Doomsday debate update

Travis, Elkridge MD — Fri, 30 May 2008 21:07:26 GMT

people are scared that this machine will prove GOD didnt create the world

Doomsday debate update

Generalist, Spokane WA — Fri, 30 May 2008 21:56:18 GMT

James Hogan, in the book "Thrice Upon A Time", suggested something like this. Thankfully there was a 'time machine' that could send messages back into the past to warn people NOT to start the machine that created the mini black holes.

Doomsday debate update

Duck — Fri, 30 May 2008 21:56:47 GMT

Quack

Doomsday debate update

ryan, — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:09:02 GMT

It's hilarious that people actually think this will cause a black hole on earth!! does anyone even understand the mass and power it takes to create a black hole? Yes, the mass and power of a sun which in our solar system makes up 98% of the mass. The small amount of particles being tested would never and could never create a black hole. wow! 4th grade science!

Doomsday debate update

Quietman — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:10:32 GMT

Douglas Preston's "Blasphemy" was fantastic, one of his best novels.

Doomsday debate update

andre dudley TX — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:28:19 GMT

All the world great srtuctures light up (Stone Hinge, the Pyramids, Easter Inland statues,) in the middle of year 2012 to show the location of the crystal skull to help the planet as it complete the cycle around the son and save or replenise the ozone layer as the world change its rotion. As the world sceams armaggadon all the secert society (mason, Federal Reserve boys, ect.)find skulls only to signal the alien to soon before the cycle ends. Which the alien only take a selected few (the rapture)only to find out that god is real and he saves the ones left behind and the one on the ship return to a different earth that released all the unknown spies of animal that lifed deep within the earth and deep within the sea

Doomsday debate update

Charlene Farber, Richland, WA — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:31:05 GMT

Can't these stupid apocalyptic evangelists keep to themselves and stop trying to shoe fear and misquoted information down our throats?!

Doomsday debate update

Aramis Rosicrux — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:31:16 GMT

What folly, to think that man could cause "Doomday".

This project is a waste of money, talent and electricity. How many hospitals, schools or universities could we build with this kind of funding?

Look, I know scientists like empirical research, but let's face it, nothing discovered in sub-atomic research is going to feed people, generate electricity, cure cancer or open doors to new technologies.

While enjoy understanding the universe, I accept that there are limits beyond which we can never know what is happening.

Let's say we find that there are teeny particles that rotate in a cha-cha fashion: one--two-- one-two-three!

So what? Will it save the planet? feed a child? provide shelter or warmpth to the hunger and cold and homeless?

The world is far worse off from discovering the easy sub-atomic secrets. Every generation that is ever born from now on will have to live with man-made terrors like radioactive pollution.

Sure, some people think that using atom bombs saved lives at the end of WWII, but every iota of radioactive material released on that day, and every A-bomb test since, is still floating in our aair, causing cancers.

Stop wasteful research!

Doomsday debate update

James Tankersley Jr, Middleton, WI — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:36:03 GMT

CERN spokesman James Gillies says "the particle collider poses no danger of destroying the world"

I'm glad to hear that it is safe, because some scientists are saying that it poses a danger of destroying the world!

“ …after 50 months the earth to a centimeter would have shrunk. It would be nothing more there, not only no more life, there but also the earth would be… a small black hole.
-Prof. Dr. Otto E. Rössler

“ … the scientists are fully aware that it is not a project without a grave risk to the life of the Earth.”
-Dr. Raj Baldev

Learn more at LHCFacts.org

Doomsday debate update

James Tankersley Jr, Middleton, WI — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:44:57 GMT

"Gillies said scientists have finished updating a safety report that concludes the particle collider poses no danger of destroying the world. That report is to be presented to the CERN Council next month, and would then be released to the public, he said."

If the report is completed, why not let the world's scientists peer review the report now? The legal petition in US Federal Court is asking for Four months for the world's scientists, who share the potential risk, to review the safety report. But I understand collisions are planned to begin in just a few months.

Doomsday debate update

James Tankersley Jr., Middleton, WI — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:47:25 GMT

I would really like to read that report.

I understand that the LHC Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) agrees that if cosmic rays produce micro black holes, they will be relativistic and travel too fast to be captured by Earth's gravity, whereas if LHC head-on particle collisions produces micro black holes they will be non-relativistic with some that can be captured gravitationally, either by the Earth, or by the Sun.

