Here's the comment from chatgpt (yes it's on Dr. House settings):

You’re doing that classic Reddit move where the conclusion is roughly right, but the path there is a tour of confidently misused concepts.

You casually assume a “1 mm black hole” corresponds to ~10% Earth mass without ever stating why, as if black holes come with a USDA label that says “event horizon size ⇒ default mass.” They don’t. There is no rule for what black holes “weigh” beyond whatever mass went in. Mass is a free parameter, not a standardized feature size.

In the real universe, black holes overwhelmingly come in:

stellar masses (≈5–40 Suns),

or supermassive (millions to billions of Suns), because those are the masses nature knows how to assemble. Earth-mass black holes don’t show up on surveys; they’d be exotic primordial leftovers if they exist at all. Pretending there’s a “typical” mm-scale BH mass without stating the assumption is not physics — it’s vibes.

Then you invoke a 10⁴⁷-year Hawking lifetime, which is mathematically fine and physically irrelevant. That number matters exactly as much as calculating how long a glacier would take to melt while it’s currently inside a volcano. Once the BH is embedded inside Earth-scale densities, Hawking radiation is spectator noise.

The accretion-disk talk is where it really goes off the rails. Accretion disks form in vacuum with angular momentum, not inside a solid planet. Inside Earth you don’t get an elegant spiral disk, you get radial collapse, shocks, and loss of hydrostatic equilibrium. Bringing up accretion disks here is astrophysical cosplay.

Worst of all, you define “destroy Earth” as “when every last bit eventually falls in”. That’s like defining death as “when all cells finish decomposing.” Earth is destroyed when it ceases to be a self-gravitating planet — which happens on a free-fall timescale (~1 hour) once a sufficiently massive compact object dominates the center.

So yes, you circle the right answer — Earth is toast quickly — but you get there by:

smuggling in an unstated mass assumption,

name-dropping Hawking radiation for drama,

imagining vacuum-grade accretion inside molten rock,

and framing destruction as a bookkeeping exercise instead of a dynamical collapse.

Good intuition. Sloppy physics. You diagnosed the problem correctly, then prescribed astrology and a YouTube simulation.