Originally posted by: vshah
no worries! i'll roll up a supergiant and plug the black hole![]()
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: vshah
no worries! i'll roll up a supergiant and plug the black hole![]()
Can you plug up my anus too?
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: vshah
no worries! i'll roll up a supergiant and plug the black hole![]()
Can you plug up my anus too?
:Q
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: vshah
no worries! i'll roll up a supergiant and plug the black hole![]()
Can you plug up my anus too?
:Q
It's probably too big by now
Originally posted by: randay
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: TehMac
Originally posted by: vshah
no worries! i'll roll up a supergiant and plug the black hole![]()
Can you plug up my anus too?
:Q
It's probably too big by now
i dont know... let me unroll my supergiant and try.
I'm not suggesting that it will happen. But according to what I have read, there IS a possibility, and though infinitesimally small it does exist.
Originally posted by: Ns1
I'm not suggesting that it will happen. But according to what I have read, there IS a possibility, and though infinitesimally small it does exist.
There's also the infinitely small possibility that me masturbating furiously will somehow make my cock turn to gold or mush. Neither has happened yet, no matter how hard/often I try.
Originally posted by: OdiN
Originally posted by: Ns1
I'm not suggesting that it will happen. But according to what I have read, there IS a possibility, and though infinitesimally small it does exist.
There's also the infinitely small possibility that me masturbating furiously will somehow make my cock turn to gold or mush. Neither has happened yet, no matter how hard/often I try.
But that wouldn't be too much to worry about. At least for the rest of the planet.
Some people are hoping it'll create black holes. If I understand it correctly, the creation of black holes will only occur if string theory is correct, so it's probably proponents of string theory who are hoping for their formation.Originally posted by: OdiN
I thought one of the things they are hoping to create with the LHC was micro black holes.
So....it is in a vacuum? What about the other particles being hurled around? It's my understanding that they aren't just going to hurl one particle at a time, so by the time that they knew of a problem like this - there would be other matter.
But assuming it is contained - would they have to keep in that way indefinitely? That would have to be a lot of power to use up I would think.
Your foreskin != the spacetime continuum.Originally posted by: Ns1
Who knows, if I keep trying maybe I'll eventually cause a rip in the time/space continuum.
Originally posted by: randay
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: udneekgnim
from what I've read, any micro black hole that might be created will disappear practically instantaneously
But of course if you get one that doesn't disappear you're pretty much screwed.
not necessarily, has anyone ever considered that the world might be consumed "practically instantaneously"?
You don't understand two things:But there is still the remote possibility. I dunno, it just seems we keep pushing farther into things and meddling perhaps more than we should at this stage of limited understanding.
Originally posted by: GooeyGUI
Is the world going to end this Saturday?
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: randay
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: udneekgnim
from what I've read, any micro black hole that might be created will disappear practically instantaneously
But of course if you get one that doesn't disappear you're pretty much screwed.
not necessarily, has anyone ever considered that the world might be consumed "practically instantaneously"?
Why would the world be consumed "practically instantaneously"?? Please explain. Let's say that we do discover that a black hole with a mass on the order of 10^-24 kilograms is stable. (It's not.) Please explain "practically instantaneously" using science rather than science fiction.
You don't understand two things:But there is still the remote possibility. I dunno, it just seems we keep pushing farther into things and meddling perhaps more than we should at this stage of limited understanding.
One: "remote possibility" - you're thinking of the normal person's definition of "remote possibility." It takes on an entirely new meaning with quantum physicists. Think of it this way: what would you say that the probability is of you running straight into a 3 foot solid brick wall, and passing through the wall, damaging neither yourself nor the wall. That's the probability that we're talking about. The quantum physicist would say "there's a remote possibility"; you'd say "bullshit", and then they could set out to prove mathematically that there is a chance not quite equal to zero. What's the probability that you can jump up into the air, and then upon impact with the ground, suddenly you find that every last particle in your body rematerializes on the surface of Mars. You'd have just long enough to think to yourself "fuck, those quantum mechanics were right" before you succumbed. That brings me to point two.
Two: addressing "limited understanding" - the physics involving particle physics (quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, etc.) are the MOST accurately tested theories in science. That doesn't mean that we know everything. One of the big puzzlers - "why is there mass?" may be answered by the LHC. (The search for the Higgs boson)
As far as "more important things" - what? It's sad that in this country, the importance (especially by the current administration) of science is unrealized. Do people realize that it was only a little more than 100 years ago that the electron was discovered? Protons less than 90 years ago? The neutron wasn't discovered until 1932; prior to that discovery, while Einstein recognized the enormity of E=mc², he didn't think we'd ever be able to use that energy. Think about it... 1932 leads to the ability to split the nucleus (ignoring for a moment that rutherford split hydrogen nuclei from 4 or 5 elements by bombarding them with alpha particles.) How many years after 1932 was it that we had the nuclear bomb (arguably a bad thing; then again, assurances of mutual destruction may have limited military conflicts to a degree), and more importantly nuclear power? How about the invention of the transistor? And, not just the phenomenon that was discovered, but actually understanding how the transistor worked. Think about it in terms of how long a person lives. If a person was born the day the transistor was invented, they still haven't reached retirement age!
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Why would the world be consumed "practically instantaneously"?? Please explain. Let's say that we do discover that a black hole with a mass on the order of 10^-24 kilograms is stable. (It's not.) Please explain "practically instantaneously" using science rather than science fiction.
