Big-bang battle plan set

Eric, Salinas, CA — Tue, 20 May 2008 19:30:41 GMT

It's sad that knuckledraggers like Wagner and Sancho have to spoil what should be an unbelieveable scientific experiment. I sure hope the courts tell them to buzz off so we can advance our knowledge of how the universe came about and the properties of particle physics.

I've been waiting for years for this thing to become operational and I don't want some spoiled sports ruining my fun learning new things.

Big-bang battle plan set

Darnell Clayton, SC — Tue, 20 May 2008 19:35:40 GMT

I think it would be far easier for humanity develop warp travel, worm holes and bring dinosaurs back from the dead than to create a black hole capable of swallowing all of Earth.

Either way, it does put me in the mood to watch the Scifi film "Black Hole," despite the fact that it leaned more towards fantasy than fact.

http://www.scifi.com/blackhole/

Big-bang battle plan set

Ssean Kelly — Tue, 20 May 2008 19:45:00 GMT

The argument that we should not light this thing off until fears are 100% addressed that a black hole will not appear is dissapointing. It is 100% certain that the Earth will come to an end some day and is humans are to survive, then we need to get off this rock. To do that, we need to know the nature of the universe. Maybe one day we will evolve and be able to get past our fears of the unknown. The Earth is not flat and we did not sail off the edge.... nor are we going to create a planet gobbling black hole. Gads!

Big-bang battle plan set

Jeremy, Virginia — Tue, 20 May 2008 20:45:19 GMT

This is bad science.

I checked the LHC concerns page, and while the author brags about his M.S. in Statistics to try to shut down one argument he leaves a huge mathematical error in the first paragraph. He asserts that the particles will move a .99999% c. Please recall that .99999% is not equal to 99/100. It's actually 99/10000. His decimal point is 2 places to far to the left. You would think a guy with a Masters in Statistics would get that.

This is a trend of all of the claims about the LHC. These maniacs are trying to stop good science. Sadly, as this blog reports, the plaintiff will get shut down on technicalities. I wish someone would just take the time to explain to them why they're wrong instead of allowing him to keep filing frivolous complaints.

Big-bang battle plan set

Fred, La Crosse, Wisconsin — Tue, 20 May 2008 20:57:33 GMT

The LHC is not even close to being powerful enough to present any kind of threat...we humans are not even close to competing with what nature already provides: cosmic rays with vastly greater energies strike the Earth's atmosphere all the time yet we are still here. I think that the plaintiffs are seizing on the entertainment value of all this as an opportunity for self-promotion--the plaintiffs, after all, are not trained physicists...they're attention-seekers and perhaps, they're after the some resultant cash because dollar bills tend to fall into the black hole of controversy. Let's hope the Europeans have the sense to see our American legal three-ring circus for what it really is: a means to scam money from hard-working people.

Big-bang battle plan set

John, SF, CA — Tue, 20 May 2008 21:20:35 GMT

As the comments state: LHC will not have enough power to "SUSTAIN" a Black Hole to let it grow - needs to much power for that. Yes, Wagner and Sancho really need to complain about something else.
Why not use the devices to "PROVIDE" power as well....or is that to much common sense. Ah the mighty Dollar. Sad.

Big-bang battle plan set

B. W. "Doc" Smith — Tue, 20 May 2008 21:36:08 GMT

In an age when you can fly to Europe in three hours it is sad to see that we as a people have not advanced as far in our thinking. We are still stuck in the dark ages mentally. If we are to prosper as a race we must leave this world and travel to another before all the resources of this planet are exhausted. Knowledge of the the true nature of the universe is essential for this to occur. Fear of change is normal for comfort loving humans who seek to remain locked in ignorance to protect what is dwindling away, but logic and experience has proven that to be the wrong approach through out history. If we don't take risks now we will surly die out as a race very soon. The danger of death from starvation or thirst is a fact we must cope with, being sucked up in a black hole created in a lab is a fantasy we should let Hollywood handle.

Big-bang battle plan set

Nate, Hampton New Hampshire — Tue, 20 May 2008 21:39:39 GMT

Since we are talking about the continued existence or the destruction of the world, we should be certain, not highly unlikely as to the success of this machine. I do believe myself that this may be alot of unnecessary concern however since we are talking about the planet we live on, we should permit the rational discussion to either substantiate the concerns or dismiss it only after throughly analyzing it. This warrants the science and the concerns about the science, to do anything less is the beginning of faulty science and the ethics that try to regulate it.

Big-bang battle plan set

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Tue, 20 May 2008 21:51:55 GMT

It's crazy I tell you. "Everyone Knows the world is flat". Oh wait that was 1492. "Everyone knows Iraq has weapons of mass destruction". Everyone else may be wrong, perhaps a little open mindness can save us all. Give the kid a chance. I'm not an expert but what if? We are dealing with the unknown.

