CERN - Large Hadron Collider Experiment

anart said:
Telperion, I realize you were speaking hypothetically, but it is of paramount importance that one does not suggest illegal/violent actions on this forum.
What I meant to say was that desperate times may call for desperate measures - i'm not sure if in the context of LHC this is true but in a wider context, seeing the rapid dissolution of everything all around me I feel just sitting around is not going to get it. My statement was borne out of restlessness and frustration, but of course I didn't mean it literally.
 
anart said:
your agenda here is quite clear at this point - as is your intent - and it would have served you better had you been honest and upfront about it from the beginning.
You really have misjudged me. Honestly, I do not see the anguish and death of children as a laughing matter either. Nor do I appreciate being labeled as dishonest. We are all motivated by different things. I don't pretend to know what motivates you, please don't castigate me. I apologize if my original posts somehow offended you, but I am not an adversary.

dant said:
the possibility that we might be transitioning into a "new earth"
Dant, I do believe this is true. Whichever path is taken the Earth will be vastly different than today. Just as firmly can I envision an apocalypse paralleling Biblical and Quranic stories if LHC creates a stable MBH Beast; the other path (totally unscientifically) seems to lead to a future of peace, happiness, and reconciliation between all the tribes of Earth. Don’t ask me to explain that scientifically, it’s just a strong belief based on a feeling I can’t explain. I can explain the reason for danger scientifically, but I cannot explain why the other path leads to so much hope—though I believe it none the same.
dant said:
Is it up you each one of us to become aware and
take the proper steps towards our spiritual evolution and adjust where necessary and at
the right moment? Perhaps the best mode of approach might be as the C's say:
"Wait and see"?
Yes and no. (Again, not scientifically speaking), spiritual evolution is a personal and ongoing process. However, agree with the hypothesis that there might be spiritual evolution on a societal level, as well as on a personal level. Perhaps, the LHC dilemma is a gigantic cumulative test that we as a society are currently faced with. If that is the case, then “wait and see” would not be the correct approach. If it is a test, then we might need to actively work toward one outcome or another. Inaction is itself an action that would favor the LHC project to move forward, and possibly on to annihilation. Just like any test, I think that the proper road is the hard one to follow (e.g., study, work, build, etc). It will be extremely difficult to convince multiple nations to just walk-away from (or even retool) this huge investment. But like any challenge, you must believe in something worth working towards (for me, it is the children, the unborn children, and those not yet conceived.)

Would I take up arms, you asked. Truth is, I already have. This model shakes the foundations of the elite of the scientific elite; I’ve enraged many very intelligent people; many have attacked me personally on my Scientific American blog; yet for all the efforts of those detractors, they have only strengthened my case by supplying new evidence I hadn’t originally incorporated.
 
H said:
You really have misjudged me. Honestly, I do not see the anguish and death of children as a laughing matter either. Nor do I appreciate being labeled as dishonest. We are all motivated by different things. I don't pretend to know what motivates you, please don't castigate me. I apologize if my original posts somehow offended you, but I am not an adversary.
My point was that when I originally suggested, due to the content of your posts, that you came here with an agenda, you assured this forum that you did not. When it then comes out, later, that you are here to promote your book, you respond with emotional manipulation, as if you are a victim here and being 'unjustly attacked by one who laughs at children's suffering'. Manipulation - pure and simple. It has nothing to do with castigation or adversaries.

For clarification's sake, I was laughing at your manipulative use of 'for the children' - as if you are Helen Lovejoy on a Simpson's episode darting about with your hands in the air, "won't somebody PLEASE think of the children??" - that is what I find most humorous. Your 'for the children' comes across as an emotional ploy that has nothing to do with the topic at hand - and this from someone whose second post on this forum complained about opinion and conjecture.

Could you tell us how you found this forum?
 
Hasanuddin said:
My goal is to get word of this model out to as many people in as many ways as possible with the hope that there will be a planet for future generations to live on. If the model is correct and LHC does manage to generate mini-black-holes then we are all in very grave danger.
Dear Hasanuddin, you seem to be missing a very important point: we are all in very grave danger even if your fears about LHC prove unfounded and it does nothing but generate mini black munchkins. Have a look at the world around you, a real good look, and read Laura's series on Comets.

You appear to be so identified with your research in LHC that you cannot see the clear and present danger all around.

Joe
 
Joe said:
You appear to be so identified with your research in LHC that you cannot see the clear and present danger all around.
Compared to Psychopaths Running half the world's Military, including all the Nukes in the US - and - the very real possibility of a global bombardment by celestial debris, this LHC nonsense is just not on my radar.

