Controversey Surrounding World's Largest Particle Collider

[MplsBison]

And some scientists predicted that when they test exploded the first atomic bomb that ensuing explosion would ignite the entire atmosphere and destroy the world.


Did not happen.




Just as blackholes and magnetic monopoles will not happen when the LHC is turned on the very near future.

[Kite]

And you know this...how? Oh thats right, you don't. Its a HUGE risk. Theres not just a chance that our world will be destroyed if a black hole is inadvertently created, its guaranteed. Unless there is some immediate tangible benefit other than the furthering of knowledge that 99 percent of the worlds population cant understand or would care about, I say leave it off.

[MplsBison]

The entire next wave of technology is based on the secrets that will be learned from the LHC.

[Affinity]

I don't see why this is now becoming such an issue. People are over exaggerating the risks. Scientists have been using particle accelerators for decades, this is just a bigger one. The Earth didn't blow up when they discovered anti-matter and tried containing it in a stable environment. We have a greater chance of being killed by the asteroid in 40 years than we do getting sucked into a rogue black hole created by this.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: MplsBison The entire next wave of technology is based on the secrets that will be learned from the LHC.

Would someone like to share information please on exactly what the LHC will help discover and what might come out of it?

[Affinity]

Quote by: HelioPrime Would someone like to share information please on exactly what the LHC will help discover and what might come out of it?

Helio: I am assuming you are sincerely interested about the discoveries and not just bashing it, the serious and possible heated tone of the response at the bottom is for anyone who is claiming that particle accelerators are useless.

Previously particle accelerators led to the discovery of anti-matter helping scientists better understand and define certain laws of physics. With the studying of artificial black holes the scientists will be able to better theorize on the accuracy of the Big Bang theory, which will provide us answers to the ever allusive question of how the universe began. As for your question about advancing technology I refer you here: Google, I can provide a few to start you off though.

Wikipedia Entry
Stanford.
Scroll to bottom
FermiNews

Particle acclerators benefit cosmology, astronomy, physics, medical science, and more. The fields benefited are greater than I want to list. If you can't appreciate the significance gained from the research using particle accelerators then you shouldn't be in a debate about them as even the ones worried about safety understand the advancements they lead to.
As you can see, if you choose not to ignore, the benefits of particle accelerators to society extend beyond that of philosophy and physics. If you want more proof I challenge you to find it yourself, the burden of proof in discrediting these machines is on your hands.

[Morality Games]

Quote by: LadiesMan217 Well of course you know this road goes both ways, I find it equally interesting that those who shout from the rooftops that if we don't drive hybrids and turn off our lights we will all be living under water in 50 years have little concern about running the risk of vaporizing our planet in an instant.

That's not the right way of thinking about it. The potentiality that this experiment will actually lead to irrepebable damage is too small for me to have the moral right to do anything to stop it (I lack a good explanation for why I or anyone else should be allowed to prevent it). Global Warming is a different matter, much more certainly a harm.

I haven't seen any math, but the statistical chance that something really terrible is going to happen would have to break out of the decimals before stopping the experiment should even be seriously considered, and it probably hasn't gotten close.

[Nono]

As someone who lives a 10-minute drive from the thing, I ought to be worried, especially as I don't (as usual, like 99.999999999999999999999999999999% of the rest of humanity) know who to believe in the, to me, arcane arguments involved.

Nor did I know who to believe on the eve of the worldwide Y2K meltdown.

[Toyotech]

I'll cut all you conspiracy theorists and doomsday sayers a deal. You provide me with ONE scientifically sound and undeniably plausible situation in which the earth may come to an end because of this LHC that is completely irrefutable by the CERN scientists, the most brilliant minds in physics this world has to offer. And for a moment I will consider your pleas.

By the way, "It might create a black hole" is not a legitimate reason... not without scientific proof that a black hole could even possibly be formed by the LHC, which there is not.

[Toyotech]

So if you know anything about black holes, and I am going to guess that most of you dont... you need matter to create a black hole, and a black hole is only as big as the matter you put into it. the specific gravity of two atoms will not be sufficient enough to gobble the planet up.

[Domino]

By the way, "It might create a black hole" is not a legitimate reason... not without scientific proof that a black hole could even possibly be formed by the LHC, which there is not.

If they knew what it was going to do, they'd have no need for it.

[Toyotech]

see my second post where I clarify my statement... i wanted there to be an accurate timeline so i didn't edit the post.

[HelioPrime]

If only they could create and contain a black hole....

Then we could be cool like the Romulans and use it as a power source.

[Domino]

I thought about responding to your second post, but I found the necessity to be demoralizing.