Big-bang battle plan set

Larry, Los Alamos, NM — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:13:46 GMT

To Jeremy in Virginia:

I am not some CERN black-hole doomsayer and look forward to when the machine is turned on. I am curious if it will find the Higgs, the Standard Model needs it to remain valid as it presently is constructed.

However the mathematical syntax the crazy is using on LHC Concerns is partly correct actually. C = 1 and it is an absolute constant. .99999 is a good way to express that, though using a percentage sign is where the mistake is.

Big-bang battle plan set

Chris W. — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:19:23 GMT

Personally, I'm excited to see what new discoveries we're going to make as a result of this massive new collider. Perhaps I'm naïve about the risks, but I don't see the planet gobbling black hold happening. Just as fascinating as the impact this will have on our understanding of the universe, is the impact this might have on our philosophy of existence. Check out the article below for some interesting ideas about this:

http://www.strangelegacy.com/2008/05/01/socrates-meets-quantum-physics/

Big-bang battle plan set

Tim V, Phoenix AZ — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:23:53 GMT

Its amazing to me that everyone posting here does not seem to have any initials after their names (phd, ms, etc) yet all have expressed "expert" opinions on the validity of the fears of Wagner and Sancho. The truth is you don't really know. You are just parroting what the "experts" are telling you. It's amazing that you are not using the scientific method (critical thinking and questioning) in this instance. The truth is, you don't know the truth. Admit that. You'll be better off for it. I don't have the answers. I don't claim to. I'll listen to the "experts" but its usually the ones to gain from something telling you that something is safe. And btw Jeremy, your math is wrong.

Big-bang battle plan set

Raymond Belanger,lasvegas,cal. — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:50:33 GMT

The people who are afraid of a "black hole" are probably afraid of lots of things. Courage isn't their strong point, But then, I'm not sure there are any such things, The guys who talk about this stuff use words I don't know, and they lie alot, except they call it miscalulations. I think they are just trying to be smart.

Big-bang battle plan set

David M. Kerrick — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:56:19 GMT

What "CERN"? Didn't you know that a large sectinon of CERN collapsed?

Oooops!

Big-bang battle plan set

Al Lazz — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:57:30 GMT

I think the people who are trying to shoot this down are religious extremists and not scientists. If we prove there was a big bang theory and replicate it in the lab then it disproves the entire "God created the heavens and the Earth" concept, etc.

Big-bang battle plan set

Delmar Fairchild, Barron, WI — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:57:45 GMT

Not being a particularily religious person myself, and as one that would say this is going to be cool and it will bring us better knowledge of how the universe works, I did learn in college that it was Galileo that was put under house arrest because the Inquisitors did not understand science and thought that he was ticking off God. Why take the chance in making their creator angry?

From Wikipedia:
"The geocentric view had been dominant since the time of Aristotle, and the controversy engendered by Galileo's opposition to this view resulted in the Catholic Church's prohibiting the advocacy of heliocentrism as POTENTIALLY FACTUAL (emphasis added), because that theory had no decisive proof and was contrary to the literal meaning of Scripture."

Good bye Galileo.

Someone might know if there was a chance of committing Universal suicide by smashing an atom with this particular piece of equipment, but because those persons are so far and few in-between, those that don't know are just asking to put "Galileo" unto house arrest until they are sure. I think that is what Wagner is saying:

From this article):
"Wagner wants to see the safety report first. Despite all the expert claims that the LHC will be safe, the former nuclear health physicist insisted that nothing he's seen so far has absolutely ruled out the black-hole doomsday scenario.

"For all I know, they will come up with some other novel argument that proves this can't happen. We want to see an argument that absolutely proves it ... because otherwise it ends up being [a statement that] 'we have no way of calculating.'

He is only asking that if you think you can prove that there will not be a black hole that will swallow up the Earth, you should prove it. Is that too much to ask? It could be POTENTIALLY FACTUAL.

Big-bang battle plan set

David M. Kerrick — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:58:04 GMT

Come on now Tell the Truth.

Big-bang battle plan set

John Weiss, San Antonio, Texas — Tue, 20 May 2008 23:04:37 GMT

The scientist has never been a model of morality. People seem to believe that scientists have the people's good in their hearts always. Please, one only has to look at the atmospheric nuclear tests or destroying of embryo's to see that Science places knowledge above human life. I am glad someone is checking the scientists, even the government has checks and balances. These mere men (scientist) should be no different. Funny how scientist use the word subjects during their experiment, much like dictators. Engineers are much better than scientists.

