Apparently in this link a Professor Dr. Otto E. Rossler has suggested that the LHC is too dangerous to run on the Earth, and the experiment should only be done on the Moon in case an Earth eating blck hole is genrated




BTW what happened about the lawsuit in Hawaii?

__________________
Van Rijn's original Invisible Elf was running for the North Carolina Senate, but dropped out of the contest after the paparazzi snapped him with a cute pixie just outside Disney World in Florida. Now he has settled down with her as they await their first child, writing his biography of life in Van Rijn's backyard, - Now you prove me wrong

/sings

I see,
A-black-moon ri-sing..

Doesn't have the same ring to it...

__________________
I'm not completely heartless, the doctor who removed it told me he'd never be able to get it all.

In regard to power generating requirements that may be the case although the hazardous nature of the enterprise would cause a wages blow out for the linesman.

And what of the cafeteria ... the prices would be astronomical!!!

__________________
"Nature is obliged to let reality determine its laws, whereas mathematics is under no such constraint."

50 months?

is that an accurate figure?

is that until everything has fallen in, or just till the Earth's surface becomes uninhabitable, and covered in lava?

__________________

Is it better to not have a black hole, anywhere in our solar system?
From what I understand they have a big appetite.

depends how close you are.

__________________
'The eye can only see what the mind is prepared to accept'

The trouble is, if we got rid of the moon, think what capital the HBs will make of that?

__________________
Van Rijn's original Invisible Elf was running for the North Carolina Senate, but dropped out of the contest after the paparazzi snapped him with a cute pixie just outside Disney World in Florida. Now he has settled down with her as they await their first child, writing his biography of life in Van Rijn's backyard, - Now you prove me wrong

Technically, every paper on the internet is "currently released for peer review". Call me when it is published in a legitimate peer-reviewed journal.

__________________
Do try not to take me too seriously.

How do you "specialise" in five different fields, in three different disciplines?

Jack of all trades, master of none, except maybe in the art of self-promotion.

BTW, I believe that the activation of the LHC will cause His Noodliness The Flying Spaghetti Monster to descend from on high, and give us all a really nice meal. I suggest we activate it forthwith, to solve world hunger. The CERN has currently not reacted to my thesis and suggestions, but has also not refuted them.

(In just how many ways is the original "has not refuted" line a load of male domestic bovine feces? I count three, but I'm sure there are more.)

So I've been thinking about this whole "black hole" thing...

Let me see if I've got this right:

1. The LHC will be used to create "exotic" subatomic particles by smashing together more mundane particles at high velocities. m=c²/E or whatever.

2. Historically, these exotic particles are so called because they're extremely unstable, and tend to disappear back into the aether mere instants after they are brought into existence.

3. A black hole is basically just an object the mass of which is entirely within its Schwarzchild radius, resulting in an event horizon and the inaccessibility of all information therein.

4. It's conceivable that the LHC might produce an exotic subatomic particle the mass of which is entirely within its Schwarzchild radius--thus, a "black hole".

5. But the mass involved would be miniscule. Bigger than the masses of other exotic particles produced in lesser particle accelerators--that's the whole point of the LHC, after all--but still vanishingly small.

6. And speaking of "vanishing", per 2 (above), it's entirely likely that this "black hole" particle will evaporate instantly, just like others of its ilk. After all, if these kinds of particles stuck around, we wouldn't call them exotic, we'd see them all over the place, and we'd have names for them like Proton, and Neutron, and whatnot.

7. Not to mention Hawking Radiation, which (I think) is still largely theoretical, but is (I think) based on sound reasoning, and which--if it truly exists--will also conspire to do away with any planet-gobblers the LHC manages to produce.

8. That said, and Hollywood aside, what's so spooky about black holes anyway? I mean, yes, yes, they're really massive, I get. But plenty of things are really massive. Jupiter is really massive. Technically, Jupiter is just as massive as a black hole of mass equal to the mass of Jupiter. Would it really be all that scary if Jupiter's mass were entirely within its Schwarzchild radius? And what would happen if a black hole massing, say, two and a half protons were to collide with a titanium atom? Would it gobble up the Titanium atom? Would its gravitational force even be powerful enough to break any electrons free of the Titanium atom?

9. Oh, and hey, here's a bizarre thought: What would the Feynman diagram for photon interaction with such a black hole look like? What are the implications for QED or QCD or whatever, of subatomic particles interacting with a particle about which no information can escape?

10. Or am I not even wrong?

That's all well and good, but how much more to actually construct it there?

