Unknown Planetary Risk To Create BIG BANG
French Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator)
Old Dying Physicists want to go out with a BIG BANG
What are we talking about?
Many helpful Links and Video links at end of post.
http://lhcconcerns.com/
In May of 2008 the largest, most expensive scientific experiment, The Large
Hadron Collider will be completed. This mechanical behemoth located along
the French and Swiss border with a total estimated circumference of 17 miles
will be the most powerful particle accelerator in existence. The principal
behind a particle accelerator is that by speeding up the smallest elements
of matter and then colliding them together that they can be broken down
further into even smaller fundamental particles, just as Atoms were once
thought to be the smallest units, so then were Quarks(Up and Down),
Electrons, and Protons discovered.
The Large Hadron Collide is hoped to discover what is referred to as the
"Higgs Boson". Although a theoretical scalar particle theorized by Peter
Higgs in 1974, it is actually a member of the standard model, and it is
believed that the Higgs Boson is what gives matter "mass". To achieve the
observation of the Higgs Boson, the LHC will be smashing these Hadrons
(specifically Protons) together at speeds almost unimaginable to the average
person, at near c( .99999999 % the speed of light).
To quantify the types of collisions, it must be pointed out that two beams
will be set to collide with each other, each beam of protons contains
roughly 2,800 Protons with an energy of 7 TeV (1 Teraelectron Volt =
1.60217646 x 10-7 joules) so the combined energies will be 14 TeV. Although
such energies in collisions are certainly occurring every day in space, this
will be the first time that energies such as these will be observed on
Earth, however what is alarming to us are the myriad of other possibilities
that could arise.
Why haven't I heard about this before?
Honestly, this is a good question, I seem to come accross this response a
lot, it seems that in general most people have never heard of the LHC, or
even particle acclerators in general, I am aware that there has been a lot
more coverage of this in the UK then the America's (probably due to it's
geographical location), but also I suppose the main reason why it is not
covered that often in the states is because of a general lack of interest,
or the belief that the general public is probably incapable of understanding
something so complex. Still however there are several Documentaries and
other programs/magazines that have covered the LHC, so I'm not fully sure
why some people have not heard about this as from a financial perspective
it's the most expsenive (8.2 Billion Dollars) and most powerful scientific
Expirement of al time.
Why We're Concerned
To explain the concern thoroughly and accurately it has to be stated that
the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva is not the first particle accelerator in
history. In 1929 the Cyclotron, invented and developed by Ernest O.
Lawrence, was the first particle accelerator, and from that initial
invention over several decades we have come into a new breed of Larger and
More Powerful Particle Accelerators. Although we have had particle
accelerators in the past, The luminosity at which these operate has
increased dramatically, in fact it is true that prior to the construction of
the RHIC (Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider) such theories as MBH Production,
Strangelets, and several other theories were placed on the table as relevant
possibilities.
So, what's different this time?
This is the point that has to be emphasized, this time things are quite
different, a study was conducted after initial concerns for the RHIC were
explored, and to their conclusion the amount of energy necessary for these
scenarios was not sufficient. The Large Hadron Collider operates at a total
combined energy of 14TeV, which is a lot higher than the energies generated
by the RHIC, as such the possibility of Black Hole creation is a reality, in
fact on CERN's own web site they admit it could create Black Holes, here is
an excerpt from Safety at the LHC
"If the LHC can produce microscopic black holes, cosmic rays of much
higher energies would already have produced many more. Since the Earth is
still here, there is no reason to believe that collisions inside the LHC are
harmful. Black holes lose matter through the emission of energy via a
process discovered by Stephen Hawking. Any black hole that cannot attract
matter, such as those that might be produced at the LHC, will shrink,
evaporate and disappear. The smaller the black hole, the faster it vanishes.
If microscopic black holes were to be found at the LHC, they would exist
only for a fleeting moment. They would be so short-lived that the only way
they could be detected would be by detecting the products of their decay."
We'll cover the theoretical problem of this statement in the next section.
So, what's the problem?