Big-bang battle plan set

Robert I. Marsh II, Butler, GA. — Wed, 21 May 2008 00:34:23 GMT

All views should be heard, and risk evaluated, through public forum! A panel of experts should be drafted, and platform an official forum committee, refereed by the Phyics Review Board. This analysis should be rendered to Cern Lhc, and these safety suggestions should be inserted to the appropriate protocol divisions. The main difference between Cern Lhc, and cosmic atmospheric collision is, the random collisions occuring at Cern are in close proximity to the cryonic superconductors, and the detector array hardware! Quantum Wave-Function Backwash becomes a more prevalent possibility with each test. Cern Lhc has already planned for future decades of precise-energy upgrades, and a primary goal is 200-400 TeV collisions! The largest risk is at some point, the collisions could disturb the Quantum Time-Dilating pathways, that move back and forth into the future. and return with pre-agreed arrangement coordinates, for Nuclear Positionings. This in turn could establish a Space/Time curvature, establishing an Einstein-Rosen Bridge Wormhole. The backwash could in theory, amplify the Quantum Inversion Wave Function, thus stabilizing the Event-Horizon Singularity! Outcome: Relativistic Temporal (Time) Shifts! Macrocosmic Time-Dilations. References Used: Einstein/Rosen/Heisenberg "Uncertainty Principle"/Schrodinger/Tesla/Hawking/Michio Kaku/Irina Aref'eva/Igor Volovich/ and anonymous Jefferson Labs (CEBAF) particle physicists 1989-2008//. With Cern being 'outside' jurisdictional interference, and the Tesla Manuscripts moved to Brookhaven National Laboratories for explicit Lhc use, there is limited chance of a rational intercession, but it is our duty to try!

Big-bang battle plan set

Walt G. — Wed, 21 May 2008 00:52:10 GMT

Nobel Prize hungry Physicists are stopping at nothing to find the "Higgs Boson" Particle, among others, and are risking nothing less than the annihilation of the Earth and all Life in this endless quest to solve a theoretical problem when many urgent real problems face the planet. The European Organization for Nuclear Research(CERN) Large Hadron Collider is an atom smasher that will soon be firing Lead and Gold atoms at each other at nearly the speed of light to create clouds of Micro Black Holes, Strangelets and other potentially cataclysmic phenomena.
For more information see:
http://www.lhcdefense.org/
http://www.lhcconcerns.com/
http://www.SaneScience.org/

Big-bang battle plan set

Martin, Orlando — Wed, 21 May 2008 00:53:12 GMT

Nate, John: For some reason, people that read this for the first time and do not know particle physics assume that this guy has thought of some brilliant new idea that the thousands of experts somehow missed. He hasn't. He is going on and on about something that was considered many many times by thousands of individuals and long since been rejected.

As far as certainty. The only reason scientists say they are not certain is because they are being technically honest. There is no such thing as certainty in science. There is always a vanishingly small chance that something you haven't thought of will result in some disater. It's impossible to have certainty. Though you've driven to work tens of thousands of times, you can never be certain that tomorrow your car won't destroy the world. How? Who knows! that doesn't mean it can't happen.

Big-bang battle plan set

Walt G. — Wed, 21 May 2008 00:57:13 GMT

It is expected that Micro Black Holes will be created at the rate of one per second. To reassure the public, CERN has stated that these MBHs will instantly evaporate in the LHC based on the "Hawking Radiation" theory and they would already have been created by naturally occurring high-energy cosmic rays. HOWEVER, "Hawking Radiation" is only a theory, is disputed by other physicists and Stephen himself no longer believes it.
As for naturally occurring high-energy cosmic rays creating MBHs, this is theoretical also and has never been observed or proven.
"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." From 'New York Times'
On May 5, an inquisitive teacher's letter to CERN experiment team ATLAS concerning MBH creation was met with this condescending response(including this passage; "Now talk about fussing about nothing: first of all, a hole, black to boot, and microscopic on top of that! If tiny, weeny little holes are going to get a big grown-up man like you all scared, holy banana, what would a big white bump do to you?") and included a photo with a sign that reads 'Microscopic Black Hole Factory'.)
Additionally Aurélien Barrau and Julien Grain speaking on behalf of CERN say "...these black holes are not dangerous and do not threaten to swallow up our already much-abused planet." the obvious implication being the Earth is damaged goods and therefore a black hole would just put it out of it's misery?

Big-bang battle plan set

Marky Mark Funky Bunch, America — Wed, 21 May 2008 01:27:23 GMT

Cool

Big-bang battle plan set

Jeff, Nottingham, MD — Wed, 21 May 2008 01:29:04 GMT

actually, from a physics standpoint, it is entirely possible to make a black hole in a powerful enough super-collider(i dont know if CERN is powerful enough) however, since these black holes would only consist of some(not all)of the parts of the two particles that collided, they would have very little mass. as black holes lose mass via hawking radiation, they would exist for a very short period of time, likely measured in fractions of a second. unless they gained more mass in that timespan, they would be unable to harm the earth, and seeing as how a black hole that small would pratically need to collide with a particle to engulf it, it is exceedingly unlikely that it would pose any danger to the earth. besides, more enerjetic events have been taking place on a regular basis in the upper atmosphere for eons and we still exist, so the odds of this killing us all are so low as to be laughable.