Originally posted by: OdiN
So....not only do we have to worry about microscopic black holes, but also the possibility of stable strangelets which could apparently cause a chain reaction and transform all matter it comes into contact with, a vaccum bubble being created, or magnetic monopoles. All of which could have the possibility, however remote, of completely destroying the earth, or worse. And their rationale is "Well, cosmic rays don't do it, so we're fine!". This certainly is reassuring. Do they even fully understand cosmic rays? At least they have some supporting data from RHIC to back up part of it, but for other stuff they are relying on theory and assuming that if cosmic rays don't do any of this, we can't do it with the LHC. But can we be absolutely sure? I don't think we can. Scientific advancement doesn't mean much if the entire planet and human race is destroyed. Is any chance that this might happen - however remote - really worth the risk? What, exactly, are they going to learn by these experiments that is worth that risk?
Also - maybe this is the start of causality loop - we actually cause a reaction that transforms the entire universe into this....protomatter was it? Which actually causes the big bang and we start all over again. That would be kinda funny actually. What if humans actually caused the big bang, after the universe was created by a divine being and he is just sitting up there facepalming when we figure out a way to annihilate the entire thing.
Originally posted by: OdiN
Still - why would you believe one scientist over another - who can be sure either is correct?
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: GooeyGUI
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Ughhh
First of all, the link goes to something called "endofworld". Then, everything in the article, starting with what's bolded is nothing more than irresponsible fear mongering by either an asshole who wants attention or an f'ing idiot who doesn't have a clue.
As for the attention seeking kooks who are bringing forth the lawsuit - I'm guessing they did it in the U.S. and not some other country where they have certain tort reforms - loser pays winners costs. I'd rather we find some country with horrible human rights violations for them to file suit in instead - losing would mean a bullet to the back of the head & organ donations. At least some good would come from their idiotic lawsuit. To think that "doomsday" scenarios haven't been exhaustively thought out by CERN & responsible scientists, and to think that instead, a decision should be made in U.S. court where some of our judges have many times proven themselves to been very lacking in technical knowledge even of computers - is ridiculous.
The link goes to virginmedia which should have given you a clue that this was not an in depth article on LHC.
I will give you credit for recognizing the actual reason this was posted, so I put your answer in bold. I will fail you that you ass/u/me I was trying to create panic and that I don't know what I'm talking about.
I will leave some doubt as to your actually finding out what this post is about because the thread contained a discussion considering lawsuits already.
However, other more dangerous particles will also be produced for which searches are planned, such as black holes, and never seen before particles of matter, and even now, the architects of what is being termed a ?Doomsday? machine, the U.S. Department of Energy, Fermilab, the National Science Foundation and CERN are being sued in federal court over fears that this experiment may in fact destroy the planet.
The underlined (previously in bold) single SENTENCE cannot be disassembled and have the same meaning.
Ever run a nuclear Rx? I have! Fail that you say, "I don't have a clue" when I have taken all the physics (with calculus) that goes with my EE. I don't want to leave out I used to work at LLNL too, so I won't.
I sort of figured the point of your post was to point out that all the groups mentioned above are being sued to prevent the LHC from being used. I didn't say that it was you who was fear mongering, but rather, the idiot who wrote the article & the idiots suing all those groups (which you'd have to have your head stuck in the ground if you have any interest at all in particle physics not to have read about this during the past 6 months.)
But, curious order with your credentials - starting with the least relevant (EE required physics (with calculus!) which I doubt actually addressed particle physics very much), then a nuclear reactor, then LLNL. Weird. Of course, both types of facilities have a need for EE's; that doesn't necessarily make them knowledgeable about particle physics. Both facilities also have a need for janitors.
Ya? He got some very powerful guys to look the other way when he we doing their wives...Originally posted by: TallBill
Nostradamus was an idiot, and so is anyone that even references him.
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Ya? He got some very powerful guys to look the other way when he we doing their wives...Originally posted by: TallBill
Nostradamus was an idiot, and so is anyone that even references him.
Originally posted by: TallBill
Originally posted by: Jeff7
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: udneekgnim
from what I've read, any micro black hole that might be created will disappear practically instantaneously
But of course if you get one that doesn't disappear you're pretty much screwed.
Let's say they smash two protons together and get a black hole. That black hole will have the mass of two protons. Nearby protons wouldn't notice much of a change.
The example I've seen used is this:
The chance of a black hole being created is about the same as winning the lottery every day for three weeks.
But then, it's also possible that dragons will pop out of the LHC when it's powered on - possible from a quantum physics standpoint. I think from that view, anything is possible, such as every proton in Earth decaying at the same time, and it's all about probability. Some things are just really improbable.
The dragon thing would be kinda cool, ala stargate or something.
When activated the collider could show one of the most elusive particles in our Universe, the Higgs boson, also called the ?God particle?. This observation could confirm the Standard Model of physics unifying three of the four known fundamental forces: electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force, leaving out just gravity.
From the PDF:Originally posted by: Modelworks
When activated the collider could show one of the most elusive particles in our Universe, the Higgs boson, also called the ?God particle?. This observation could confirm the Standard Model of physics unifying three of the four known fundamental forces: electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force, leaving out just gravity.
All that is fine. But can it cook hot pockets faster than my microwave ?
