|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack (4) | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
||||
|
Hi all. I myself have never been comfy with LHC's at all. There have been smaller experiments around them but now they seem to be doing more and more and it actually scares me. No joke and im not trying to scare monger others but many scientists seem to not be very comfy with the idea themselves either. here is one link though its a bit more for the layman. http://www.exitmundi.nl/vacuum.htm
here is another layman site http://www.exitmundi.nl/quantum.htm http://www.exitmundi.nl/strange.htm and http://www.exitmundi.nl/blackholes_lab.htm these are more reader friendly sites aimed at the everyman a little more scientific here http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org/anon1.htm let me know your thoughs. Does it worry you at all? It does me. Its an experiment. Experiments are what you do when you do not know what will happen. If you knew the outcome you wouldnt need to do them. It has been admitted there are very small chances that something as bad as the Earth being destroyed could happen but if a chance is actually thee and it is admitted there is a tiny chance then should we do it. In fact who the hell are these scientists to decide what happens to the rest of us?? Maybe Im mad but let me know your thoughts. ![]() |
|
|||
|
You say that "many scientists" seem to be uncomfortable with LHCs.
But your evidence is four links to a single unscientific website (exitmundi), and a single discussion forum (risk-evaluation-forum) whose contact person, James Blodgett, does not appear to have any scientific credentials. A quick glance of the scientific papers he refers to suggests that none of the scientists so far involved are very uncomfortable with LHCs at all. Do you have any stronger evidence for your claim? |
|
||||
|
Here is what CERN has to say about the safety of the LHC. Concerns were also voiced when the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider became operational in 2000, so far no ill effects
![]()
__________________
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi |
|
||||
|
Valerie Jamieson: "Black holes, but not as we know them". In: New Scientist, 22 January 2005
John G. Kramer: "CERN’s LHC: A black hole factory?" are two of the links from one of the laymans pages. Not sure how to link them but go on the web pages and you will see them. I dont really claim that these things will happen. I am no scientist. I am very worried about these things though. It just doesnt seem wise to me at all. |
|
||||
|
It is studying things which we have never done before. Potentially dangerous things. We dont know what will happen. We have had scientists put forward Theorys but it never has actually been done yet and the scale of the experiment and what has been done seems potentially dangerous.http://www.discover.com/issues/aug-05/cover/?page=2
this article which by no means goes against LHC work does highlight that the energy used is like trillions of that of TNT(makes me think of the next step up from an Atom Bomb and are we about to accidently detonate one?). That Electromagnets will create fields 100,000 times more pwerful than the earths. Surely this is not good?? Magnetic fields that strong around our earth? Could this not proove dangerous? Please tell me i am wrong and put my mind at rest!! |
|
|||
|
Quote:
Also how is science supposed to advance if not by doing things that have never been done before? Even potentially dangerous things, if everything with a significant risk was disallowed then there wouldn't be much left for anyone to do. [1] Which do include particles of every type known to man (and probably some that aren't yet), blame the same people who refer to everything with an atomic mass higher than helium as "metals" for the name (ie astronomers) |
|
|||
|
Well...scientists often put a calm face on things—scientists being creatures not prone to hysterics—but remember that the folks who developed the atom bomb believed there was a chance it could ignite the Earth's atmosphere.
Still, I believe the risk is small, but I think it would be foolish to say that there is no risk. |
|
||||
|
Why dont we study these natural events if they happen all the time?? We wouldnt need to recreate them?? They are going ro do things that have not happened before in these experiments. I dont care about science advancing if no humans are about to appreciate the findings if we die due to the experiments. I hope I'm wrong. I really do.
|
|
||||
|
Damn. All well, it appears scarcasm can't sure everything after-all...
__________________
Life is full of choices. Sometimes you make the good ones, and sometimes you have to kill all the witnesses.
Lurker - "This is baut... we can't decide on the safety of pbj sandwiches in less than 9 pages..." |
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas. |
|
||||
|
Quote:
This And this And this I think one of the problems with using cosmic rays as your source is you don't know when they will arrive, from what direction, and with what energy. I suspect it is much easier having a source you can turn on and off.
