Well I mean I don't want to wake up in 70 years and find out that China or England was the next victem of the micro-blackhole.

But seriously....is that actually possible? If so they're basically saying that we could create a blackhole that could destroy our world, but it won't be our problem to deal with? That doesn't seem too cool Could someone put my mind to ease?

How do black holes form? Answer that and your mind will be at ease.

A star collapses, or this LHC creates one?

What do you mean?

You just changed what you said...

Your other post said that IF it were to happen, it wouldn't have much any effect during the lifetime of the Solar System.
It would take too long and the Sun will have baked the Earth long before then Anyway.

NOW you are claiming 70 years? And it's quite clear that you invented that 70 yezars off the top of your head...

Like I said- Fear Induced...

I can put your Mind at ease:
Long before Earth is devoured by a Black Hole- The Sun will grow into a Red Giant and devour Mercury and Venus.
If it does not devour the Earth as well- then it will bake everything off of it turning it into a very hot gasless and waterless rock.
But it won't be OUR problem...
In fact, the odds, although minimal odds, are actually pretty good odds over that type of timeframe- That something will have banged into the Earth and done some wiping out anyway before the Sun goes all Red Giant on us.

All of this assumes that a Nearby SuperNova does not douse the entire planet in extremely Lethal radiation first. And that has a pretty good probability of happening within the next 100,000 years or so.

Black holes form from imploding stars is correct as you said. Now are they imploding stars at the LHC?

haha, no sir, not that I have heard

Then why the are people running around shouting about blackholes? Is this another media driven ploy? or was this thought up by the botanist and biochemist?

LHC has just a slightly better chance of forming a black hole than microwaving a frozen burrito does. When they talk about the "chance" of it happening, it's easy to take that term out of context. It's the same way that other quantum phenomenon give us a chance of instantly appearing at the other side of the universe, yet in all the years of human existance no one has ever recorded a case of anything "warping out". Because science strives for accuracy, they will note this "chance", but it doesn't mean it's a good chance.

I'm getting tired of people latching on to the word and running around spouting doomsday prophecies. Most, if not all, of the people who are worried about this and are protesting the LHC do not even know what it is, much less what it does. I read a headline today that said some of the operations people over there are now recieving death threats if they continue to move towards these experiments. It's frustraiting to see over-hyped, under informed individuals interfering with one of the greatest achievements of this century.

Bah.

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"In order to increase awareness of the homeless, security have been given binoculars."

Name one black hole researcher or astrophysicist that claims the LHC is going to produce black holes.

You say that like it's a bad thing but it's just a jump to the left, then a step to the right

In spite of how you worded this much more eloquently than I could have...

I still must give you three demerits for Understatement.

It's putting constraints on what a hypothetical stable black hole could do if it existed. There are a number of lines of arguments, but a key one is that if were possible for micro stable black holes to occur on Earth, they would also occur on white dwarfs and neutron stars due to natural high energy events. These are much denser than Earth, so, assuming micro stable black holes, would be converted into black holes far more rapidly than Earth. The population of white dwarfs and neutron stars we observe means that if micro stable black holes did exist they would take longer than the lifespan of our solar system to consume the planet.

None of this means that stable micro black holes exist or can eat planets.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Asystem your question and concerns echo mine. The scenarios described in that report do not reflect the conditions of the experiments that will be performed. ie. cosmic rays don't create blackholes, so us mashing heavy ions won't create one. And yes Nightfly please read the report so you see the part where they claim it will be the same energy release of 2 mosquitos colliding, they wrote that not me. Again I don't even pretend to be an expert so don't quote me, however, what we know about blackholes is that they are created by the intense pressure created by gravity in large mass suns. This pressure causes high density masses in the core of the sun causing its collapse as adjacent atoms are pulled further and further towards the interior in a chain reaction. The process is significantly slowed by the tangential acceleration of particles due to rotation. The concern that some have expressed is that should a such a stable high density mass be created it will be in essence a micro -black hole, but that it would not be in the center of the planet, it would be on the exterior and thus moving in concert with the surrounding mass. This could allow it to begin growing while moving towards the earth's core in mutual attraction to the center of mass of the planet. While it would indeed take an extremely long time to "devour" the earth , the effects on the earth's axial rotation would be devastating under this scenario in a much shorter time. I am not personally worried about any doomsday stuff, but like you I read that report and found it to be full of non supporting facts and not reassuring. Did I get that right everyone ? If not, correct me, without flaming me please.

