Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
> Art Deco <erfc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> found these unused words:
>
>>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!
>
> Big bunch a'dis Alexa's!
Yo, 'Lexa!
--
ah
|