__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King) One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009 All moderation in purple |
|
||||
|
John Nelson at Birmingham University stated of RHIC that "it is astonishingly unlikely that there is any risk - but I could not prove it." In academia there is some question of whether Hawking radiation is correct. Taken from the site http://www.answers.com/topic/large-hadron-collider
Nobody can prove it. Untested Theorys stop us knowing. |
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
It is astonishingly unlikely that tomorrow my head will not spontaneously turn into a black hole and suck up the entire world. But I can't prove it.
Should I chop off my head today, just to be safe, or are you willing to risk a little "experiment"? |
|
||||
|
What is the stress about anyways? Not like if it consumes the world that you're going to be alive to care...
__________________
Life is full of choices. Sometimes you make the good ones, and sometimes you have to kill all the witnesses.
Lurker - "This is baut... we can't decide on the safety of pbj sandwiches in less than 9 pages..." |
|
||||
|
Quote:
![]() |
|
||||
|
Quote:
Fred
__________________
"For shame, gentlemen, pack your evidence a little better against another time." -- John Dryden, "The Vindication of The Duke of Guise" 1684 |
|
|||
|
Quote:
As to the risk Earth is still here after being exposed to far higher energy events than we are capable of producing for the past almost 5 billions years and is still around so I think the risk is sufficiently small to be acceptable. Particularly as any planet destroying event would be visible from thousands of light years away and we haven't observed any taking place elsewhere either. |
|
||||
|
Dirty_g, you really do remind me of bmpbmp, only with better spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Take a look at a few of the threads he started. Then take a few long, slow, deep breaths.
Fred
__________________
"For shame, gentlemen, pack your evidence a little better against another time." -- John Dryden, "The Vindication of The Duke of Guise" 1684 |
|
||||
|
Quote:
There is a finite risk in everything we do. However, we need to consider not only the risk, but the likelihood that it will happen. My guess is your chances of dying from a manmade black hole are considerably less than your chances of dying in an automobile accident. Do you plan to stop travelling by car?
__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity. Isaac Asimov |
|
||||
|
In response to witnessing ppanet exploding events many light years away ..... Some gamma ray bursts cannot be explained. Most can though. Some cant. I was reading an article on it in the Astronomy now or sky at night magazine. I'll have to have a look. Obviously it doesnt think that these are caused by LHC's. Obviously most are caused by supermassive stars starting to collapse and shooting beams from their poles. Well at least thats the major consenus.
|
|
||||
|
Quote:
![]() Too many ways in which this planet could be rendered lifeless tomorrow. Enjoy what you've got while you've got it.
__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas. |
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
LinkBacks (?)
LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.bautforum.com/science-technology/51643-large-hadron-colliders-danger.html
|
|||
| Posted By | For | Type | Date |
| Random Unfinished Thoughts | This thread | Refback | 12-September-2008 01:51 PM |
| The Dodgy Dramatis Personæ (persons) | This thread | Refback | 10-September-2008 02:42 PM |
| Amusement value at Random Unfinished Thoughts | Post #964 | Pingback | 10-September-2008 12:17 PM |
| Rechenkraft.net e.V. :: Thema anzeigen - Neues Projekt LHC@Home | This thread | Refback | 09-February-2008 12:17 AM |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| The energy machine of Joseph Newman | banquo's_bumble_puppy | Off-Topic Babbling | 243 | 09-July-2009 09:29 PM |
| Large Hadron Colliders. Dangerous? | dirty_g | Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers | 62 | 06-June-2006 04:02 AM |
| Recent possible 'large' meteors in California and elsewhere | Psionyx | Astronomy | 2 | 06-June-2004 11:58 AM |
| Large body has been spotted beyond Pluto! | Maksutov | Against the Mainstream | 37 | 07-April-2004 09:05 AM |
| Filamentary and large scale structures of the universe. | D J | Against the Mainstream | 24 | 30-April-2003 08:13 PM |