I'm tired of it too. I guess people just want certainty. But thanks, I feel a lot better.

Oh and to Lepton, I know, I haven't heard of any saying it. I was just saying the only people that have gone to court over it are people not qualified to do so, am I right?

Oh ok, My mistake.
I really was wondering how you came up with that one

I did dl and read most of the PDF, but not all of it. Much of the reading was also skimming. I stopped around the second graph because my brain was starting to swell up something awful.

NightFly...

I kinda like that....
Bear in mind- for my part at least, I tend to be blunt and rather goofy which can sometimes be misinterpreted as angry or flaming.

It usually isn't.

When I get to the point of flaming someone- they have ZERO doubt in their mind that I am flaming them

If an essentially micro black hole was formed the gravity it would have is the gravity of the two particles that collided. That would neither grow or last long enough to travel more than 10 meters in any direction.

Does anyone remember that sci-fi film about someone trapped in a ground hog day(or few days), where they switched on some sort of experiment machine or something.


[off topic]hey guys, what do you think about the hurricane, is it gonna hit New Orleans do you think?

__________________

Yes you are right and it is really funny how these people think they have the right to make CERN stop and cater to their alarmist beliefs.

Don't they realize that if something was realisitcally going to happen, literally whole nations would have intervened lol?

No. The mindset is pretty similar to most conspiracy theorists (not as "out there" though). They seem to believe they are the only ones who see the danger and it is there job to inform or save humanity.

Did these fears spring up during the last collider in the US? Or wherever it is?

Didn't follow it but I am sure there were some alarmists. There were protests at three mile island, indian point and big rock but those are only three that I was aware of.

"When the LHC achieves its design collision rate, it will produce about a billion proton-proton collisions per second in each of the major detectors Atlas and CMS."

Thats from section 2 in their report "The LHC Compared with Cosmic-Ray Collisions"

I'm playing the part of devil's advocate here, but should these multiple collisions occur without the expected immediate decay, you can see where I came up with the multiple car fiery mess in the middle of the street analogy. 2 particles is nothing to worry about, however the mass and energy resultant in 2 billion heavy lead ions accidently mashing together is quite a different matter.

And keep in mind they are purposely trying to create a particle with a higher mass, density and energy level of any known existing particle in the universe and then compare that particle to a cosmic ray(single electron with insignificant proportional atomic mass).
In the immortal words of Alfred E. Neuman
"What me worry?"

I'm starting to think that you didn't really read the report you linked to.

Is that your own claim, or did you find it somewhere? In fact, they are trying to produce particles that occur all over the universe, but doing it where they have hardware that can study them.

Eh, no. Only about one percent of cosmic rays are electrons, and the high energy particles we call "cosmic rays" regularly impact other particles, as they will be doing in the LHC.

That's the point, they aren't doing anything that isn't already happening in nature.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

No, I'm not getting it. What "immediate decay" are you talking about?

Where do you get the idea that there would be 2 billion heavy lead ions mashing together?

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

These are separate proton-proton collisions happening between protons in beams moving in opposite directions within a volume where the beams intersect. These are not multiple protons intersecting together at a single point, or even along a plane. It is extremely difficult to get protons to stay close together, or especially, to collide. This is why it has been so difficult to build fusion reactors.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

This is a false statement. The LHC is designed to produce unprecedented energy levels. There is at least one faction at CERN who predict that the LHC will produce miniblack holes at the rate of one per second. Here's the link again since you obviously missed it last time: CERN Courier: The case for mini black holes

Doesn't exactly sound like they think that black holes are as likely to come out of a burrito, does it?

That's a bit of an exageration. The conditions at LHC will be unique. There's more involved than the one fact that each particle will be 14 TeV. There are two beams that will millions of 14 TeV collisions per second (enough power to render 1 ton of copper to a puddle of slag) in a tiny volume. That doesn't happen anywhere else in the universe. We shouldn't be surprised if there are unique consequences.

So how come you're not working for these guys Warren?
You clearly know much more than they do...