On May 1, 9:29=A0pm, ah <splifing...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Doomsday Machine wrote:
> > French And CERN Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole
Generator=
)
> > Unknown Planetary Risk To Create BIG BANG
>
> > French Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator)
> > Old Dying Physicists want to go out with a BIG BANG
>
> > What are we talking about?
>
> > Many helpful Links and Video links at end of post.
>
> >http://lhcconcerns.com/
>
> > In May of 2008 the largest, most expensive scientific experiment, The
La=
rge
> > Hadron Collider will be completed. This mechanical behemoth located
alon=
g
> > the French and Swiss border with a total estimated cir***ference of 17
m=
iles
> > will be the most powerful particle accelerator in existence. The
princip=
al
> > behind a particle accelerator is that by speeding up the smallest
elemen=
ts
> > of matter and then colliding them together that they can be broken
down
> > further into even smaller fundamental particles, just as Atoms were
once=
> > thought to be the smallest units, so then were Quarks(Up and Down),
> > Electrons, and Protons discovered.
>
> > The Large Hadron Collide is hoped to discover what is referred to as
the=
> > "Higgs Boson". Although a theoretical scalar particle theorized by
Peter=
> > Higgs in 1974, it is actually a member of the standard model, and it
is
> > believed that the Higgs Boson is what gives matter "mass". To achieve
th=
e
> > observation of the Higgs Boson, the LHC will be sma****ng these Hadrons
> > (specifically Protons) together at speeds almost unimaginable to the
ave=
rage
> > person, at near c( .99999999 % the speed of light).
>
> > To quantify the types of collisions, it must be pointed out that two
bea=
ms
> > will be set to collide with each other, each beam of protons contains
> > roughly 2,800 Protons with an energy of 7 TeV (1 Teraelectron Volt =3D
> > 1.60217646 x 10-7 joules) so the combined energies will be 14 TeV.
Altho=
ugh
> > such energies in collisions are certainly occurring every day in
space, =
this
> > will be the first time that energies such as these will be observed on
> > Earth, however what is alarming to us are the myriad of other
possibilit=
ies
> > that could arise.
>
> > Why haven't I heard about this before?
>
> > Honestly, this is a good question, I seem to come accross this
response =
a
> > lot, it seems that in general most people have never heard of the LHC,
o=
r
> > even particle acclerators in general, I am aware that there has been a
l=
ot
> > more coverage of this in the UK then the America's (probably due to
it's=
> > geographical location), but also I suppose the main reason why it is
not=
> > covered that often in the states is because of a general lack of
interes=
t,
> > or the belief that the general public is probably incapable of
understan=
ding
> > something so complex. Still however there are several Do***entaries
and
> > other programs/magazines that have covered the LHC, so I'm not fully
sur=
e
> > why some people have not heard about this as from a financial
perspectiv=
e
> > it's the most expsenive (8.2 Billion Dollars) and most powerful
scientif=
ic
> > Expirement of al time.
>
> > Why We're Concerned
>
> > To explain the concern thoroughly and accurately it has to be stated
tha=
t
> > the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva is not the first particle
accelerato=
r in
> > history. In 1929 the Cyclotron, invented and developed by Ernest O.
> > Lawrence, was the first particle accelerator, and from that initial
> > invention over several decades we have come into a new breed of Larger
a=
nd
> > More Powerful Particle Accelerators. Although we have had particle
> > accelerators in the past, The luminosity at which these operate has
> > increased dramatically, in fact it is true that prior to the
constructio=
n of
> > the RHIC (Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider) such theories as MBH
Producti=
on,
> > Strangelets, and several other theories were placed on the table as
rele=
vant
> > possibilities.
>
> > So, what's different this time?
>
> > This is the point that has to be emphasized, this time things are
quite
> > different, a study was conducted after initial concerns for the RHIC
wer=
e
> > explored, and to their conclusion the amount of energy necessary for
the=
se
> > scenarios was not sufficient. The Large Hadron Collider operates at a
to=
tal
> > combined energy of 14TeV, which is a lot higher than the energies
genera=
ted
> > by the RHIC, as such the possibility of Black Hole creation is a
reality=
, in
> > fact on CERN's own web site they admit it could create Black Holes,
here=
is
> > an excerpt from Safety at the LHC
>
> > "If the LHC can produce microscopic black holes, cosmic rays of much
> > higher energies would already have produced many more. Since the Earth
i=
s
> > still here, there is no reason to believe that collisions inside the
LHC=
are
> > harmful. Black holes lose matter through the emission of energy via a
> > process discovered by Stephen Hawking. Any black hole that cannot
attrac=
t
> > matter, such as those that might be produced at the LHC, will shrink,
> > eva****ate and disappear. The smaller the black hole, the faster it
vanis=
hes.
