That argument is a bit deceptive.
The LHC will create conditions not created by nature on Earth.
In the LHC protons (or lead on lead nucleon and possibly protons to anti-protons in the future?) collide head on, like a head on car crash, some resulting particles will travel too slowly to escape Earth's gravity.
When a cosmic ray strikes Earth's atmosphere (moving hitting stationary) results all have extremely high speed. If any stable neutral micro black holes were created by Nature they would all travel through Earth and into space.
CERN's LHC Safety Assessment Group acknowledged this in a 16 March 2008 email before they modified their theories a bit.[1]
"While it is true that a BH produced by cosmic rays would not be stopped by the Earth, there are many other "things" in the universe that could trap such CR-produced BH's, thus leading to visible consequences."[1] (that arguments is also refuted)
[1] http://www.lhcconcerns.com/LHCConcerns/Forums/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=10 LHC Safety Assessment Group, 16 Mar 2008
Look around, are the noise makers conspiracy nuts or does the crowd look a bit lemmingish?
What happens in nature all the time flies through the planet and relativistic speeds. Arguments to the contrary are not credible.
Perhaps god needs another golf ball.
Actually the worst case would be all Higgs bosons sucked into micro black holes created at energies just below the Higgs. Have you read the leading paper on LHCFacts.org?
Quote "...systematically dismantles the notion... cosmic rays... black hole... neutron stars... created at the LHC... any meaningful timescale."
The report has not yet been externally validated, but an internal validation of the report by CERN's SPC Committee contains the not so reassuring statement about the certainty of the primary safety argument:
"but this argument relies on properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos that, while highly plausible, do require confirmation, as can be expected in the coming years." - Quote from CERN's SPC Committee
But I did not see a recommendation to delay collisions until the confirmation they state is required... I have read collisions could begin in two months.
As for "any meaningful timescale", Dr. Otto E. Rossler writes "â¦after 50 months the earth to a centimeter would have shrunk. It would be nothing more there, not only no more life, there but also the earth would be⦠a small black hole."
M.B. Dion of society du jour writes in The ATLAS Experiment... Madness Or Invaluable Insight?: âoeSo is ATLAS just an intellectual version of something Evel Knievel may have attempted in the lab?â
I can imagine Evel Knievel telling a co-pilot about to jump the Snake River Canyon with him, "I can't tell you there is no risk, but I assure you that it is perfectly safe".
LHCFacts.org
Physics would truly be weird if this was true that anti-matter might fall up.
First of all, there is no evidense that anti-matter is anywhere near that weird. It is just a form of energy, just as matter is a form of energy. Though some people do not understand that basic notion. When you combine matter with anti-matter you get energy. In terms of energy, adding matter and anti-matter is similar to adding 1 + 1 and getting 2. Not adding 1 and minus 1 and getting 0. That is a very important difference, and that is part of the reason that the notion that anti-matter might 'fall up' is just not credible.
But that is not the reason for my post...
The following comments were posted this week on a related blog that helps put some of the conversation surrounding the Large Hadron Collider Safety controversy in perspective I think.
From a June 2008 blog by Martin Meenagh
Quote: âoeBy what means can an Hawaii Court, even if it is a federal one, assert any authority over a facility outside the USA?â
I am not a lawyer, but the case has world wide implications, some court must take jurisdiction.
Quote: âoegoing to do anything but make Europeans and Canadians determined to go ahead anywayâ
A few very credible scientists believe that CERN is basing their theory of safety on at least one flawed assumption. If the following reasonable and plausible assumptions prove to be correct, then the uncomfortable truth is that the probability of destruction of Earth is actually closer to 100%, though only mother nature currently knows for certain due to our limited understanding of the physics involved.
A. LHC Creates black holes as CERN Predicted (1 per second) [1]
B. Micro Black holes do not evaporate as LSAG accepts is plausible. [2]
C. One or more micro black holes are captured by Earthâ(TM)s gravity as LSAG accepts as plausible. [3]
D. Micro Black holes grow exponentially as Dr. Otto E. Rosslerâ(TM)s paper predicts and calculates. [4]
If the reasonable and plausible assumptions above prove correct, and Europeans and Canadians are determined to go ahead anyway, then that would be an unfortunate situation. The entire world is in this together after all!
Quote: âoeThere is a world issue here. In libel, in risk assessment, and in extradition casesâ
Yes, there are also potentially issues with respect to freedom of speech, corporate deception, and mis-representation of facts designed to confuse or mislead the public as to risks involved. The lawsuit also alleges on page 15 of AFFIDAVIT OF LUIS SANCHO IN SUPPORT OF TRO AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION: [5]
Quote: âoeCERN has neither asked mankind to validate these experiments, nor has it been open and clear about those risks to the public. On the contrary it has systematically hidden evidence, and hence it is, in my opinion and hopefully that of this Court, liable of criminal negligence and occultation of proofs, as it carries about what amounts to a potential global genocide.â
Quote: âoeWould you have any links that you could send any readers and myself to as a short cut?â
I would suggest LHCDefense.org for the legal focus.