LSAG is also not assuming Hawking Radiation (evaporation) is valid in their new safety study. We are still waiting for release of this report.

I wonder how they will prove reasonable safety?

JTankers
LHCFacts.org

Doomsday debate update

James Tankersley Jr., Middleton, WI — Fri, 30 May 2008 23:12:42 GMT

This was posted on a blog today...

[quote="Taliesin"][quote]CommonSenseStopNow wrote:
If as if it apprears, CERN Scientists who may have concerns have been told not to voice them[/quote]

I believe [b]it was Jtankers himself who started that little urban legend[/b]. He claimed this in the xkcd thread , it kida blew up in his face when a few members there (who worked for cern, the ATLAS project i believe) stated that they had no such internal memo.
Clearly it was an attempt to villify the cern empolyees , elluding to secrets that the public shouldnt know etc etc....
its pretty funny really.
Btw , that xkcd thread is certanly worth a read. I recommend everyone who has not read it do so.
here it is.
http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=11690[/quote]

Dear Taliesin,

That is an interesting accusation...
I try to be honest, accurate and factual in my statements, and your speculation [b]it is not correct[/b], it is part of the evidence in the legal action.
You should read the legal documents and arguments involved in this case, you might find some of them compelling.

In the [b]affidavit [/b]of Luis Sancho in Support of TRO and Preliminary Injuction, submitted to US Federal Court in Hawaii, Luis Sancho writes on page 18. [url]http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=9[/url]

[quote="Luis Sancho - US Federal Court Affidavit "]CERN censors information on the risks involved. Its Chief Scientific Officer, Mr. Engelen passed an internal memorandum to workers at CERN, asking them, regardless of personal opinion, to affirm in all interviews that there were no risks involved in the experiments, changing the previous assertion of ‘minimal risk’. This happened as he himself explained in a 2007 interview in The New Yorker, due to the growing public fear. So instead of addressing the legitimate fears of the citizenship, CERN decided to hide all risks involved;
[/quote]

The following individual on that same thread was clearly concerned that a very unfavorable risk assessment that he made was not actually a risk assessment. [url]http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=11690&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=160#p622085[/url]

[quote="yy2bggggs"]We don't want to know if it's possible [b]we will blow up the world[/b]--because, quite frankly, we already know the answer. And the answer is, quite frankly, despite all the testing we will ever do--yes.[b] It's possible[/b]. That doesn't help us.

What we want to know is [b]if we are going to destroy the world[/b]. And we [b]can't know this with certainty[/b], but in reality, [b]we don't really care[/b] about certainty. We care about whether or not it's probable--that is, likely, that we will [b]destroy the world[/b]. So again,[b] possibility--irrelevant. Likelihood--key[/b].[/quote]

[quote="JTankers"]
How good are CERN scientists at playing Texas Hold'em poker?
My impression is that CERN is about to go "all in" on a pair of Kings.
([i]Part of risk analysis is how big are the consequences if you lose. I think nature was dealt a pair of Aces, CERN might still win, but I think the odds are against them/us/all of us.[/i])[/quote]

[quote="yy2bggggs"][b]You're misinterpreting what I typed[/b]. Reread it, very carefully. This has [b]nothing to do with risk analysis[/b] (about which you're wrong anyway), and everything to do with possibility being irrelevant.[/quote]

By the way, do you know what the characters in the user ID yy2bggggs represent?

JTankers
LHCFacts.org

Doomsday debate update

Matthew F. Clough — Fri, 30 May 2008 23:18:33 GMT

Wow - good stuff!

Thanks Alan! :)

Doomsday debate update

Don Wiser, Lake Forest, CA — Fri, 30 May 2008 23:20:46 GMT

Sweet! No more taxes!

Doomsday debate update

James Tankersley Jr., Middleton, WI — Fri, 30 May 2008 23:26:22 GMT

I don't usually refere people to LHCConcerns.com anymore, because there is a full time presents of physics who say that they have worked for CERN and other full time opponents of a transparent peer reviewed safety study who say they do not. But I think this blog is worth reading...

http://www.lhcconcerns.com/LHCConcerns/Forums/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=193&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=30#p2170

Former LHCConcerns.com co-moderator Taliesin:
"I believe... a few members there (who worked for cern, the ATLAS project i believe) stated that they had no such internal memo..."

