ah <splifingate@[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
Large
>> Hadron Collider will be completed. This mechanical behemoth located
along
>> the French and Swiss border with a total estimated cir***ference of 17
miles
>> will be the most powerful particle accelerator in existence. The
principal
>> behind a particle accelerator is that by speeding up the smallest
elements
>> 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
the
>> observation of the Higgs Boson, the LHC will be sma****ng these Hadrons
>> (specifically Protons) together at speeds almost unimaginable to the
average
>> person, at near c( .99999999 % the speed of light).
>>
>> To quantify the types of collisions, it must be pointed out that two
beams
>> 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 =
>> 1.60217646 x 10-7 joules) so the combined energies will be 14 TeV.
Although
>> 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
possibilities
>> 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,
or
>> even particle acclerators in general, I am aware that there has been a
lot
>> 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
interest,
>> or the belief that the general public is probably incapable of
understanding
>> something so complex. Still however there are several Do***entaries and
>> other programs/magazines that have covered the LHC, so I'm not fully
sure
>> why some people have not heard about this as from a financial
perspective
>> it's the most expsenive (8.2 Billion Dollars) and most powerful
scientific
>> Expirement of al time.
>>
>> Why We're Concerned
>>
>> To explain the concern thoroughly and accurately it has to be stated
that
>> the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva is not the first particle
accelerator 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
and
>> 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
construction of
>> the RHIC (Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider) such theories as MBH
Production,
>> Strangelets, and several other theories were placed on the table as
relevant
>> 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
were
>> explored, and to their conclusion the amount of energy necessary for
these
>> scenarios was not sufficient. The Large Hadron Collider operates at a
total
>> combined energy of 14TeV, which is a lot higher than the energies
generated
>> 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
is
>> 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
attract
>> 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
vanishes.
>> 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
way
>> 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
section.
>>
>> 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,
and
>> being essentially harmless, although this is comforting in theory, It
has
>> never been proven, and in fact has been questioned before. The problem
is
>> that although most people in the physics community believe in Hawkings
>> Radiation, it has no basis in observation. In 2003 Adam D. Helfer
Published
>> a paper concerning Hawking's Radiation coming to the conclusion that
>> Hawking's Radiation may in fact be incorrect, and that a Black Hole
would
>> 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,
which
>> 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
references
>> Hawking Radiation, however, if Hawking Radiation turns out to be
incorrect
>> then the Black Hole would continue to accrete mass at an exponential
rate.
>>
>> Now Hold on, No one would willingly create a machine that would create
Black
>> 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
the
>> 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
each
>> beam will pretty much collide roughly in the middle, although no
collision
>> would create a particle exactly dead center, or "still", in a relative
sense
>> 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
center
>> 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
Holes?
>>
>> It is true that these scenarios are also possible, however the problem
with
>> 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
very
>> unnatural way, not only forcing them into groups of roughly 3,000
protons
>> 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
unnatural
>> 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
entire
>> world in potential Danger. I've seen many websites calculate
>> possiblity/problem or a percentage of risk, however without many of
these
>> theories as proof, there is no accurate way to calcuate them, So
although
>> the risk potential is unknown, the risk can never be calculated at
zero.
>>
>> Although the credence given Strange Matter production, and it's
subsequent
>> catalytic behavior by the scientific community is not always mutual.
Certain
>> 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
discussion 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
concerned,
>> 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
we
>> would like your sup****t, however, the goal of this web site is
information,
>> 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
need
>> 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=2&t=72
>>
>> Black Holes On Demand (George Street Journal)
>>
>>
http://www.brown.edu/Administration/George_Street_Journal/vol26/26GSJ10a.html
>>
>> 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=1336881600&en=7c25f6
>> 782d7029e7&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
>>
>> 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=oOFSrS03wjE#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=_fJ6PMfnz2E&feature=related
>>
>> Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [2 of 3]
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQNPpeVvZ9w&feature=related
>>
>> Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [3 of 3]
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XbKZwXK-3c&feature=related
>>
>> The Large Hadron Collider: The End Of The Universe?
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPxYdObyJ2A&feature=related
>>
>>
>>
>
>You are an Alexa sock, AICMF¢!
>
>btw, Hi Alexa!
Hi, Alexa!
--
"Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic]
should be your concern, Deco."
-- David Tholen
|