Sincerely,
JTankers
Administrator, LHCFacts.org
References:
[1] http://doc.cern.ch/yellowrep/2003/2003-001/p1.pdf
[2] http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0304042
[3] http://lhc2008.web.cern.ch/LHC2008/documents/LSAG.pdf
[4] http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/OTTOROESSLERMINIBLACKHOLE.pdf
[5] http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=9
CERN's web site states that we have not been destroyed by effects of cosmic rays and micro black holes will evaporate.
However, cosmic rays travel too fast to be captured by Earths gravity, and Hawking Radiation is disputed (http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0304042) and contradicts Einstein's highly successful relativity theory. Collider particles smash head on like a car collision and can be captured by Earth's gravity, and relativity predicts micro black holes will not decay (Hawking called Einstein doubly wrong, yet it is Einstein who is repeatedly found to have been correct in his theories). There is currently no reasonable proof of LHC safety, LSAG (LHC Safety Assessment Group) has been trying for months to prove safety without success. I hold the minority opinion that it may not be possible because it may in fact not be safe.
If micro black holes are created, we may soon be trying to calculate the growth rate, and in my personal speculation, it might not be too implausible to believe that calculation might need to account for the same quantum effects that Hawking predicts but as an accelerator not as a decay factor.
NewScientist March 22-28 "Stakes get higher in antimatter puzzle": "We can say with greater than 99.7 per cent probability that CP violation is there" says Sivestrini [of Italy's National Institute of Nuclear Physics INFN] (link corrected from article: http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.0659)
Cosmic Rays from the legal complaint....any such novel particle created in nature by cosmic ray impacts would be left with a velocity at nearly the speed of light, relative to earth. At such speeds,..., is believed by most theorists to simply pass harmlessly through our planet with nary an impact, safely exiting on the other side.... Conversely, any such novel particle that might be created at the LHC would be at slow speed relative to earth, a goodly percentage would then be captured by earth's gravity, and could possibly grow larger [accrete matter] with disastrous consequences of the earth turning into a large black hole.
Slashdot Mirror
That argument is a bit deceptive. The LHC will create conditions not created by nature on Earth. In the LHC protons (or lead on lead nucleon and possibly protons to anti-protons in the future?) collide head on, like a head on car crash, some resulting particles will travel too slowly to escape Earth's gravity. When a cosmic ray strikes Earth's atmosphere (moving hitting stationary) results all have extremely high speed. If any stable neutral micro black holes were created by Nature they would all travel through Earth and into space. CERN's LHC Safety Assessment Group acknowledged this in a 16 March 2008 email before they modified their theories a bit.[1] "While it is true that a BH produced by cosmic rays would not be stopped by the Earth, there are many other "things" in the universe that could trap such CR-produced BH's, thus leading to visible consequences."[1] (that arguments is also refuted) [1] http://www.lhcconcerns.com/LHCConcerns/Forums/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=10 LHC Safety Assessment Group, 16 Mar 2008
Tomorrow is a party and a media event, not a technical milestone. The Associated Press quotes CERN's chief spokesman James Gillies as saying "Full power is probably a year away." http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g5nGPtmoUVIJDgehVJ_snD6vDA6gD933D3J00
Look around, are the noise makers conspiracy nuts or does the crowd look a bit lemmingish? What happens in nature all the time flies through the planet and relativistic speeds. Arguments to the contrary are not credible. Perhaps god needs another golf ball.
Actually the worst case would be all Higgs bosons sucked into micro black holes created at energies just below the Higgs. Have you read the leading paper on LHCFacts.org?
Funny. Do you know what you get when you mix high energy colliders with Professor Otto Rossler's charged micro black hole theory? Answer: A golf ball
Do you know what you get when you mix high energy colliders with Professor Otto Rossler's charged micro black hole theory? Answer: A golf ball
Quote "...systematically dismantles the notion... cosmic rays... black hole... neutron stars... created at the LHC... any meaningful timescale."
The report has not yet been externally validated, but an internal validation of the report by CERN's SPC Committee contains the not so reassuring statement about the certainty of the primary safety argument:
"but this argument relies on properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos that, while highly plausible, do require confirmation, as can be expected in the coming years." - Quote from CERN's SPC Committee
But I did not see a recommendation to delay collisions until the confirmation they state is required... I have read collisions could begin in two months.
As for "any meaningful timescale", Dr. Otto E. Rossler writes "â¦after 50 months the earth to a centimeter would have shrunk. It would be nothing more there, not only no more life, there but also the earth would be⦠a small black hole."