From the xkcd blog:

"yy2bggggs wrote:We don't want to know if it's possible we will blow up the world--because, quite frankly, we already know the answer. And the answer is, quite frankly, despite all the testing we will ever do--yes. It's possible. That doesn't help us.

What we want to know is if we are going to destroy the world. And we can't know this with certainty, but in reality, we don't really care about certainty. We care about whether or not it's probable--that is, likely, that we will destroy the world. So again, possibility--irrelevant. Likelihood--key."

Based on my conversations with yy2bggggs, I believe that he is a CERN physicist from the xkcd blog, and guess what yy2bggggs stands for?

James Tankersley Jr.
Middleton,WI
LHCFacts.org

Doomsday debate update

Sean F. Maloni, Springfield, Massachusetts — Fri, 30 May 2008 23:41:07 GMT

The point of the singletary is relative to the overall size of the gravty field it will create: Example: A black hole with the mass of a subatomic particle will only be able to create a gravity field powerful enough to interact with other less/equally dense subatomic particles. It's simple science really.

Doomsday debate update

Lumen — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:00:35 GMT

God, I hope it blows all of us up.

I really do.

Doomsday debate update

Stephen, Dallas, TX — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:33:47 GMT

Some things, sadly, seem never to change. For all of the half century I have now lived, there was always a man-made doomsday on the horizon (notice how readily people accept 'man-made global warming, and ignore the 50 scientists who refute it for each who proclaims it). When I was a child, we were on the verge of an ice age. Nuclear war, waste, asteroids and comets (at least this has historical basis and is known to have occurred during the time of man).

Ignorance and superstition must, above all, fear knowledge. Knowledge does the worst thing which can be done to ignorance and superstition … it ignores them completely. They simply pass ignobly into forgotten irrelevance.

I have no great understanding of particle physics or M-Theory, but even a perfunctory examination demonstrates that any black hole created in such a device (or even in one many times larger) would evaporate though quantum processes which are well established, in an infinitesimal fraction of a second, long before it could gobble up any other atoms, let alone the planet. Please feel free to refer to the works of Steven Hawking for more on this.

No, knowledge is the ‘bogey man’ here. Learning and reason over power ignorance and even fear as the sun blasts away a shadow. The shadow fears the light. The real danger is in the fear, and in those who make use of it for their own means. One would think that the history of the last 7 years would aptly demonstrate this.

Specifically, and in closing, I feel a need to address Aramis Rosicrux, who, if you are deserving of your chosen name, or even understand its meaning, should certainly know better.

Doomsday debate update

John Doe, Seattle, Wash. — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:39:24 GMT

I seem to recall that some of the scientists involved with the orignial atomic bomb were concerned that an atomic explosion could set the earth's atmosphere on fire. Some things never change.

Doomsday debate update

Gizmo, Raleigh NC — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:47:33 GMT

What is the big deal with you people, if these scientists want to do this and have the apparent huge funding for the project do you honestly think that a court hearing or other scientists are going to stop it????

Doomsday debate update

Kim Huggard — Sat, 31 May 2008 01:14:25 GMT

What a fitting end to the Bush Dynasty, total annihilation!

I guess it couldn't hurt anymore than another four years of Conservative Politics!

Doomsday debate update

jdtseattlewa — Sat, 31 May 2008 01:24:06 GMT

Stephen,Dallas
Knowledge is not the bogey-man here. It's the same attitude that allowed the industry leaders responsible for radium paint to ignore the risks to their employees and pull a series of red herrings when the poisoned and dying women took them to court. Those executives knew there was risk, but they felt it wasn't their risk. They had a business to run, and more important fish to fry.

Doomsday debate update

Dirk — Sat, 31 May 2008 01:35:39 GMT

Ha Ha! My Collider is bigger than yours!

Doomsday debate update

Flakk, Houston TX — Sat, 31 May 2008 01:40:41 GMT

"nothing discovered in sub-atomic research is going to feed people, generate electricity, cure cancer or open doors to new technologies."

I've heard things like this before. But thoes were about things like the airplane, and Personal Computers and every body knows thoes people were just foolish primatives ;)

Doomsday debate update

aussie, australia — Sat, 31 May 2008 01:50:36 GMT

well if the world does get sucked up by a mini blackhole, australia's on the other side of the world so we will be the last one to be sucked up.. join us and spend your last few moments chilling out on a beach with a beer!

