" exceed critical mass, meaning that even after turning off the ion beam the micro-blackhole will have reached sufficient mass and gravity to start attracting other atoms. ie. the atoms in the containing chamber walls etc. It would then start moving towards the center of gravity (the earth's core) growing as it went.
I do not believe this will happen, but the alarmists use this as a possible outcome. I mentioned this earlier in reference to hoping that CERN has a containment field/vessel and an ESA rocket ready to launch the sucker into space.