> > If microscopic black holes were to be found at the LHC, they would
exist=
> > only for a fleeting moment. They would be so short-lived that the only
w=
ay
> > they could be detected would be by detecting the products of their
decay=
.."
> > We'll cover the theoretical problem of this statement in the next
sectio=
n.
>
> > So, what's the problem?
>
> > In theory (according to Hawking Radiation) any Black Hole created
would
> > eva****ate in Femtoseconds, not having the chance to accrete any mass,
an=
d
> > being essentially harmless, although this is comforting in theory, It
ha=
s
> > never been proven, and in fact has been questioned before. The problem
i=
s
> > that although most people in the physics community believe in Hawkings
> > Radiation, it has no basis in observation. In 2003 Adam D. Helfer
Publis=
hed
> > a paper concerning Hawking's Radiation coming to the conclusion that
> > Hawking's Radiation may in fact be incorrect, and that a Black Hole
woul=
d
> > not lose mass in such a way. (For the full text of this do***ent go
here=
> > Paper By Adam D. Helfer on Hawking Radiation.)
>
> > In fact since the LHC has been on the drawing board several studies
and
> > theories which have gained a lot of sup****t in the scientific
community =
such
> > as "String Theory" and "Extra-Large Hidden Dimensions" have surfaced,
wh=
ich
> > do indeed place the threshold for Black Hole Creation much lower than
> > previously thought.
>
> > The main problem lies in believing in theory as fact, every argument
for=
> > safety made concerning Black Holes and thier creation immediately
refere=
nces
> > Hawking Radiation, however, if Hawking Radiation turns out to be
incorre=
ct
> > then the Black Hole would continue to accrete mass at an exponential
rat=
e.
>
> > Now Hold on, No one would willingly create a machine that would create
B=
lack
> > Holes on Purpose?
>
> > Of course not, I highly doubt the thousands of scientists involved
wish =
to
> > usher in Oblivion any quicker than politicians, however the danger
lies =
in
> > Theory being accepted as Fact, Adam D. Helfer Published a paper
recently=
> > which outlines a very strong possibility that Hawkings Radiation may
in =
fact
> > not exist, which would actually fit in better with the Laws of
> > Thermodynamics, at which Our current explanation and understanding of
th=
e
> > nature of Black Holes has always been somewhat at Odds.
>
> > Alright, so if a Black Hole created doesn't eva****ate, what next?
>
> > Here is another place that CERN's safety *****sment is incapable of
> > addressing, although these extremely high energy collisions each
Proton =
beam
> > is in fact coming from opposite directions, Over 2 thousand Protons in
e=
ach
> > beam will pretty much collide roughly in the middle, although no
collisi=
on
> > would create a particle exactly dead center, or "still", in a relative
s=
ense
> > any MBH or fundamental particle created in such a manner (even with
both=
> > beams at a speed of .99999999 c) would be in a relative sense, at
Rest, =
or
> > to elaborate the term at rest we mean lower than the necessary escape
> > velocity to escape the Earth's own gravitational pull.
>
> > At that point two hypothetical scenarios exist. It would either
maintain=
a
> > rather low orbit within our planet itself, slowly accreting mass at an
> > exponential rate, or it's possible it may "gravitate" to the direct
cent=
er
> > of the planet in which case would accrete mass very quickly
>
> > Wait a second, I've also heard of other dangers like "Strange Matter",
> > "Bubble Nucleation", and "Magnetic Monopoles", why the focus on Black
Ho=
les?
>
> > It is true that these scenarios are also possible, however the problem
w=
ith
> > representing them accurately is the true danger can never be
quantified =
as
> > None of these have been observed, however that does not mean the risk
is=
> > zero. The very fact that this experiment is called an experiment is
the
> > prove a hypothesis, if the results were truly known then this would
not =
be
> > occurring in the first place.