Doomsday debate update

JTankers, Middleton WI — Sat, 31 May 2008 02:00:54 GMT

Sean F. Maloni writes "[micro black hole] will only be able to create a gravity field powerful enough to interact with other ... subatomic particles"

[LHCFacts.org Comment]:
"[Prof. Dr.] Rossler’s idea is that when a MBH accretes a charged particle, say electron, this will not go straight into the MBH, but will circulate around the MBH for a while, and by doing this, a magnetic field will be created which will attract positive and negative charged particles, each at the opposite poles of the MBH, thus accelerating the accretion rate."

Doomsday debate update

JTankers, Middleton WI — Sat, 31 May 2008 02:13:37 GMT

Stephen writes: "any black hole ... would evaporate though quantum processes which are well established ... refer to the works of Steven Hawking for more on this. "

The LHC Safety Assessment Group does not assume that any micro black holes that might be created will evaporate.

The following PHDs and Professors of Math and Physics also argue that micro black holes might only grow:

* Dr. Adam D. Helfer: Do black holes radiate? “this prediction rests on two dubious assumptions…“
* “no compelling theoretical case for or against radiation by black holes“

* Dr. William G. Unruh and Prof. Ralf Schützhold: On the Universality of the Hawking Effect “Therefore, whether real black holes emit Hawking radiation or not remains an open question“

* Prof. V.A. Belinski: On the existence of quantum evaporation of a black hole “quote” “…the effect [Hawking Radiation] does not exist.“

* Dr. Adam D. Helfer: QUANTUM NATURE OF BLACK HOLES “…the correct picture of a black hole is very different“
* “…completely alters the picture drawn by Hawking“

Learn more at LHCFacts.org

Doomsday debate update

SW, Boise, ID — Sat, 31 May 2008 02:15:31 GMT

In response to ryan;

You are incorrect about the ability of the CERN reactor to create black holes. It CAN create black holes, they just happen to be VERY small. SO small, that you could have 10 million of them within your body space and would never know it nor would you likely suffer ANY problems from the exposure. (your body is almost ALL empty space). Since gravity's pull reduces exponentially (inverse squared), and since the black holes that are created are infinitesimally small, they will have no significant effect if any at all, on any surrounding matter. Also, if you take into account Hawking radiation (black holes, like everything else in the universe, decay), the black holes will have a lifespan of less than a billionth of a second. Not quite enough time to destroy the world....

If you want to read a really cool book along the same lines as "Thrice upon a Time", try "Einstein's Bridge". Great book if you like this sort of thing:)

Doomsday debate update

Bill McDonough, Smithtown, NY — Sat, 31 May 2008 03:10:25 GMT

"Look, I know scientists like empirical research, but let's face it, nothing discovered in sub-atomic research is going to feed people, generate electricity, cure cancer or open doors to new technologies."

Actually, it might well do all those things. Better understanding of quantum effects have, over the last 50 years, created and improved the transistor, and with it, allowed computers to become more than glorified calculators. That, in turn, has produced scientific breakthroughs in genetics (including agriculture, where dwarf wheat has already been helping about half of the planet meet its dietary needs for thirty+ years), medicine, power generation, etc.

None of it possible w/out quantum theory, none of it capable of being improved upon w/out continuing improvements on quantum theory.

Doomsday debate update

SEAN — Sat, 31 May 2008 03:32:30 GMT

DONT WE ALREADY HAVE A DOOMSDAY MACHINE AKA OUR CURRENT CONGRESS OR WAIT IT COULD JUST AS WELL BE AL GORE AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH RUN FOR YOUR LIVESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Doomsday debate update

Crummer — Sat, 31 May 2008 03:58:12 GMT

That's it... I'm moving to Australia!

Doomsday debate update

Jerry Connelly Queensland Australia — Sat, 31 May 2008 04:16:01 GMT

If there is no God why is it called the God particle

Doomsday debate update

Andrews — Sat, 31 May 2008 05:02:35 GMT

4th grade science. Oh no. People did say these words to Galileo friend. We cannot predict something we doesnt know. Until very recently black holes are thought to be very large but for a 1.5 mile black hole couple of months back. That 1.5 mile black hole wasn't ever found before, coz we dint have the technology. As of now we dont have any tech.to find a MBH as well.