Big-bang battle plan set

stu — Wed, 21 May 2008 01:46:53 GMT

I say they should fire it up now, without telling anyone.....then when we are all still alive 6 months from now, and far tooo busy killing each other, the scientist can tell them to kiss thier ass

Big-bang battle plan set

david b — Wed, 21 May 2008 02:36:18 GMT

hmm why is asking for a 4 month delay to study the possibilities 'trying to stop science'?

It makes his case pretty well that his hypothesis cant be mathematically disproven by the scientists working on the project. All the demagogery aside, shouldnt they at least be able to do the math if the guy is so 'crazy' and off the mark?

Whats the difference if we switch it on ni july or october?

Big-bang battle plan set

Mike H. — Wed, 21 May 2008 02:57:16 GMT

Here's a test: Meat from clones! Franken-foods! cell phones and cancer! A mouse with human DNA! Test-tube babies! nano tech! Black holes in the Hadron collider! A Mist from another dimension that has wierd creatures that kill everyone in a supermarket in Maine because the scientists couldn't leave well enough alone!

If any of that was scary - you watch too much sci fi channel. Leave the science to the experts please, and the scary stories to Stephen King.

Big-bang battle plan set

JB, Portland, Oregon — Wed, 21 May 2008 04:13:04 GMT

No learned person thought the earth was flat in 1492. Columbus certainly did not. I don't think anyone in 1092 or even 0002 thought it was flat. Where does this interesting myth come from? And what is all this science worship? Sure it'll be cool when the machine fires up. Unless it's not cool. I say, hold their feet to the fire for a few months in the name of sanity and caution - even if a couple of nut cases are bringing the case to court. Maybe some dirty little secrets will come to light, maybe some loose bolt will get tightened, literal or metaphorical. To me, letting the scientists play unsupervised, men and women who often have little or no moral code other than "I want to do want I want to do", is just as bad as letting the generals or the politicians run amok.

Big-bang battle plan set

Eric C, Rochester, NY — Wed, 21 May 2008 05:52:25 GMT

It appears that Mr. Wagner didn't remember one of the key elements of science.

We can never be sure of anything. We can be pretty darn certain, but in science and physics especially, 100% is something you cannot get.

So to ask for something he should know is unreasonable says a lot about his character. He knows he will never get the answer he wants, so he can attempt to stall it forever.

Oh well, fire it up I say. What's the worst that could happen?

Big-bang battle plan set

Einstien — Wed, 21 May 2008 07:23:08 GMT

JB -- when Columbus sailed to the "edge of the world", it didn't jeopardize the rest of the world. No one knows what is going to happen when they start this thing up. Thank God, you guys are so damn smart, that you already know that it is all going to go perfectly as though. And if so, then why do we even need to do this? I have nothing against science; just nuts that think that their thirst for knowledge should come at any cost -- even humanities existance.

Big-bang battle plan set

Peter, NY, NY — Wed, 21 May 2008 08:17:33 GMT

Hmm. Whom to believe more? Who risks more ?

A. Concerned expert physicists saying that there are theories which predict under certain circumstances a very remote possibility that very tiny small black holes are created due to LHC collisions, but dissolve quickly afterwards, OR

B. Politicians, who state firmly "Everyone knows Iraq has weapons of mass destruction" and risk 3rd world war ?

Which lemming to follow ?

Big-bang battle plan set

D Smith, Atlanta GA — Wed, 21 May 2008 08:23:00 GMT

Look at it this way. If the crazies are right and it creates an planet gobbling black hole, I don't have to pay the IRS next year and it will put an end to all these mind numbingly stupid political commercials. See, a silver lining.

Big-bang battle plan set

AB — Wed, 21 May 2008 08:43:55 GMT

"I think the people who are trying to shoot this down are religious extremists and not scientists. If we prove there was a big bang theory and replicate it in the lab then it disproves the entire "God created the heavens and the Earth" concept, etc."

I think that it's amazing how people bash religion everytime they get a chance when it's not even related to the article. None of these tests are going to prove that there isn't God. The majority of scientests are religious, as are doctors, etc, since the more you learn about how the world works, the more you see that it was all designed.

Big-bang battle plan set

LL, Fredericksburg, Virginia — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:35:44 GMT

Puuuleeeze, people, get a life! Theoretical stupidity is still stupidity! Columbus didn't sail off the edge of the world! This is possibly the most important experiment ever done, and the doomsayers are having a blast. (No pun intended).

