here's another paper

http://focus.aps.org/story/v16/st12

also the part I fear the most I have heard

I read stuff like "energies not seen since the Big Bang" and feel rather uncomfortable.

__________________
Don't Hate Me Cause I Am Dum

what court cases by what scientists?

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

ffrom the article

that is thing with science you do not know what will happen. when the first atomic and h bombs were tested there was a worry that they would cause a chain reaction in the atmosphere and destroy the earth. There is a risk with everything I would want to know hard numbers on the probability of destroying our planet or creating another universe before a get to worried about it. About the other scientists sueing this group people sue each other the strangest stuff at times in the states so do not read to much into that, and scientists are just people.

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

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

You seem to be sceptic on this to davidlpf

__________________
Don't Hate Me Cause I Am Dum

yep

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

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

so you also think that bad things could happen

the the last article i posted change your mind

__________________
Don't Hate Me Cause I Am Dum

I sceptical bad things will happen during this experiment.

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

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

but you seemed ok previously why the change now


are you playing with me now bud

__________________
Don't Hate Me Cause I Am Dum

my post earlier was meant everytime some new big experiment happens a few allows think cause the end of the world but world has gone on.

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

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

What david is saying is that everytime we push the boundary in an experiment such as this, regardless of the work and effort that have gone into examining the possibilities and risk factors involved, there are always a few misguided individuals out there with a lack of understanding that get all "fear-mongering" on us and start shouting from their soap box.

__________________
"The bread's hollowed out --- the veggies go on forever --- and --- oh my God! --- it's full of meat!" - Maksutov

exactly, sorry I was not clearer.

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

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

Consider a burning match. Now consider a forest fire. Within each flame, the same kind of energy is being released. The only difference, the difference that lets us light up a smoke with one and sends us running headlong from the other, is the amount -- the volume, if you will -- of that energy.

The comparison between what the LHC will do and what the big bang did is similar, only the difference is many many many many orders of magnitude larger. The energy release in the LHC is very small, compared even to the burning match, much less to the big bang.

And, as has been pointed out before, even if the LHC does manage to produce a black hole, its mass will be no more than that of the two atoms that collided, and its cross-section so small that it could very likely drift out into space, in whatever direction you choose, without actually hitting another atom.

And, as has also been pointed out before, remember that nature has been doing this kind of high-energy collision for aeons, in the form of cosmic rays hitting our upper atmosphere. We have not been sucked into any of these all-natural, wholly organic black holes yet. Not that I've noticed, anyway.

Finally, remember that mainstream news sources exist to sell their stories (or at least to attract readers to expose them to advertising), and that sensationalism sells rather better than cold, dull facts.

Fred

__________________
"For shame, gentlemen, pack your evidence a little better against another time."
-- John Dryden, "The Vindication of The Duke of Guise" 1684

Let me take a shot at explaining things.

The reason for the "kicking a stone" metaphor is the odds of risk. Apparently, the odds of this thing destroying the world--as calculated by people who do know what they're talking about--are the same as the risks of you destroying the Earth by kicking a stone. As in, hardly any. Now, in a universe of infinite possibilities, there is always some risk. As has been pointed out, there's a risk of being hit by falling bits of an airplane. However, the risk of that is greater than the risk of the world being destroyed by this.

I don't know a heck of a lot about particle physics. (I know there's such thing as particle physics, anyway.) However, I do know that particle physicists--all physicists--are people just like the rest of us. As has been pointed out, there's no reason to believe they have any interest of destroying the Earth. If they were worried, they wouldn't do it. And if they, who know exactly what the risks are, aren't worried, why should you be?

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

OK, particle physicist here (albeit one who's not currently in the field but keeping up with it). Many points have been brought up already. First, the Earth experiences cosmic ray hits of higher energies than the LHC on a daily basis. If these would have created black holes, strange matter, etc that would end the world then the world would have ended millenia ago.

While this is a commonly reported story I think the physicists of the time made it more in jest than in earnest. In my student days I knew several profs who had worked on the Manhattan Project, including one who helped cut graphite bricks for the first reactor and was present when it went critical in the squash court in Chicago. While there was some degree of uncertainty, they had enough confidence in their physics to know they weren't endangering the existance of Chicago, much less humanity, with their experiments.