Doomsday debate update

ibanks, Seattle WA — Sat, 31 May 2008 06:03:11 GMT

Um, how would Earth or the Sun's mass or gravitation have any bearing on a singularity?... Regardless of the "size" of the singularity.

The problem with a tiny black hole (if that's even possible...) wouldn't be with getting 'captured' by a massive body. I would think. It'd be rather the other-way around. Wouldn't it?

And what if the expected 'observation' of micro-holes 'evaporating' rapidly, is actually an optical illusion of sorts?

I mean maybe they won't 'evaporate' so much as merely escape the frame of our ralativistic observations. Whatever that implies.

Doomsday debate update

John Paul Hamilton, Ohio United States — Sat, 31 May 2008 07:07:12 GMT

Wow! To be at the "Creator's" front door... Isn't that where mankind has constantly strived to be? You are there and many are afraid to knock. Are we "worthy" of physical destruction is the hypothesis comes to be? The knowledge that we have which even could alter mankind's existence can only be that knowledge which was wrought from the Creator anyway. Fear nothing but fear itself...

Doomsday debate update

Isamu Dyson — Sat, 31 May 2008 13:34:07 GMT

"nothing discovered in sub-atomic research is going to feed people, generate electricity, cure cancer or open doors to new technologies."

What if they stumble across a way to produce Cold Fusion at a subatomic level or some other something other great thanks to the R&D being done here. A lot of the great discoveries have been on accident.

There's always going to be starving poor people, thanks to science there are a lot more people around to live and also be poor and starving it's a catch-22. You can't save the world and stopping all pure R&D just because it might not have an apparent beneficial prospect. If all this does is expand our knowledge of the universe in the short term we are all the better for it.

Should Columbus have stayed home because there were poor people in Europe? I'm tired of this boring argument people complain about science even if it's not inherently beneficial right off yet reap the benefits of it everyday.

Doomsday debate update

one — Sat, 31 May 2008 13:59:37 GMT

Let's not forget what happened the last time you got to big for your britches in building the tower of babel...you are still a very primitive civilization who thinks it knows all their is know when actually you don't know what you don't know....now turn this thing off and stop bothering me...

Doomsday debate update

Skeptic 1 — Sat, 31 May 2008 15:23:03 GMT

With every hole regardless of type, there is either a bottom / ending or an opening on the other side. So either the Earth, as we know it, will cease to exist or we, get a free ride in the next level of existence. Should be interesting.

Doomsday debate update

Sara, Fairbanks Alaska — Sat, 31 May 2008 16:23:16 GMT

Michio Kaku, the world's leading physicist, who's day job is completing Einstein's "theory of everything", states that this powerful machine might indeed help to create the first "new baby universe", the first and necessary step to solving the theory of everything.
Fascinating!

Doomsday debate update

Dan, Vancouver WA — Sat, 31 May 2008 18:48:29 GMT

For all of you laypeople who are absolutely sure that it is impossible for the LHC to destroy the earth due to some theoretical miscalculation, two words: Castle Bravo. Look it up.

Doomsday debate update

Dude — Sat, 31 May 2008 22:07:46 GMT

Move to TX. It, being another world, should be safe from this one getting sucked into a black hole...

Or, better yet, move the LHC to TX! That way if it does create a black hole we have a triple win. The earth is safe, TX gets blown up, and science learns something.

Doomsday debate update

Dude — Sat, 31 May 2008 22:14:18 GMT

Dan:

Intentional initiation of a fusion explosion (oops lithium-7) is not comparable to the LHC. Castle Bravo was intended to explode, big. The LHC is not.

Lets save the false analogies, panic, and other irrational claims for when somebody decides to intentionally create a mini black hole.

Doomsday debate update

Chris Blaze, Vancouver BC — Sat, 31 May 2008 22:42:04 GMT

You know, humans are a bunch of sheep. Someone in power says "jump", we all say "how high". How do you produce a conclusive saftey report for something that has never happened? The answer is: you can't. There's only one way to find out what will happen, and that is to turn on the machine. The risk associated with the particle accelerator is present and real, however unlikely or improbable, we heard it from the mouths of the scientists themselves. So now we're supposed to put our trust in scientists who are risking the lives of everyone and everything on earth based on theory and probability? Hmmmmm, makes me wonder about the collective sanity of the human race. Also, someone on here said it was simple grade 4 science that these 'mini black holes' could not be produced by the accelerator because there's not enough power? Well, as I recall, splitting an atom created a heck of alot of power. Makes me wonder what oblitterating particles will produce. To add, grade 4 science also taught me that black holes have gravity so great that light cannot escape, so all it would take is a 'mini black hole' to start a chain of events that could turn into disaster for everyone. Open your eyes people. Think for yourselves. If they have created a machine with the POTENTIAL to bring doomsday upon us (regardless of how small the risk), which side of the fence do you wanna be on?