Big-bang battle plan set

Nick Rozenski, Grand Rapids, Michigan — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:11:30 GMT

Look, there have been other particle-smashers that have worked and didn't create any black-holes, nor did they endanger the earth. Some people have to stop hiding behind a rock and come out and see what the CERN's Large Hadron Collider is going to do, and that is to answer the question, What develop in the first microseconds after the big bang?

Big-bang battle plan set

Jonathan , Montgomery AL — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:31:01 GMT

Wow, let's not try to advance science and knowledge for our own sakes. How about being afraid of every little thing that comes our way. This way we'll stay in this perpetual cycle of living the way we do now. Or how about this, shut the nuts up, turn the thing on, and learn something about the universe. I'm going to with the latter.

Big-bang battle plan set

Jeff N., AL — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:18:02 GMT

I think that Wagner has no reason to worry about a black hole "gobbling" up our planet. If he researched the topic a bit more, perhaps he would see that this experiment/demonstration is not going to destroy our planet.
But if it did open a black hole, I think it would be interesting to see another dimension.
That comment was made in jest.

Big-bang battle plan set

Butch Kline, Portland the cleanest city in America — Wed, 21 May 2008 16:07:56 GMT

I say follow the lemming with the best looking ass so that there is something good to look at while we are following either one to hell.
Earth wasnt meant to be alive forever, however, it was meant to harbor human life that has the ability to reach off of this planet and find ways to thrive in the universe. Conservative people who dont want to experiment with new things are always the ones that die off. The australian aboriginees are an example, they are still alive but never destined to leave their homeland of australia because they dont know physics/calculus.

Big-bang battle plan set

Jay M., MI — Wed, 21 May 2008 16:47:35 GMT

I may have missed something in the discussion, but it seems Mr. Wagner is asking the scientists to prove a negative. Neither science nor the US constitution accept that condition. A negative, by definition, cannot be proven.

All social issues and experimental details aside, isn't that is the basic flaw in his argument?

Big-bang battle plan set

Jimmy, Pell City, Alabama — Wed, 21 May 2008 16:57:06 GMT

Ok so I haven't been following the LHC too terribly closely, but I'm assuming they are trying to recreate what happens after the big bang. Just a thought - if the universe was created by the big bang theory, I assume there was more energy involved in that than what is happening here. So what happened there? Were there tiny black holes that disappeared almost immediately or did they stick around? Or were there even black holes at all? I have no real knowledge of physics or anything of that sort, just what I've read and some common knowledge. So maybe I'm naive but, if there were black holes that developed along with the big bang, or any time that matter collided in this fashion, wouldn't anything that resulted afterward have a hard time getting away from the black hole, provided the black hole stayed longer than fractions of a second? It just seems like if that's the case, the universe would have a hard time developing itself.

Big-bang battle plan set

JTankers, Middleton WI — Wed, 21 May 2008 17:16:37 GMT

Fred of La Crosse (where I grew up) writes:
"cosmic rays with vastly greater energies strike the Earth's atmosphere all the time yet we are still here"

Actually the LHC Safty Assessment Group has conceded that results of cosmic rays striking stationary particles on Earth would send all potentially dangerous particles created into space.

Unfortunately head-on particle collisions may allow the results to be captured by Earth.

Big-bang battle plan set

JTankers, Middleton WI — Wed, 21 May 2008 17:19:53 GMT

Jeremy of Virginia writes "He asserts that the particles will move a .99999% c."

I will contact the Admin. The correct value is 99.9999991% of the speed of light in one direction and the same speed in the opposite direction for head-on collisions of thousands of protons at a time (or protons to anti-protons in some experiments), at temperatures lower than space and with powerful magnetic fields helping to compress the particle collisions into the smallest possible space.

JTankers,
LHCConcerns.com co-moderator
(Layman's site for both sides of the issues)

Big-bang battle plan set

JTankers, Middleton WI — Wed, 21 May 2008 17:24:11 GMT

Nick Rozenski of Grand Rapids writes "there have been other particle-smashers that have worked and didn't create any black-holes".

Actually they have started to get closer in those much less powerful previous colliders, including creating what is argued to be "dual black holes", not a black hole, just closer to one.

And CERN's safety web site in 2008 predicted possible creation of up to 1 micro black hole per second when collissions begin about 2 months after initial operations begin sometime this year.

CERN's safety web site still predicts that creation of micro black holes will not be an unexpected result.

Big-bang battle plan set

JTankers, Middleton WI — Wed, 21 May 2008 17:28:05 GMT

Jeff of Nottingham, MD writes "odds of this killing us all are so low as to be laughable"

The legal action calculates 75% risk with a very high degree of uncertainty. The actual risk may be closer to 0% or closer to 100%, science can not accurately estimate the odds at this time.