Bmpbmp, you should check out the RHIC website. If anything, that accelerator stood a better (albeit infinitesimal) chance of causing TEOTWAWKI than the LHC. If that still bothers you, I recommend staying in bed. You stand a better chance of dieing in a car accident than you do from a black hole from the LHC. On the other hand, don't studies show most people die in bed? Better get out while the getting's good.

__________________
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind." - William Thompson, 1st Baron Lord Kelvin

"If it was so, it might be, and if it were so, it would be, but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic!" - Tweedledee

This isn't right. This isn't even wrong. - Wolfgang Pauli

Well Eta C, your probably right about that but alot times a new technology or somebody pushing the boundaries of science a little you get end of the world stories, on area outside of physics is stem cell research one group claims that it will help cure alot of genetic based diseases but another group automatically gets worried about a world of cloning.

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

http://davidsuniverse.wordpress.com/

Whoah this board got busy since I last logged on!! Well what to say so much to read. What can I say? All the arguments against LHC seem to ask us to beleive that kicking a stone is the same as what goes on inside a LHC. Please give me a scientific link that tells me that the risk is this small. I seriously do not think that the risk is the same. I am not worried about mini black holes at all and have not been too worried about them. I am more worried about the production of strange matter which has been brought up.

As to somebody bringing up that I am worried about The SUn going out?? As I have stated time and again on that thread but obviously you have not read it properly at all, I wondered if the scientist was talking a load of rubbish as I thought the chance of fusion stoping in the Sun seemed absurd. As with regards to an Asteroid.... I Just wondered what the actual effects would be of one splashing down. You didnt see me posting and worrying about the end of the world there at all. The only subject I care about is this one. I don't care about Planet X or the Mayan Calander, Papal Prophecies etc... I think they are a load of rubbish.

If you're worried about cloning, don't eat fruit
If you're worried about radioactivity, don't buy a watch with glow-in-the-dark hands. Or a fire alarm.
If you're worried about high-energy particles, buy a lead safe and crawl inside.

There are risks everywhere. The point is that they are *manageable* and for the most part a lot less dangerous than the tabloids would have you believe.
Check out this article. Many people worry about the completely outrageously unlikely stuff instead of the everyday risks that are of much greater impact to our lives. So - drive safely, quit smoking, get exercise. And don't worry.

__________________
"We do not require reality to conform to the expectations of the ignorant"

I already said. If the LHC could produce strangelets then the cosmic "radiation" can too. The fact that my body does not contain a single strange quark tells me that either high energy collisions between atomic particles do not create strange matter or that strange matter does not infect "normal" matter. So either case, no risk. The assumption that matter containing strange quarks would turn other matter in strange matter too has never been shown. It is what it is. Just an assumption that has never been backed up with evidence and therefore was dropped by mainstream science.

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

The atom bomb igniting the atmosphere story if often heard. They were worried about it for a while but they did a lot of work on the subject and did mor ethan a few calculations and found it would not happen. All of this being done well before they exploded anything. When the test date came they knew they werent going to set the atmosphere alight

Not that it would mean anything I looked up the maximum energy the LHC can give a particle. When using heavy ions energies up to 575 TeV per particle (1150TeV for two colliding ions) are possible. Thats 30 times the energy the RHIC is capable of.
They expect to find the Higgs Boson or other supersymetrical particles.

Facts:
LHC - the most important parameters

Length: 26,659 km
Magnets: superconductive at 1,9 K (Dipole and Quadrupole) bzw. 4,5 K
magnetic field: max. 9 Tesla
colliding particles: protons and heavy ions
Emphasis energy: 14 TeV for protons, 1150 TeV for heavy ions
collision rate: max. 40 million per second
voltage of acceleration field: 5WV/m

For the black hole problem.
I did a little reading. The gravitational force of a two particle BH does not suffice to attract anything. To be sucked "inside" it would have to hit it straight on. Given the densities on earth this is highly unlikely.

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

If we use the Eddington accretion rate from the bases of the accretion theory as argument, then it follows that with a typical accretion efficiency of 10% a mini hole of the mass of 1 TeV could gather 10^-36 gram per second from the environment. If one assumes once that the mini hole gathers mass constantly with this accretion rate, then it would only have gathered a mass, which corresponds to only one electron after some quintillion years!