Doomsday debate update

Papadopoulos Gregory, Athens, Greece — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 02:15:01 GMT

I am a physicist myself, living in Greece and know 3 people involved in CERN and the specific project LHC.
First of all subatomic research is essential to understanding the world around us or proving theories.
And probably will provide the humanity with energy (and electricity) in the future.
If we ever had a single doubt of creating such a destructive thing as a black hole, we would burn the research and shoot ourselves for having that knowledge. The ethics of science are a little more strict these days.
If you check the energies involved in the experiment, you would understand that it wouldn't even bend the ST around it. And check again on tiny black holes...
I believe that genetically manipulated crops are more dangerous than this experiment.

Doomsday debate update

Giuseppe Berrey — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 03:07:54 GMT

Didn't Carlos Wu and Julian Foreward prove that a black hole WOULD suck up a planet if whomever had it dropped it?

Doomsday debate update

undarwebian — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 03:14:16 GMT

For he gave his only begotten son so that all mankind could be saved. He created the earth and all its inhabitants in 7 days...He created mankind and all things seen and unseen. And man, now thinks he has invented a machine that will prove God created nothing ? no, what mankind will find will be the true opening to the gates of his hell or the acknowledgement that God is... now, flip the switch..

Doomsday debate update

unmox meeks — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 03:19:17 GMT

listen up oh great professors of ungodliness, your about to bend your knees to the new learning of Cq being, C Quantum....and as for God Particle ?

he's everywhere...he is because he is, was and forever will be... and inspired mankind to write you and all mankind the ingredients and directions to survival.

Doomsday debate update

Tracy, Wooster OH — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 05:36:42 GMT

Whatever is written is questionable today. Truth is hard to come by. To look at the picture, seems to me they are trying to move something somewhere to another time or location. WAIT 30 yrs. maybe the real scoop will surface. We only hear or read what they want you to now.

Doomsday debate update

ibanks, Seattle WA — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 05:44:44 GMT

@Skeptic 1. What if you could make a toroid and then flatten it without causing seams or tears? Where is the "hole" in that doughnut? How 'BIG' is it?

Doomsday debate update

matthew, bemidji, MN — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 08:09:06 GMT

the amount of force a black hole exerts on a particular space is proportional to the amount of mass it contains. theories in the works suggest that everyday we are subject to small black holes and other anomalies.
the possibility that this will create spacial anamomies is certain, are they a threat. all current information about the topic points to no.

Doomsday debate update

STEVE,GREENWOOD S.C. — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 12:41:24 GMT

MAN CANNOT CREATE THE FORCES OF NATURE ONLY MINIPULATE THEM TO THE DEGREE OF HIS UNDERSTANDING.
THE SAME WILL BE FOR THE BLAACK HOLE SCENERIO. IF THERE ARE FORCES(WHICH THERE ARE MANY)WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND IN THE FORMATION OF BLACK HOLES THEN WE CAN ONLY CEATE A CERTAIN SET OF CODITIONS IN THE COLLIDER. IT IS MOST LIKELY THERE ARE MORE CONDITIONS THAN WE CURRENTLY UNDERSTAND IN CREATION OF BLACK HOLES AND WITH THIS MACHINE WILL WILL ONLY BE INCHING ONE SMALL STEP INTO THIS NEW FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCE.
IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THIS JUST LOOK AT ATOMIC FUSION AND FISSION. WE KNOW ENOUGH TO CAUSE THE CONDITIONS THAT ALLOW THIS TO OCCUR AND THE FORCES OF NATURE(GOD) TAKES OVER FROM THERE. WE ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO FULLY UNDERSTANDING NOR CONTROLLING THESE PROCESSES. SAME WITH MATTER-ANTI-MATTER REACTIONS

Doomsday debate update

Andre Woods, Orange City Florida — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 13:14:13 GMT