Big-bang battle plan set

JTankers, Middleton WI — Wed, 21 May 2008 17:31:46 GMT

Tim V from Phoenix writes "I'll listen to the "experts"

One of them just helped author an excellent article by CNN at: http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/05/21/black.holes/?iref=mpstoryview

Big-bang battle plan set

Ron R. Elk, PA — Wed, 21 May 2008 19:55:39 GMT

Do we know what a black hole is? Let's make them cross the t's and dot the i's. Then step forward into the future the way we always do. What if they find out what gravity is? Then we can use it...after they figure out how to suck the money out of out pockets.

Big-bang battle plan set

Frank H. , Dallas, Texas — Wed, 21 May 2008 20:11:10 GMT

We are so arrogant!

Big-bang battle plan set

Delmar Fairchild, Barron, WI — Wed, 21 May 2008 20:47:42 GMT

It's funny how, when you read these above remarks, the tone goes from "for it", to "against it", back to "for it", etc. Like waves against the shore. You still have the waves coming in and the undertow going out, no matter who is right.

Big-bang battle plan set

Tom Newgard, Seattle, Wash — Thu, 22 May 2008 01:57:57 GMT

I believe that it doesn't matter wether or not the LHC could destroy the world. The lawsuit agaisnt it has been filed in the United States and the LHC is on the French-Swiss border, i.e. in another country, last I saw the United States didn't own the world or have the authority to shut something down that is in another country, so if someone is going to try to shut something down they should at least do their homework and go to the country its located in and file a lawsuit there.

Big-bang battle plan set

stone, Florida — Thu, 22 May 2008 06:50:22 GMT

These guys are dumb[...] - Even if you could create a tiny black hole, its mass would be absorbed by the infinitely larger mass of the earth...Its total poppy cock. Just like the old "China Syndrome" Chernobyl proved that was a bunch of crap....

Big-bang battle plan set

Jeff, Nottingham MD — Thu, 22 May 2008 11:28:44 GMT

if I did the math right(I checked twice, but I am not perfect), according to the theory that describes Hawking radiation, a black hole with a mass of 1kg, which is far larger than anything CERN would be able to make would last 1.3387205037x10^-17 seconds(or ~13.387 attoseconds). this means even if it was traveling at the speed of light it would have to engulf more than 1kg of mass while only traveling a hair over 4nm. such a black hole would have an event horizon of ~1.458*10^-27 m whereas a proton has a diameter of 1.65×10^−15 m. So even using a black hole that weighs far beyond anything the CERN will be able to generate, though the thought of 2 footballs moving at the speed of light colliding is pretty funny to me for some reason(I'm speaking of a regulation NFL football, and yes that would still be short of a kg, but its close enough for my imagination) the black hole would exist for such a short period of time and have such a small event horizon and be capable of moving such a short distance that I will sleep soundly at night when they fire it up. besides, if I'm wrong, who is going be around to correct me?

Big-bang battle plan set

Jon B Waukesh WI — Thu, 22 May 2008 14:30:53 GMT

Hmmm.

Sadly, most figures in history are made into caracatures, good and bad.

For example, Galileo, with his heliocentric theory, was no closer to accurate (based on modern theories as the standard) than his Catholic opponents. The sun is not the center of the universe...

Additionally, his math (a theory of ellipses) was very wrong, and it was based on observations which were inaccurate (possibly fudged to fit the data.)

He makes a poor poster child for science vs religion. But he will do, if none other can be found.

People overestimate the ability of humans to influence the universe. It seems doubtful to me that this little experiment will do much harm. I say that without any particular insight, as my doctorate is in the applied sciences, and I haven't bothered much with the details of physics lately.

However, this should be seen as what it is. An expensive effort by very religious people to prove their creation myth (the big bang) is true.

Sadly, their devotion to their religion has apparently deprived them of the capacity for simple logic.

In the event that it were shown that the "big Bang" could have happened; even if a copy of it were contained in a jar somewhere, it would only show that it could have happened. Not that it did. A rather unsatisfying result, as Jesse Jackson could have been president (as an example).

As God said to Job:

Where were you , when I hung the stars over nothing?

Pax

Big-bang battle plan set

JTankers, Middleton WI — Thu, 22 May 2008 17:49:08 GMT

Fred of La Crosse (where I grew up) writes: "cosmic rays with vastly greater energies strike the Earth's atmosphere all the time yet we are still here"

Besides the fact that single stray cosmic ray impacts send results into space, it is highly questionable that cosmic rays might produce the same results as head-on particle collider collisions with thousands of protons at a time.

A single rare high energy cosmic ray may involve a single proton impact with a relatively stationary particle and send all particles created safely into space, while collider collisions will involve thousands of protons (or protons to anti-protons) colliding head-on at 99.9999991% of the speed of light in temperatures lower than space traveling in opposite directions with powerful magnetic fields to help focus all the energy to a single point in space and particles created may be captured by Earth's gravity.