There was a piece of fiction I read awhile ago about a mini-black hole falling into the center of Earth, proceeding to gobble up the planet from the inside... I can't remember the title... thought it was "Earth" but couldnt find it on amazon. It was cool, it ended up stabilizing at some point and then it turned into a super weapon controlled by this crazy hacker lady. Good story.
 
Just in case you were wondering what the LHC looks like, here it is. It frightens me, from this angle it looks like that enormous sand creature from Return of the Jedi.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap080225.html
 
It frightens you because it looks like a fictional character in a movie? It looks pretty amazing to me, actually. Carried on the sott page today:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/150544-Artificial-black-hole-created-in-lab
 
anart said:
For clarification's sake, I was laughing at your manipulative use of 'for the children' - as if you are Helen Lovejoy on a Simpson's episode darting about with your hands in the air, "won't somebody PLEASE think of the children??" - that is what I find most humorous.
After reading this, and as we approach the date for the LHC's debut, this is certainly me at times though it is certainly kind of silly considering everything else going on lol:

image08_1.png
 
Hi all,

Read all your thoughts about the LHC, quite passionate viewpoints involved. I find the LHC quite fascinating. Maybe a bit scary too. The scientific comunity seems to be quite divided about the possible dangers (note: I am not a physicist, just an interested amateur, so no formal training in physics).

I am quite new to this forum and haven't had the time to read through the whole knowledge base since I joined, still jumping from link to link and mainly reading the wave series.

So a few questions from a novice:
1. The C's say: Everything is a learning experience. So the LHC is a learning experience as well. And as we are unable to extrapolate its effects into the future with any degree of certainty, we cannot predict any intervention to turn out in our favor. So "to do something" or "to do nothing" is equally "safe". So the C's credo "wait and see" may be the smartest thing to do. Or am I wrong?
2. The LHC is certainly a scientific project that is quite public. Wouldn't the mere fact of this publicity almost prove its harmless nature? If there was a huge risk involved, wouldn't all the people with an interest at the status quo proceed in more secretive ways? Or is is just "physically" to big to juggle under the very eyes of the public?
3. Has anyone run the question re LHC past the C's yet? Would be fascinating to hear their take on this issue.

Anyway, I am not particularly worried about the LHC, should be "fun" to watch the results ... And I quite agree with Cyre2067, that there are a lot of things going on around us that are really dangerous for us and that are happening completely under the radar of the public consciousness ...

Interested in your feed-back
 
Hi Nicklebleu, welcome to the forum. A few thoughts on some of your comments..

nicklebleu said:
1. The C's say: Everything is a learning experience. So the LHC is a learning experience as well.
I agree, but if everything is a learning experience, then it also follows that a total lack of LHC is a learning experience too. Suffering, death, destruction, are all learning experiences, but that does not mean we should seek those out either. If we need the lessons, we'll get them whether we want them or not. Sorta like, nobody wants a bunch of psychopaths running the world, but they will do exactly that as long as we remain as blissfully ignorant as we've always been on this big blue marble.

nicklebleu said:
2. The LHC is certainly a scientific project that is quite public. Wouldn't the mere fact of this publicity almost prove its harmless nature? If there was a huge risk involved, wouldn't all the people with an interest at the status quo proceed in more secretive ways? Or is is just "physically" to big to juggle under the very eyes of the public?
I don't think it's too big, there are plenty of things much bigger that are total secrets - there's a veritable crapload of uninhabited square mileage in the world, not to mention underground. But I agree, the PTB use classified and other secret technologies to their advantage. They don't really need a public project to advance their own knowledge of physics and science - that's why they have basically unlimited funds for secret projects. But not only are the PTB not learning new things they don't already know from such a public project, they also are not risking anything. If they thought there was risk involved, they'd do this in secret first - so they can have their own scientists, who have more knowledge of science and technology than public scientists, working on this first. You know, like a bunch of ex-nazis that have been tinkering with stuff like time machines, advanced mind control tech, and captured UFO's for the past 60 years.

They're not about to happily hand over the fate of *their* planet (as they see it) into the hands of a bunch of MIT graduates! Just like if you're a parent you don't let you child play with matches because he will burn your house down! Not to say that they "care" about us, but they do in a way a farmer cares about his farm. With their hubris and short-sightedness they will burn the farm down themselves soon enough, much like a farmer spraying too many pesticides and growth hormones and ending up poisoning everyone, including himself. It's just not going to happen because of a cow who was allowed to play with hand grenades and jeopardize the entire farm. STS is known for wishful thinking, but handing hand-grenades to their own cows is not the same as burning your own farm down due to wishful thinking, the PTB have enough sense not to do anything too obviously stupid.