Although I have not read the book as of yet, it is my belief that just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should. Mankind progresses, but his wisdom must accelerate to catch up with his intelligence. I am not saying that the accelerator should be shut down, but before taking a major step the concequences should be objectively reviewed and weighed heavily beforehand. The potential for unexpected scenarios is way too high and nobody wants to hear "oops how could we have known". The drive that is fundemental within curiosity is strong and has propelled us to the state in which we live currently; however mankind more than once has placed blinders on and have dangerously taken steps that upon retrospect should not have been taken. Change is slow for society and we are still more intelligent than wise. In short, think before you act, crawl before you walk, and mostly do not continue just for the sake of doing so otherwise we will have yet another manhattan project type thing or we will have someone use the new founded technology to create a new form of terror upon the world claiming if we didn't do it someone else will who will use it maliciously! If you don't learn from your mistakes in the past you are doomed to repeat them; how many bricks have to fall on our collective heads before we realize that our technical skill has far surpassed our capacity for wisdom?

Doomsday debate update

emma, seattle, wash. 9th grader — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 16:17:22 GMT

I don't know how many people understand this but research like that can lead to learning how to create things. Still that amount of money shouldn't be needed. Some of that should go elsewhere. And doomsday? I think we've royally screwed ourselves pretty well already dontcha think?

Doomsday debate update

emma, seattle, wash. 9th grader — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 16:20:54 GMT

oh and 4th grade science wasn't planets, blackholes, atom smashing, or any of that. It was learning about the metric system

Doomsday debate update

Tom, Seguin, TX — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:29:34 GMT

I say turn it on. I'm bored and need to either laugh or cry. I'm sure if there is a god it's either in his plans or he figures it's a good way to end all the suffering we cause to each other. Flip the switch, make a bang!

Doomsday debate update

Sean F. Maloni, Springfield, Massachusetts — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 20:51:23 GMT

Well, "black holes" have already been created in other labs and were still here. This project will create a better understanding of quantium physics and needs to be explored. I'm not going to get all "tech-ie" and detail how there are current labs that have and still create sub-atomic black holes, that's not the point. The point is there is no evidence to back up the "end of everything" nay-sayers and there will ALWAYS be nay-sayers, and the proof is there for the creation on sub-atomic black holes to pose no threat...And the science will help (mankind) in the long run.

Doomsday debate update

Sean F. Maloni, Springfield, Massachusetts — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 20:54:37 GMT

ALSO: Castle Bravo was a dry H-Bomb test of Dr. Hellers that surpased it's estimated 5Mega-Ton power by apx. 10Mega-Tons...And has nothing to do with this debate...

Doomsday debate update

ibanks Seattle, WA — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:36:23 GMT

@Dude, hilarious!

Turn key released, panic device is ready.

On your mark...

Doomsday debate update

Beau — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 02:58:08 GMT

One of the interesting things I've observed here is the overwhelming voice that there could actually be a black hole of sorts birthed from collision of particles.

The reason why I find it odd, is because when I first heard about colliders when I was a boy; particles moved faster than light, and we learned it created a lot of energy from colliding just two heavier particles.

With no prompting, and only good ole fashioned common sense with a fascination for high energy, and advanced scientific research, I too wondered if such a machine could possibly create a black hole. Only to hear that echoed by many others and this article as well.

The other odd thing was, when I was younger we didn't know what a black hole was (or at least wasn't taught), but it seemed so obvious to me that when a star collapsed, it formed a black hole. Now there are probably other events that can cause a black hole, but at that time, I surmized that a black hole would be caused by the final events of a collapsing star. It seemed obvious to me that its a cycle, with a black hole gathering an immesurable amount of mass... My guess would be that its a cycle designed to recover elements needed to either FILL the hole as a cosmic plug, or simply to gather material to super compress more fuel for yet another star...

I'm just sharing a couple of thoughts that I've had in the past regarding black holes, and that I think its kind of weird that without outside prompting I came to the decision that it is indeed likely to form a black hole in this manner.

I also believe personally that God had created a fantastic and stable physics system, one that includes saftey nets for such events. So on a scale as large as a star collapsing, its designed to do what it does, but on a scale that we can curently (possibly) cause, I don't believe that it would cause damage on an epic gobal scale.

This is not to say, it should be taken lightly, but at the same time, continue the research we have no other way of measuring particles in such a state, and likley will hold key physics data that we will use to leverage our usherance out of the information age to something even more exciting.

Doomsday debate update

Dan, Vancouver WA — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 04:35:11 GMT

But Dude!