Big-bang battle plan set

Agrippa Von Nettlesheim PHD, Berlin, Missouri — Thu, 22 May 2008 19:40:03 GMT

CERN has an excellent safety record, and frankly anything the Germans persue in science advances mankind's knowledge. Wagner has fears about the unknown and there is some validity there. When America tested the first atomic and hydrogen bomb our scientists didn't know with 100% certainty what the extent would be.

I don't think God would allow us to destroy the Earth in an experiment. Creation is not so fragile or simple as our little imaginations. That being said it is possible for us to make mistakes and learn from the aftermath, but if it goes BOOM then only Europe will suffer. I await the results of their first experiments with exuberance.

It isn't like they ignited a sun and don't know what to do with it (Cough*.) If we could just hook up a power grid to our little "problem" then America's energy woes would be over forever.

"Top people" are working on it I'm told.

Big-bang battle plan set

craig hancock ,brighton, England — Thu, 22 May 2008 20:17:34 GMT

This is another disater waiting to happen,why do we have to know how everything works surely the money been spent on this program,would better used in helping the third world.

Big-bang battle plan set

Isamu Dyson — Fri, 23 May 2008 10:48:17 GMT

Craig so how much money have you sent to the third world lately?

Big-bang battle plan set

Mark Shellans, Colorado Springs, CO — Mon, 26 May 2008 23:46:55 GMT

Either you believe the mathematical basis of black holes developed by Hawking, et al, or you don't. If it's wrong, micro black holes will not be produced at all at the LHC; if it's right, then they will evaporate via Hawking radiation before they can interact with matter. It's an integral mathematical structure, not subject to being right about production and, at the same time, wrong about the inverse process of decay.

Big-bang battle plan set

Heather Ross, Clarksville, AR — Tue, 27 May 2008 19:38:47 GMT

To build a terrifying machine, do they know how to stop it? think of how "if" they should build and turn it on? where's the responsibility? Have we come to the point we don't care if we destroy ourselves, or think we are so "advanced" we can handle the uncontrollable? Sounds like they may start something they can't even truly imagine what will happen. I get the impression they are like children playing with matches. Maybe they will switch it on, and they will be sucked in their own hole. Then we can shut it off, dump it in the marianna trench and live without them happily!

Big-bang battle plan set

Concerned passenger Undervalued Earth — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:56:28 GMT

The whole premise of any safety report is that we actually know what we are dealing with here, when quite obviously we simply don`t, or what the hec is the LHC for.
Cern can`t predict just what anomilies or reactions may happen and basing safety on specualtion and theories of cosmic events etc we have just observed is very dangerous and subject to all of the gaps,limitations, variables, and unknowns in this field.
Next time you are considering buying a new concept untested car, just hop in your next door mates old banger and take it for a spin to see if the new one you may buy is Ok from that, Ahem!!!!! does`n`t work does it, but at least it is a car.
Theories and ideas in this field are proven wrong or misjudged etc all of the time.
Maybe the operation of the LHC may show we just simply didn`t know what we were dealing with or going to unleash, but perhaps once we realise that it may be too late.
Don`t think for a minute we can say in 6 months we are still here its fine beacause the very next second the unexpected may be created within the collider or dangerous anomilies including black holes etc may have already been created and are starting accretion etc in the earth.
We simply wont ever and can`t know, our understanding of these things is way below what we are facing ourselves with here.
Its Sanctioned lunacy.

I know next time we build a new plane with all sorts of new parts and components etc etc and different engines, wing style, extra weight and size etc etc all unproven, for its first ever flight lets fill it with women and children and the grand parents for the fun of it because thats what we have got here test flight earth on a whole new first of its type concept and we are all going along on the hotley disputed test run whether we like it or not, oh and of course every other single living thing on the planet.

Big-bang battle plan set

James Tankersley Jr., Middleton WI — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 04:48:13 GMT

Stone of Florida writes "Even if you could create a tiny black hole, its mass would be absorbed by the infinitely larger mass of the earth...Its total poppy cock."

Actually the way it works is that black holes are super dense, millions of times more dense than regular matter, and they 'collapse' regular matter into them. There are basically two unanswered questions that determine safety or not:

A. Do micro black holes evaporate? (Best answer: Unknown, no compelling case to say they would evaporate based on several recent studies).

B. How fast would a micro black hole grow if it did not evaporate? (Best answer: Unknown, no compelling evidence of either slow or fast growth. Credible theories predict both.)

If micro black holes evaporate or grow extremely slowly, then they will not destroy the planet. But we don't currently know the answer to those questions...