__________________
Numbers are not case sensitive. (me)

I think that's Rossler's goal: to make building the LHC so expensive that not even all the GDPs of all the world's countries put together could pay for it. And even if the world could afford it, they'd have to get it past the usual whining of the "we've got to solve all our problems on Earth first before going into space" crowd.

Meanwhile, what do we do with that tunnel under France and Switzerland? Grow mushrooms and age Rouquefort for the starving?

Edited to add: Of course in a few hundred years when we do have the capability of putting an accelerator ring about the Moon's equator, wow, what an accelerator that will be! We can accelerate electrons and positrons with it to absurdly high energies (by our current limited capabilities) without having to worry about the losses from synchrotron radiation. But until then we'll have to make do with what we have. The LHC is not a giant piece of chopped liver by any stretch of the imagination!

__________________
Microsoft is over if you want it.

The bar has been lowered for the promotion of ATM ideas; the bar for the acceptance of ATM ideas must remain high.

Prolly a few quadrillion dollars.

Hello all, I am a major chicken when it comes to science. In fact I think everything is going to kill us all. Honestly I think I crave being scared of science.
I am no scientist, but I've been thinking about the micro black hole situation and "threat". I don't think it is possible. After reading several articles from both sides of the argument I have to say either micro black holes do not exist or Hawking radiation is a sure bet.

My reasons for this are because of the particle collisons that take place in our upper atmosphere. If they are not powerful enough to create micro black holes than the LHC will not be. If they do create them they obviously float off or obliterate themselves instantly. The big thing about the LHC seems to be that the micro black hole would be under the surface of the earth already and it would be caught and soon work its way down to the core thus ending us all. Now I've been thinking that if this theory is possible, why are we even here? How does the Solar System exist as we know or anything else for that matter. Wouldn't the particle collisons that take place near the surface of the sun or other stars generate these same micro black holes, and if so wouldn't it be certain that those micro black holes would be trapped by the massive gravity of said star? If this were the case I don't see how any thing can exist other than black holes.

And in an even cooler idea then building a acclerator around the moon, how about one around the Earth? Say at. . . geosynchronus orbit. It could be even MORE powerful then one around the moon.

__________________

You wouldn't have to worry about maintaining a vacuum in the ring.

__________________
'The eye can only see what the mind is prepared to accept'

(my bold)

Welcome to BAUT Devy_Motova,

One or two rather small details when it comes to micro black holes:-
1. They are very small.
2. They are very heavy for their size.

Roughly speaking they don't handle corners very well. They are so small that moving around even pushing through rocks is no big deal for them.

When separating two liquids or gases and one is much more dense than the other the one with the greatest density will take the outer orbit. Because the micro black hole is so small and would move so easily without having to eat much of anything it could float pretty much treating the earth as a thin gas.

If in time enough weight accumulates the the micro black hole will find a point without too many curves that acts like the centre of gravity. In time then a micro black hole should just drift through the earth to be captured by the gravity of the sun. That is good news for us even if they get produced at an estimated rate of one every second.

If all CERN can do is make little black holes then it may be bad news for the sun but that is about it. It is some of the other stuff that is worrying.

You are either in for a normal life determined by events and planning which is a good a reason as any to enjoy each day or you are not which is an even better reason to enjoy each day.

__________________
"Nature is obliged to let reality determine its laws, whereas mathematics is under no such constraint."

Let me just clear up a few little points. First I have a different opinion to the use and usefulness of CERN as an instrument of science to the mainstream of the scientific community.

Second when looking at the installation as a large, a very large piece of equipment it is more bound by the laws of general relativity than quantum mechanics.

My personal opinion is that by using the rubber sheet analogy and ring singularity concept of extreme energy in a near absolute zero environment is that it is an excellent way to generate the required negative energy needed to form a rather large worm hole.

So while it would be an awfully expensive loss of a very big piece of equipment and highly trained personnel it would in fact be a tremendous leap forward as far as adding to the sum of knowledge as taught by the scientific principle.

My main concern if that does happen is what ever became of all those little unexplained energy losses on file and what to do about them. On the plus side of the equation is of course the incredibly deep and blue lake that France will be able to share with Switzerland.

__________________
"Nature is obliged to let reality determine its laws, whereas mathematics is under no such constraint."

wouldn't any long lived blackhole, created at the surface of a planet, just sink into the center, or swing back and forth for a bit and the settle in the middle, to get bigger and bigger?

surly gravity acts on BHs just the same as it works on ordinary matter?

__________________