M.B. Dion of society du jour writes in The ATLAS Experiment... Madness Or Invaluable Insight?: âoeSo is ATLAS just an intellectual version of something Evel Knievel may have attempted in the lab?â I can imagine Evel Knievel telling a co-pilot about to jump the Snake River Canyon with him, "I can't tell you there is no risk, but I assure you that it is perfectly safe". LHCFacts.org
Physics would truly be weird if this was true that anti-matter might fall up. First of all, there is no evidense that anti-matter is anywhere near that weird. It is just a form of energy, just as matter is a form of energy. Though some people do not understand that basic notion. When you combine matter with anti-matter you get energy. In terms of energy, adding matter and anti-matter is similar to adding 1 + 1 and getting 2. Not adding 1 and minus 1 and getting 0. That is a very important difference, and that is part of the reason that the notion that anti-matter might 'fall up' is just not credible. But that is not the reason for my post... The following comments were posted this week on a related blog that helps put some of the conversation surrounding the Large Hadron Collider Safety controversy in perspective I think. From a June 2008 blog by Martin Meenagh Quote: âoeBy what means can an Hawaii Court, even if it is a federal one, assert any authority over a facility outside the USA?â I am not a lawyer, but the case has world wide implications, some court must take jurisdiction. Quote: âoegoing to do anything but make Europeans and Canadians determined to go ahead anywayâ A few very credible scientists believe that CERN is basing their theory of safety on at least one flawed assumption. If the following reasonable and plausible assumptions prove to be correct, then the uncomfortable truth is that the probability of destruction of Earth is actually closer to 100%, though only mother nature currently knows for certain due to our limited understanding of the physics involved. A. LHC Creates black holes as CERN Predicted (1 per second) [1] B. Micro Black holes do not evaporate as LSAG accepts is plausible. [2] C. One or more micro black holes are captured by Earthâ(TM)s gravity as LSAG accepts as plausible. [3] D. Micro Black holes grow exponentially as Dr. Otto E. Rosslerâ(TM)s paper predicts and calculates. [4] If the reasonable and plausible assumptions above prove correct, and Europeans and Canadians are determined to go ahead anyway, then that would be an unfortunate situation. The entire world is in this together after all! Quote: âoeThere is a world issue here. In libel, in risk assessment, and in extradition casesâ Yes, there are also potentially issues with respect to freedom of speech, corporate deception, and mis-representation of facts designed to confuse or mislead the public as to risks involved. The lawsuit also alleges on page 15 of AFFIDAVIT OF LUIS SANCHO IN SUPPORT OF TRO AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION: [5] Quote: âoeCERN has neither asked mankind to validate these experiments, nor has it been open and clear about those risks to the public. On the contrary it has systematically hidden evidence, and hence it is, in my opinion and hopefully that of this Court, liable of criminal negligence and occultation of proofs, as it carries about what amounts to a potential global genocide.â Quote: âoeWould you have any links that you could send any readers and myself to as a short cut?â I would suggest LHCDefense.org for the legal focus. Sincerely, JTankers Administrator, LHCFacts.org References: [1] http://doc.cern.ch/yellowrep/2003/2003-001/p1.pdf [2] http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0304042 [3] http://lhc2008.web.cern.ch/LHC2008/documents/LSAG.pdf [4] http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/OTTOROESSLERMINIBLACKHOLE.pdf [5] http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=9
CERN's web site states that we have not been destroyed by effects of cosmic rays and micro black holes will evaporate.
...any such novel particle created in nature by cosmic ray impacts would be left with a velocity at nearly the speed of light, relative to earth. At such speeds, ..., is believed by most theorists to simply pass harmlessly through our planet with nary an impact, safely exiting on the other side. ... Conversely, any such novel particle that might be created at the LHC would be at slow speed relative to earth, a goodly percentage would then be captured by earth's gravity, and could possibly grow larger [accrete matter] with disastrous consequences of the earth turning into a large black hole.
However, cosmic rays travel too fast to be captured by Earths gravity, and Hawking Radiation is disputed (http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0304042) and contradicts Einstein's highly successful relativity theory.
Collider particles smash head on like a car collision and can be captured by Earth's gravity, and relativity predicts micro black holes will not decay (Hawking called Einstein doubly wrong, yet it is Einstein who is repeatedly found to have been correct in his theories). There is currently no reasonable proof of LHC safety, LSAG (LHC Safety Assessment Group) has been trying for months to prove safety without success. I hold the minority opinion that it may not be possible because it may in fact not be safe.
If micro black holes are created, we may soon be trying to calculate the growth rate, and in my personal speculation, it might not be too implausible to believe that calculation might need to account for the same quantum effects that Hawking predicts but as an accelerator not as a decay factor.
NewScientist March 22-28 "Stakes get higher in antimatter puzzle": "We can say with greater than 99.7 per cent probability that CP violation is there" says Sivestrini [of Italy's National Institute of Nuclear Physics INFN] (link corrected from article: http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.0659)
Cosmic Rays from the legal complaint.
Sincerely, JTankers LHCConcerns.com