In theory (according to Hawking Radiation) any Black Hole created would
evaporate in Femtoseconds, not having the chance to accrete any mass, and
being essentially harmless, although this is comforting in theory, It has
never been proven, and in fact has been questioned before. The problem is
that although most people in the physics community believe in Hawkings
Radiation, it has no basis in observation. In 2003 Adam D. Helfer Published
a paper concerning Hawking's Radiation coming to the conclusion that
Hawking's Radiation may in fact be incorrect, and that a Black Hole would
not lose mass in such a way. (For the full text of this document go here
Paper By Adam D. Helfer on Hawking Radiation.)
In fact since the LHC has been on the drawing board several studies and
theories which have gained a lot of support in the scientific community such
as "String Theory" and "Extra-Large Hidden Dimensions" have surfaced, which
do indeed place the threshold for Black Hole Creation much lower than
previously thought.
The main problem lies in believing in theory as fact, every argument for
safety made concerning Black Holes and thier creation immediately references
Hawking Radiation, however, if Hawking Radiation turns out to be incorrect
then the Black Hole would continue to accrete mass at an exponential rate.
Now Hold on, No one would willingly create a machine that would create Black
Holes on Purpose?
Of course not, I highly doubt the thousands of scientists involved wish to
usher in Oblivion any quicker than politicians, however the danger lies in
Theory being accepted as Fact, Adam D. Helfer Published a paper recently
which outlines a very strong possibility that Hawkings Radiation may in fact
not exist, which would actually fit in better with the Laws of
Thermodynamics, at which Our current explanation and understanding of the
nature of Black Holes has always been somewhat at Odds.
Alright, so if a Black Hole created doesn't evaporate, what next?
Here is another place that CERN's safety assessment is incapable of
addressing, although these extremely high energy collisions each Proton beam
is in fact coming from opposite directions, Over 2 thousand Protons in each
beam will pretty much collide roughly in the middle, although no collision
would create a particle exactly dead center, or "still", in a relative sense
any MBH or fundamental particle created in such a manner (even with both
beams at a speed of .99999999 c) would be in a relative sense, at Rest, or
to elaborate the term at rest we mean lower than the necessary escape
velocity to escape the Earth's own gravitational pull.
At that point two hypothetical scenarios exist. It would either maintain a
rather low orbit within our planet itself, slowly accreting mass at an
exponential rate, or it's possible it may "gravitate" to the direct center
of the planet in which case would accrete mass very quickly
Wait a second, I've also heard of other dangers like "Strange Matter",
"Bubble Nucleation", and "Magnetic Monopoles", why the focus on Black Holes?
It is true that these scenarios are also possible, however the problem with
representing them accurately is the true danger can never be quantified as
None of these have been observed, however that does not mean the risk is
zero. The very fact that this experiment is called an experiment is the
prove a hypothesis, if the results were truly known then this would not be
occurring in the first place.
The Large Hadron Collider is going to be forcing Protons together in a very
unnatural way, not only forcing them into groups of roughly 3,000 protons
for the collisions, but exposing them to temperatures colder than space as
well (1.9 K or -271 C). These types of collisions in a sense are unnatural
because collisions at those speeds and temperature would never happen,
meaning at the point of activation, no one will truly know these results
until they occur, in a matter of Femtoseconds we would be placing the entire
world in potential Danger. I've seen many websites calculate
possiblity/problem or a percentage of risk, however without many of these
theories as proof, there is no accurate way to calcuate them, So although
the risk potential is unknown, the risk can never be calculated at zero.
Although the credence given Strange Matter production, and it's subsequent
catalytic behavior by the scientific community is not always mutual. Certain
types of Strange Matter could be formed that would catalytically convert all
matter that it touches into strange matter as well, although this is not as
likely as creating a Black Hole, it's worth mentioning because it is a
possibility.
I want to learn more, where can I go?
The internet is a good place, it brought you here, didn't it? Of course you
could always visit the links on the site, and take part in our discussion on
the forum, I would recommend familiarizing yourself with all the issues, and
a basic
...
read more »