>
> > The Large Hadron Collider is going to be forcing Protons together in a
v=
ery
> > unnatural way, not only forcing them into groups of roughly 3,000
proton=
s
> > for the collisions, but exposing them to temperatures colder than
space =
as
> > well (1.9 K or -271 C). These types of collisions in a sense are
unnatur=
al
> > because collisions at those speeds and temperature would never happen,
> > meaning at the point of activation, no one will truly know these
results=
> > until they occur, in a matter of Femtoseconds we would be placing the
en=
tire
> > world in potential Danger. I've seen many websites calculate
> > possiblity/problem or a percentage of risk, however without many of
thes=
e
> > theories as proof, there is no accurate way to calcuate them, So
althoug=
h
> > the risk potential is unknown, the risk can never be calculated at
zero.=
>
> > Although the credence given Strange Matter production, and it's
subseque=
nt
> > catalytic behavior by the scientific community is not always mutual.
Cer=
tain
> > types of Strange Matter could be formed that would catalytically
convert=
all
> > matter that it touches into strange matter as well, although this is
not=
as
> > likely as creating a Black Hole, it's worth mentioning because it is a
> > possibility.
>
> > I want to learn more, where can I go?
>
> > The internet is a good place, it brought you here, didn't it? Of
course =
you
> > could always visit the links on the site, and take part in our
discussio=
n on
> > the forum, I would recommend familiarizing yourself with all the
issues,=
and
> > a basic understanding of Black Holes won't hurt either, of course I
can
> > always recommend reading A Brief History of Time or the Universe in a
> > Nutshell there is always Google, for as many people as there are
concern=
ed,
> > there are people who believe the danger is zero, it's im****tant for
you,=
to
> > properly evaluate the facts and come to your own conclusion, of course
w=
e
> > would like your sup****t, however, the goal of this web site is
informati=
on,
> > discussion, action, and rationale, we are real people after all, and
so =
are
> > you.
>
> > Thinking outside the box can't hurt either, I encourage you to Talk to
a=
> > Professor at a local college, write a Letter to CERN, do whatever you
ne=
ed
> > to do to inform yourself and make an informed decision, any
contribution=
you
> > make, even discussing with one other single person in the world, has
the=
> > possibility to make all the difference.
>
> > Links..
>
> > Large Hadron Collider
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider
>
> > CERN
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CERN
>
> > LHC Concerns
>
> >http://lhcconcerns.com/
>
> > National Geograhic - The God Particle
>
> >http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/03/god-particle/achenbach-text
>
> > BBC News - Lab Fireball May Have Been Black Hole
>
> >http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4357613.stm
>
> > An Open Letter To Stephen Hawking
>
>
>http://lhcconcerns.com/LHCConcerns/Forums/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3D2&t=3D=
72
>
> > Black Holes On Demand (George Street Journal)
>
>
>http://www.brown.edu/Administration/George_Street_Journal/vol26/26GSJ...
>
> > CBC News - LHC
>
> >http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/science/lhc.html
>
> > New York Times - LHC Dangerous?
>
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/15/science/15cern.html?ex=3D1336881600&e..=
..
>
> > LHC Legal Defense Fund
>
> >http://www.lhcdefense.org/
>
> > MySpace STOP CERN Website
>
> >http://www.myspace.com/stopcern
>
> > LHC Risk Evaluation Forum
>
> >http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org/
>
> > YouTube music Video Of The Atom Smasher (LHC) Black Hole Generator
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DoOFSrS03wjE#GU5U2spHI_4
>
> > French Build Doomsday Machine
>
> >http://www.misunderstooduniverse.com/France_Builds_Doomsday_Machine.htm
>
> > U-Tube Videos
>
> > Do***entery
>
> > Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [1 of 3]
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D_fJ6PMfnz2E&feature=3Drelated
>
> > Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [2 of 3]
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DMQNPpeVvZ9w&feature=3Drelated
>
> > Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [3 of 3]
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D_XbKZwXK-3c&feature=3Drelated
>
> > The Large Hadron Collider: The End Of The Universe?
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DfPxYdObyJ2A&feature=3Drelated
>
> You are an Alexa sock, AICMF=A2!
>
> btw, Hi Alexa!
> --
> ah
One hears that when not around Deco ah makes it with a massive object,
while not as destructive as a strangelet, can cause massive blindness
in young teen boys - something Deco should be interested in!:
http://tinyurl.com/ychwao
|