And this only assuming that Hawking Radiation does not exist. Otherwise the BH would be gone by 10^-22 seconds.
A BH can grow only if its initial energy density is above 10^10 GeV/fm^-3 assuming a plank mass of 1TeV. If tests at the LHC would show it to be higher this energy density would be even higher.

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

The cosmic ray model is not valid for the LHC. It has been said that cosmic rays, which have more energy than the LHC, show that there is no danger. This may be true for accelerators that shoot high energy particles at a zero speed target. This is similar to cosmic ray shock on the moon's surface. In these cases the center of mass of interaction retains a high speed. This is different from the situation at the LHC, where particles with opposing speeds collide. With cosmic rays (mainly protons in cosmic rays) we need a speed of 0.9999995 c to create a micro black hole of 1 TeV and after the interaction the micro black hole center of mass will have a speed of 0.999 c. As MBHs are not very reactive with matter, calculations indicate that this is more than enough velocity to cross planets or stars without being caught and to escape into space.

Is what is said on one site. Any thoughts. Not that Mini Black Holes concern me that much.

The difference between the creation of MBH in the atmosphere and those produced in a collider that smashes two particles with opposing speed is the resulting velocity of the MBH. The first moves at a specific speed in a specific direction. The second one could stop. Still it is too small do any harm. It does not matter if it radiates away because Hawking was right or not. Either it is gone after a fraction of a second, even before the other resulting matter recombines, or it will gather the mass of one electron after some quintillion years. Who cares?

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

I think my big concern here is the fact that they are trying to create a whole new particle (Higgs). I mean if this is a new particle that they have never seen before how can they calculate the risks on it. I mean how can you actually calculate the outcome of actual particles interacting with a new type of one. Even though you say they hit the earth all the time wy way stronger than this there is still the new Higgs particle that you know nothing about


Quote from Laguana

No we are using the same particles. We just give them more energy.
The resulting "particle" that we want to make appear is something we have not yet "seen".

__________________
Don't Hate Me Cause I Am Dum

I think you're confused a bit here. They're not trying to create an entirely new particle; they're trying to collect evidence that will prove the existence of the Higgs boson. If it exists, it's been there all along; if it doesn't exist, they're not going to make it.

You might try this link: Higgs Boson: One page explanation
It gives several short explanations of what the Higgs is and what they hope to do with the LHC.

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

As Jim already said. The higgs boson is nothing that would have been created for the very first time.
We just need to create them to be sure the theory about the higgs field is correct. The theories predict them to exist and we are very sure they do, we even know roughly what mass we could expect it to have. Just up to now, we did not have the energy to produce a particle with a mass as high as the mass of the higgs boson.
Proving the theory to be right, or better say it the other way round, not proving it false, would bring us to an explanation why a photon has no rest mass and why the other particles do have their specific rest mass. It would bring us to an explanation about what causes mass.

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

I just realised that if the black holes *don't* spontaneously decay, they're a very good candidate for Dark Matter. Now that would be cool.

__________________
"We do not require reality to conform to the expectations of the ignorant"

Someone on another board told me this is a very unprotected experiment when I asked why he replied the following

Since a singularity has infinite density yet no 'size' it would fall through any material, the earth's gravity would accelerate it to the point where it would 'fall through the earth' and out the other side, as I said coriolis would do the rest. as it passed through it would 'absorb' the atoms around it.


He is refering to the method of containment they are using

Does this make sense

__________________
Don't Hate Me Cause I Am Dum

No, it makes no sense.
1. The BH would be attracted by earth and accelerated to its gravitational center. It would pass it, would then be decelerated and would fall back to the gravitational center. After some periods it would come to rest at the gravitational center.
2. As mass consists mainly of free room and the BH is much smaller than the particles, I doubt that the BH would hit anything on its way.

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

This is what he said a worst case scenerio can be

I would suggest that any such black hole created would 'melt down' as soon as it's mass reached the density of a nuetron star, surely this would be after consuming only a tiny fraction of matter, say a kilogram or so. THis would then accelerate to the centre of the earth and continue right out the other side, and then return, the coriolis effect would 'twist' the exit position each time. Every 45 minutes it will have drilled a hole through the earth, at two specific lattitudes until the earth was 'sliced into 3 parts - the effect on plate techtonics would be awsome it would grow with each pass, each 'hole' would be slightly larger than the last.

__________________
Don't Hate Me Cause I Am Dum