Learn more at LHCFacts.org

Big-bang battle plan set

James Tankersley Jr., Middleton WI — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 04:52:07 GMT

A copy of legal paper work related the summons served to CERN is available at: http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=50

Big-bang battle plan set

Veronica. Long Island, NY — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 04:19:31 GMT

While it probably is perfectly safe to do, I don't see any reason for not stepping back and rethinking it one more time. If its going to work on say, Monday, it will also work on Thursday.... and then again it may not work at all. (Remember boys, this thing is being built by humans, and they tend to err on occassion.)

Big-bang battle plan set

Shane Treeves — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:54:56 GMT

We should declare a 'War on Science'. When we see scientists start to 'PLAY GOD' and possibly threaten human existence (regardless of the magnitude or validity of these claims) they need to be stopped. As humans, we take calculated risks on a daily basis. We drive our cars to work, even though there is a remote possibility that we could have an accident a die. As humans, we gamble, we like to take what we have and turn it into something greater and more substantial. And finally, as humans, we like 'colourful' and spectacular displays of humanity's progression in the field of science, astrology and art. Regardless of the minute chances of destruction, we will always choose in the end to let the light show begin - It is just our nature. But, friends, let us not forgot that curiosity DID kill the cat and that we should not be arrogant enough to think we too cannot be killed.

Big-bang battle plan set

sienna dessie chicago illinois. — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:17:54 GMT

honestly, im scared. why shouldnt i be?
but i thought about it, and maybe some of you guys are right. they probably know what theyre doing. and i dont think these scientists want to die. i am religious, and i dont want to offend anyone-but pray for the best, and expect for the worst.

Big-bang battle plan set

Joe Ironsides — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:07:34 GMT

Do you people really think that this behemoth machine is for seeking just the "looks good on paper" particles? They are looking for what nobody has ever seen before not just the Higgs Boson!!!!!!!!

They will keep doing that out of mindless passion for science and demystifying life and the atom until a friggin mysterious particle is created. Then guess what the whole friggin planet is consumed before they get a chance to demystify it!!!!!!!!

The only civilizations that survive in this universe are those that don't manage to demystify everything into oblivion.

Friggin moronic scientists. Seriously friggin moronic.

Big-bang battle plan set

Air, Scottsdale, AZ — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 00:19:00 GMT

A microscopic black hole is thought to have a very transient existence. The smaller, the ever-more transient, as they emit radiation named after Stephen Hawking (Hawking radiation). The radii of there event horizons are extremely small - So, what around them can they possibly pull in during their extremely brief existences? These microscopic black holes are theoretical constructs. If one takes the position that the theory is correct and that they exist, then it follows that one should also accept the theoretical predictions that they cannot destroy the world we live in. It's irrational to accept one while rejecting the other. It's time for the nay-sayers to get a grip on this. Their cookie may have been broken as a child, but as an adult, the pieces of their cookie will not be 'eaten' by microscopic black holes. Also, c does not equal 1, but rather (approx) 3 X 10^8 m/s. Hence, .99999% is incorrect by a factor of 10^2.

Big-bang battle plan set

Mary-Kate Johnson,Seattle,Washington. — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 02:21:48 GMT

i didnt even read this i was just looking for a good and easy to read answer for what actually happened during the big bang and i couldnt find a good answer ANYWHER!!im gettin really frausterated at the freakin moment because i have i test tomorrow and we have to write a 1 page essay on the big bang!! SO please dont even bother to help me because by the time you read im already done with the #%$*ing test!so thanks for nothing!!!!!!!!!(i cant believe i wasted my time on this when i should be studying).Man i really dont know what to do.(oh and by the way my reall name isnt Mary-Kate).

Big-bang battle plan set

dave, pj, malaysia — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:58:16 GMT

i found all previous experiments done on any kind are amazing but definitely not this one. First of all, we have limited knowledge of what it could be as a result and what's the worst case. Second, do we have what it takes to at least, stand a chance to have certain degrees of control over it especially when things going out of expectation?

Whatever the results gonna be, it's catastrophic. It turns out good, that's great. If it's not, the rest might suffer. These guys are putting our lives on the edge.

I support Walter Wagner's view and suggestion on this project. Sorry to say that, i think it would worth a try at a smaller scale with one of these guy has a brain like Albert Einstein. Else, i think the day we got the result will be the day our calendar go stale to eternity, as what's ancient Mayan and Chinese's I-ching predicts, the December 21st 2012.

Big-bang battle plan set

Midhun C.V ,Koppam , Kerala — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 06:39:03 GMT

The high density nuclei combained by high energy to form high gravity particles.But in the plasma stage it is posible,the high density/ and there said that all graviton particles where emits.Then what is the scope of a high strength particle exchange?. If it is possible then by the collision, the mass will transfered to huge amount of energy. Then we must bothered about it. But i think that the high gravitational field is canceled by other one.