Clearly, a two-proton black hole isn't going to have much effect, and may evaporate quickly. However, it is foolish to assume that those will be the only two protons around. If the black hole bumps another proton, it is 50% bigger, stronger, and ready for its next meal.

The black hole, when created, would be far smaller than a proton, and so, very probably, will simply evaporate, even if there are more meals around, because it's too small and weak to find them. It could fall straight to the Earth's core, and never bump another bit of matter, if it lasts that long. However, it is very much like a snowball, rolling down a hill: once it does start collecting matter, it will become more able to collect. Every proton it consumes makes it that much more able to find and consume protons, until it grows large enough to gobble up molecules... and, at that point, it won't be evaporating any time soon, so it's odds of finding more fodder grow much higher, making it a near certainty that, eventually, it will consume the whole Earth.

So, while even creating a black hole might not be terribly dangerous, the possibility of calamity remains.

Of course, since the folks running the thing are utterly certain that no black hole will be created, they've made no preparations to contain the thing. At that small size, it would be very easy to control it... if they're at all ready for it.

[Toyotech]

so whats the problem

[Rainbow]

Update

Immense detectors surround the areas where inconceivably small particles slam into one another at super-high energies, collisions that may confirm Arkani-Hamed's predictions about undiscovered properties of nature. The accelerator, estimated to cost between $5 billion and $10 billion, could provide answers to questions physicists have had for decades. Thousands of scientists from around the world are collaborating on the project at the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN. Arkani-Hamed has had a hand in explaining how the world can operate according to Einstein's theory of general relativity, which describes the universe on a very large scale, and at the same time follow quantum mechanics, laws that describe the universe on a scale smaller than the eye can see. For example, if you are driving a car, your GPS tells you where you are, and your speedometer tells you how fast you are moving. But on the scale of particles like electrons, it is impossible to know both position and speed at once -- the very act of trying to find out requires incredible amounts of energy. A theory that has emerged in recent decades that claims to bring some relief to physics mysteries like these is called superstring theory, or string theory for short. While previously, scientists believed that the smallest, most indivisible building blocks of our world were particles, string theory says that the world is made of extremely small vibrating loops called strings. In order for these strings to properly constitute our universe, they must vibrate in 11 dimensions, scientists say. Everyone observes three spatial dimensions and one for time, but theoretical models suggest at least seven others that we do not see. String theory has come under attack because some say it can never be tested -- the strings are supposed to be smaller than any particle ever detected, after all. But Arkani-Hamed says the Large Hadron Collider could potentially lead to the direct observation of strings, or at least indirect evidence of their existence.

Link :
Colliding with nature's best-kept secrets - CNN.com

Where the Energy comes from, guys ? :-)

[Simonius]

Before we detonated the first nuclear bomb some people theorised that it might destroy the entire atmosphere, so what did we do...

I think that sort of shows the nature of mankind.

[Thanatos]

Quote by: HelioPrime Would someone like to share information please on exactly what the LHC will help discover and what might come out of it?

Direct mass to energy conversion, instant teleportation to anywhere in the universe, time travel, a number of nifty new weapons...there are quite a lot of things one could do with a captive black hole.

One variable is known; black holes either won't be made or will decay rapidly. This is because ultrahigh energy cosmic rays far beyond anything CERN will make bombard Earth and the surface of other planets all the time and we're still here.

If there are no resulting black holes, meh, it will advance theoretical physics and probably not much else. If they can make a few and capture them in an electrostatic trap you will see all sorts of weird trippy technology.

[Halofan48]

Well, i don't know too much about physics (yet , i'm going to take classes on it soon.) But if i'm correct, isn't the theory that black holes are made of a dense singularity of mass. I heard that the amount of mass in that singularity is massive. So, would this machine even be able to condense the amount of mass needed to create this singularity? If i'm wrong someone PLEASE correct me, i love to learn about physics and space

[Captain Cardio]

YouTube - The Large Hadron Collider: The End Of The Universe?

Hope nobody else has posted this yet, but its a video that explains in a pretty entertaining way about the hadron collider, that most people could understand.

As a side note, it might not be such a big deal if we did manage to instantaneously destroy ourselves.

In my opinion, if its worth anything, humans are very self-important, and have mostly decided without a complete frame of reference, that they are either the purpose of the universe, or the most sophisticated and only worthwhile result of the universe.

A sudden end to the human experience would result in a lot of happiness no longer being possible, but it would also result in the end of a lot of suffering.

Considering the magnitude of what the doom sayers are saying might happen, it would be pretty much a neutral experience for us. Humans' comprehension of the universe would just cease, and the universe would go on doing whatever the hell it's doing, without us.