nicklebleu said:
Anyway, I am not particularly worried about the LHC, should be "fun" to watch the results ...
Like the Mars and other space "exploration" they're doing now, and all the amazing "discoveries" along the way. The common person is still convinced by mainstream science that the question of whether we're alone in the universe is still an open question - and that's who such manipulation is targeting. Similarly, the question like "golly gee, what will happen when we smash this photon against this neutron here?" is more than likely not a real question either - cuz if it was, I don't think it would be the cows answering it for the farmer, fwiw.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/scien … ef=science

{quote} March 29, 2008
Asking a Judge to Save the World, and Maybe a Whole Lot More
By DENNIS OVERBYE
More fighting in Iraq. Somalia in chaos. People in this country can’t afford their mortgages and in some places now they can’t even afford rice.

None of this nor the rest of the grimness on the front page today will matter a bit, though, if two men pursuing a lawsuit in federal court in Hawaii turn out to be right. They think a giant particle accelerator that will begin smashing protons together outside Geneva this summer might produce a black hole or something else that will spell the end of the Earth — and maybe the universe.

Scientists say that is very unlikely — though they have done some checking just to make sure.

The world’s physicists have spent 14 years and $8 billion building the Large Hadron Collider, in which the colliding protons will recreate energies and conditions last seen a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang. Researchers will sift the debris from these primordial recreations for clues to the nature of mass and new forces and symmetries of nature.

But Walter L. Wagner and Luis Sancho contend that scientists at the European Center for Nuclear Research, or CERN, have played down the chances that the collider could produce, among other horrors, a tiny black hole, which, they say, could eat the Earth. Or it could spit out something called a “strangelet” that would convert our planet to a shrunken dense dead lump of something called “strange matter.” Their suit also says CERN has failed to provide an environmental impact statement as required under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Although it sounds bizarre, the case touches on a serious issue that has bothered scholars and scientists in recent years — namely how to estimate the risk of new groundbreaking experiments and who gets to decide whether or not to go ahead.

The lawsuit, filed March 21 in Federal District Court, in Honolulu, seeks a temporary restraining order prohibiting CERN from proceeding with the accelerator until it has produced a safety report and an environmental assessment. It names the federal Department of Energy, the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, the National Science Foundation and CERN as defendants.

According to a spokesman for the Justice Department, which is representing the Department of Energy, a scheduling meeting has been set for June 16.

Why should CERN, an organization of European nations based in Switzerland, even show up in a Hawaiian courtroom?

In an interview, Mr. Wagner said, “I don’t know if they’re going to show up.” CERN would have to voluntarily submit to the court’s jurisdiction, he said, adding that he and Mr. Sancho could have sued in France or Switzerland, but to save expenses they had added CERN to the docket here. He claimed that a restraining order on Fermilab and the Energy Department, which helps to supply and maintain the accelerator’s massive superconducting magnets, would shut down the project anyway.

James Gillies, head of communications at CERN, said the laboratory as of yet had no comment on the suit. “It’s hard to see how a district court in Hawaii has jurisdiction over an intergovernmental organization in Europe,” Mr. Gillies said.

“There is nothing new to suggest that the L.H.C. is unsafe,” he said, adding that its safety had been confirmed by two reports, with a third on the way, and would be the subject of a discussion during an open house at the lab on April 6.

“Scientifically, we’re not hiding away,” he said.

But Mr. Wagner is not mollified. “They’ve got a lot of propaganda saying it’s safe,” he said in an interview, “but basically it’s propaganda.”

In an e-mail message, Mr. Wagner called the CERN safety review “fundamentally flawed” and said it had been initiated too late. The review process violates the European Commission’s standards for adhering to the “Precautionary Principle,” he wrote, “and has not been done by ‘arms length’ scientists.”

Physicists in and out of CERN say a variety of studies, including an official CERN report in 2003, have concluded there is no problem. But just to be sure, last year the anonymous Safety Assessment Group was set up to do the review again.

“The possibility that a black hole eats up the Earth is too serious a threat to leave it as a matter of argument among crackpots,” said Michelangelo Mangano, a CERN theorist who said he was part of the group. The others prefer to remain anonymous, Mr. Mangano said, for various reasons. Their report was due in January.

This is not the first time around for Mr. Wagner. He filed similar suits in 1999 and 2000 to prevent the Brookhaven National Laboratory from operating the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. That suit was dismissed in 2001. The collider, which smashes together gold ions in the hopes of creating what is called a “quark-gluon plasma,” has been operating without incident since 2000.

Mr. Wagner, who lives on the Big Island of Hawaii, studied physics and did cosmic ray research at the University of California, Berkeley, and received a doctorate in law from what is now known as the University of Northern California in Sacramento. He subsequently worked as a radiation safety officer for the Veterans Administration.

