No it doesnt. Most GRB's we have models to explain. Not a few of them though.

Thinking about it I would argue that the various ultra-low temperature experiments are as likely to cause a major unforeseen accident as high energy ones as ultra-low temperatures are far rarer in nature than high energy particles so there haven't been the very large number of natural experiments demonstrating the safety of them.

Why would the rate of GRB's go aginst it? Average of one a day. Woudlnt theoretically many civilisations exist in the universe?? Not that I want to start saying GRB's are LHC going wrong. I want to look at the fact that we dont know enough about what we are doing to do these experiments.

Yes it does, I was assuming that all the unknown cause GRBs were from events caused by high energy particle collisions (natural or otherwise), in fact even if all GRBs are in fact the result of particle collisions the fact that we only observe one per day in the whole universe it means that it must be a very rare type of event. Therefor as nothing that LHC can produce is particularly unusual the odds of it producing a major event are very low.

As I pointed out before there are relatively common natural events that reproduce what the LHC will do, and more than that produce events hundreds of millions of times as energetic as the LHC. Weather a particle has been accelerated naturally or artificially doesn't make any difference to the physics of its collision with another particle.

The first person to use fire to cook a meal didn't know that. Indeed, for that time, fire represented a tremendous risk.

The folks running the LHC have had more training and examined the situation more carefully that that first Great Chef did.

Yet, you seem to take the position that "cooking a meal" is not so hazardous that you are giving it up anytime soon.

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

Whay are they doing it if it oocurs naturally? It's a dangerous thing to do. We dont know what we are doing here at all. Well not enough to start doing these experiments. I realise doing these experiments is needed to know what we are doing but I think it has potential danger. It can not be said it is totally safe. It isnt.

What on Earth does bringing up cooking a meal have to do with colliding particles near the speed of light?? Its a very weak argument against it. Fire was about when they cooked a meal. The two subjects arent even in the same ball park. Not even the same league.

Except that particles have been colliding at nearly light speed for much longer than there has been fire so the exact same argument applies. In fact as many of the naturally occouring collisions are far higher energy than any thing any particle accelerator we are capable of building can produce its an even better argument for the safety of particle accelerators.

NOTHING is perfectly safe, there is a constant risk of death from a million different events some of which we can control some of which we can't. Driving a car is dangerous yet people do it every day, using a fire is risky but even more people do it every day, living outside a mile deep bunker is dangerous and yet no one is claiming we all should, and so on for many many other things. A certain level of risk must be tolerated in order to be able to function and if something is sufficiently below that then it can be ignored, the odds of anything the LHC does resulting in the destruction of the Earth is no higher than the few million comparable natural events that have taken place since you began this discussion.

Okay, wait a second...

I must be missing something...explain this if you would.

__________________

See my first post in this thread, ultra-high energy cosmic rays have been observed with hundreds of millions of times as much energy as anything our particle accelerators can produce (up to the point of having the kinetic energy of a reasonable baseball pitch!!!).

Okay, thanks.

__________________

DirtyG
You said you dont want to Die.
Got bad news for ya
YOU WILL!
I understand what you mean but you are making a mountain out of a molehill.
You Think those people Working LHC are suicidal?
Dont have families too?
Do you REALLY think they'de fart around and Blow up the galaxy?
Give em some CREDIT!!!
Im gonna have to read up on this topic if im going to talk intelligently about it..
and this thread will be LONG gone before i CAN talk intelligently about it
but i kinda had to point that out to the Worry Wart

We've explained, they are doing it in the LHC so that they can collect more data than you would by just observing natural events. It is like studying the effect of high speed collisions between cars. You could just wait around some street corner, hoping for a car accident. Or you can set up a controlled collision in a test facility, using automatic devices to drive the cars instead of people.

The Earth is constantly hit by particles with energies much higher than anything they will make in the LHC and it hasn't been destroyed in 4 billion years. On the list of dangers to the planet, this is so far down the list as to be close to meaningless.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

and also you have to be within the event horizon to feel the effects of a singularity and since this has such a small mass the event horizon will be so small it would only affect a small arae, also micro black holes like the ones the would create would evapourite very quickly too. also scientist is such a broad term because of of the subfields physics which was subfields of its own so are these scientist experts on black holes or are the biologists.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

Quantum Physicists

The claim is that a Universal Instabilty could be instigated into a collapse....... By our Insane Experiments
Kinda like the A bomb would Ignite the atmoshpere Theory...

well when the experiments are over we will find out if it just evapourites or destroy the universe. my guess it just evapourites.(theory not my strong point more observational)

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

Well if its the other
we would vanish BEFORE we knew what happened..
leaving nothing behind to contemplate..
"What the ***! just happened?!?!"

as said before you could go out driving your car tommorrow and end up in accident, more then likely that this micro black hole would end the world.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

im counting on the Gary Larson Check out...
Figure ill be Devoured by a Python.


If these LHC guys ruin that ill be MOST upset

will the pythons name be monty.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

oh i hope not......

sorry just could not resist.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

We are the men........












who say NIT!

dirty_g we know what we have to expect when we do these high energy collisions on LHC. We have models and theories about high energy physics. All we are doing there is testing if our predictions are correct. As all other high energy collisions, that occured naturally, we have ever observed did follow our predictions we could expect that our man made experiments will do the same.
No one can proof that there is no risk. You cannot do it. You cannot prof that your car will not fall to the core of earth, you cannot proof that your christmas tree will not ignite by itself and you cannot proof that the LHC will do no harm. That is how logic works.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

Just to give an impression about what energies we are talking about.
The LHC will try to find the Higgs particle. Its Mass is assumed to have an energy equivalent of about 175 GeV. Thats 1.75*10^11 eV.
The particles of the cosmological radiation, impacting our atmosphere, have an energy equivalent around 10^20eV and more.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation

Very much in the same league.

The first person to use fire to cook a meal had no idea how dangerous it might be. He (She?) knew that fire was hot and that fire could burn, so there was a most definite risk associated with it. What she didn't know was the effect the fire would have on the meat. Or what effect the cooked meat would have on people.

It's a risk-benefit thing. You need to determine what the worst case scenario is and rank it, and then decide how likely it is that the worst case will happen. If the product of those two is low enough, and the potential benefit is high enough, you accept the risk.

If you eat cooked meat, you take this risk every time.

The same reasoning applies to the LHC.

What is the worst case scenario? What is the likelihood it will happen? The product defines the risk.

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

Cooking food isnt even the same sport as the experiments in an LHC. You can dress it up all you like but I am not agreeing on that one. I do realise that scientists have obviously put some study into the dangers of using an LHC. The worry for me is that the danger is still there. Yes whilst there is a certain amount of risk in everything we do from taking a walk to going bungee jumping the scale of what will happen in the LHC raises alarm bells in my head. As with a previous post with a link I attached I raised the points that the energy used here would be around trillions of TNT and that the magnetic field produced by such an experiment would be thousands of times more powerful than the Earths. I got this information from a pro - LHC site not an anti - LHC site. Please look at the earlier post with link and let me know what you think. I'm off back to work.

Most of your links you provided lead to layman pages who express their fear without beeing able to tell what they base the fear on.
Just because I have an unfounded fear of spiders this does not make them dangerous.

The last thing at least looks like a scientific paper. But I have the impression that its look is all it has in common with a scientific paper. I will take a closer look later.

__________________
"Who does not know anything, must believe everything."
Baroness Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach 1830-1916
our animal welfare board and organisation