Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
G&M on page 26 provide a conservative, lower bound on accretion time of 3 x 105 years. Enough time to evacuate the planet's population to Mars, thankfully!
|
300,000 years eh?
So, the WORST most HORRIBLE case possible- If all our Physics which has so far been observed to be correct magically turns wrong somehow- We have 300,000 years to figure out what to do about it?
Sheesh!
We're due for a Massive GRB at least 200,000 years PRIOR to that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
Dr. John Ellis admitted as much in the recent CERN colloquium when he said that the best way to put an end to the safety debate was to get the LHC up and running as soon as possible.
|
Is this your representation of his words?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
If the thing is as safe as they say it, there should be no problem. (Well, actually, I confess that even if it is as safe as they say it is, that is not safe enough in my book--
|
I'm glad you are not in charge of my safety standards in my life. I'd be confined to a straight jacket and a padded room.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
especially when there are practicable alternatives available, like single-beam colliders.)
|
Which have yet to yield the high energy results necessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
Well, do you think that there might just possibly, potentially be a 1 in 1,000 chance that G&M's paper is so horribly wrong due to some oversight that we can't see now, but in hindsight will be so obvious that they will have to retract their paper from Physical Review Letters?
|
Not really.
No more than I think Relativity will be shown to be horribly wrong.
Is it possible? Of course.
Is it 1:1000- I really do not think so.
Warren Platts, You seem to be getting more and more hyperactive in your emphatic stance as these two threads progressed. 1:1000 that ALL KNOWN quantum Mechanics are Horribly Wrong?
Get Real.