Mr. Sancho, who describes himself as an author and researcher on time theory, lives in Spain, probably in Barcelona, Mr. Wagner said.

Doomsday fears have a long, if not distinguished, pedigree in the history of physics. At Los Alamos before the first nuclear bomb was tested, Emil Konopinski was given the job of calculating whether or not the explosion would set the atmosphere on fire.

The Large Hadron Collider is designed to fire up protons to energies of seven trillion electron volts before banging them together. Nothing, indeed, will happen in the CERN collider that does not happen 100,000 times a day from cosmic rays in the atmosphere, said Nima Arkani-Hamed, a particle theorist at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton.

What is different, physicists admit, is that the fragments from cosmic rays will go shooting harmlessly through the Earth at nearly the speed of light, but anything created when the beams meet head-on in the collider will be born at rest relative to the laboratory and so will stick around and thus could create havoc.

The new worries are about black holes, which, according to some variants of string theory, could appear at the collider. That possibility, though a long shot, has been widely ballyhooed in many papers and popular articles in the last few years, but would they be dangerous?

According to a paper by the cosmologist Stephen Hawking in 1974, they would rapidly evaporate in a poof of radiation and elementary particles, and thus pose no threat. No one, though, has seen a black hole evaporate.

As a result, Mr. Wagner and Mr. Sancho contend in their complaint, black holes could really be stable, and a micro black hole created by the collider could grow, eventually swallowing the Earth.

But William Unruh, of the University of British Columbia, whose paper exploring the limits of Dr. Hawking’s radiation process was referenced on Mr. Wagner’s Web site, said they had missed his point. “Maybe physics really is so weird as to not have black holes evaporate,” he said. “But it would really, really have to be weird.”

Lisa Randall, a Harvard physicist whose work helped fuel the speculation about black holes at the collider, pointed out in a paper last year that black holes would probably not be produced at the collider after all, although other effects of so-called quantum gravity might appear.

As part of the safety assessment report, Dr. Mangano and Steve Giddings of the University of California, Santa Barbara, have been working intensely for the last few months on a paper exploring all the possibilities of these fearsome black holes. They think there are no problems but are reluctant to talk about their findings until they have been peer reviewed, Dr. Mangano said.

Dr. Arkani-Hamed said concerning worries about the death of the Earth or universe, “Neither has any merit.” He pointed out that because of the dice-throwing nature of quantum physics, there was some probability of almost anything happening. There is some minuscule probability, he said, “the Large Hadron Collider might make dragons that might eat us up.”

{/quote}

Last edited by webglider (Today 16:50:14)

Online
 
Particle Accelerator Black Hole Humor! Two cartoons recently appeared on this topic:

One by Ted Rall:

http://news.yahoo.com/comics/uclickcomics/20080405/cx_tr_uc/tr20080405;_ylt=AhCSCSCpmgqngY06XGWan4IXvTYC

Another by Ruben Bolling (Tom the Dancing Bug):


http://www.salon.com/comics/boll/2008/04/10/boll/
 
I emailed the LHC website earlier this year as I became worried they wrote back to say that basically they were only going to be recreating small black holes the like of which are being created naturally every day. It did not lull me into any false sense of security. Fact is tiny things can go wrong and will go wrong which can lead to bigger things. I am amazed every time I see an airplane fly overhead. The number of things that must go right to ensure that baby flies are infinite. From the pilot being on top form to the smallest bolt somewhere not being tightened. I believe we should not lose our sense of awe in meddling with science the moment we do we may face the consequences.
 
Came across this today and thought it might fit in here. It is a photo post and the pictures of the thing are simply wow!

Large Hadron Collider nearly ready
August 1, 2008
The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), a 27 kilometer (17 mile) long particle accelerator straddling the border of Switzerland and France, is nearly set to begin its first particle beam tests. The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) is preparing for its first small tests in early August, leading to a planned full-track test in September - and the first planned particle collisions before the end of the year. The final step before starting is the chilling of the entire collider to -271.25 C (-456.25 F). Here is a collection of photographs from CERN, showing various stages of completion of the LHC and several of its larger experiments (some over seven stories tall), over the past several years.
Link: _http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/08/the_large_hadron_collider.html
 
http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2008/08/suit-alleges-cern-in-violation-of-human.html
http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2008/PR06.08E.html

Hi Laura/Ark and all forum members,

This is my first message here as I'm from the Spanish forum, so apologize if my english is not so good.
Above you'll find a link were you'll find an information about the new cern that will be swicht on tomorrow in Geneva, as I heard many scientist are against this plan, Ark Have you heard from that, What you think about?

Thanks
 
Back
Top Bottom