The point is they didn't expect the lithium-7 to contribute significantly to the explosion, but it did. They didn't completely understand the conditions that it would be subjected to, or how it would react.

The analogy stands on the fact that they don't precisely know what is going to happen in these experiments either, otherwise they wouldn't need to do them.

Also, even CERN conceeds that they may very well create microscopic black holes, they just don't expect them to cause problems.

That said, the cosmic ray argument is persuasive, although the collisions produced don't necessarily occur under precisely the same conditions as LHC. I am actually looking forward to the advances the LHC may bring and don't really expect anything bad to happen, but there is always a chance.

I just don't like to see people assume that the "authorities" are infallable and never to be questioned, whether those authorities are religious or political leaders or scientists.

Doomsday debate update

Walt G. — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 06:22:24 GMT

Playing God!
Nobel Prize hungry Physicists are racing each other and stopping at nothing to try to find the supposed 'Higgs Boson'(aka 'God') Particle, among others, and are risking nothing less than the annihilation of the Earth and all Life in endless experiments to try to solve theoretical problems when urgent real problems face the planet. The European Organization for Nuclear Research(CERN) new Large Hadron Collider(LHC) is the world's most powerful atom smasher that will soon be firing subatomic particles at each other at nearly the speed of light to create Miniature Big Bangs producing clouds of Micro Black Holes, Strangelets and other potentially cataclysmic phenomena as described below.
The CERN-LHC website Mainpage itself states quote: "There are many theories as to what will result from these collisions,..." This stunning admission is because they truly don't know what's going to happen. They are experimenting with forces they don't understand to obtain results they can't comprehend. If you think like most people do that 'They must know what they're doing.' you could not be more wrong. The second part of the quote reads "...but what's for sure is that a brave new world of physics will emerge from the new accelerator,..." A molecularly changed or Black Hole consumed Lifeless World? The end of the quote reads "as knowledge in particle physics goes on to describe the workings of the Universe." These experiments to date have so far produced infinitely more questions than answers but there isn't a particle experimentalist physicist alive who wouldn't gladly trade his life to glimpse the "God particle", and sacrifice the rest of us with him.
This quote from Nation Geographic exactly sums this "science" up: "That's the essence of experimental particle physics: You smash stuff together and see what other stuff comes out."
For more information visit;
http://www.lhcdefense.org/
http://www.lhcconcerns.com
http://www.SaneScience.org/
http://www.LHCFacts.org
Popular Mechanics - "World's Biggest Science Project Aims to Unlock 'God Particle'" - http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/extreme_machines/4216588.html"

Doomsday debate update

justa dude — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:02:21 GMT

ok so, im no scientist, but uh doesnt a black hole have an insatiable appetite for, well EVERYTHING? matter, light, and everything in between? micro or not, sounds like an unstoppable chain reaction to me. isnt it the nature of a black hole to grow exponentialy? whos to say a back hole isnt micro to begin with, anyone ever measured one? just my 2 cents.

Doomsday debate update

Joe, Chicago — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 14:33:08 GMT

Cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere have more energy than the particles the LHC will be smashing.

Claiming that there's a danger of creating a long-lived black hole that's capable of swallowing the earth shows an ignorance of physics.

Doomsday debate update

J. Quinlan — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 15:10:12 GMT

I started my electrician's career in a small "university" town almost 40 years ago. I met and worked for many of the university's professors in their homes. I can tell you all, as a matter of fact, that not all "professors" are endowed equally with the same amounts of intelligence! Most seemed to have a sincere lack of common sense, which made me quite leery of their actual qualifications. Don't get me wrong! They were all very "book smart" people but most didn't have a full grasp of everyday reality! In other words some couldn't "pour piss from a boot with the directions printed on the heal." I think that these are the ones that slow real progress in science. They can't think "outside of the box." but they have tenure.

Doomsday debate update

Jason, Dallas, Tx — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 15:25:59 GMT

looks to me like Jtankers is a plant of the people seeking to stop this project. He sure has a lot of time to go and find "evidence" to post to refute anyone's claims or statements.

Doomsday debate update

BW, Atlanta, GA — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 15:52:24 GMT

the negative strangelet hypothesis is far more interesting than micro blackholes

Doomsday debate update

daniela smith killeen texas — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 16:58:37 GMT

"nothing discovered in sub-atomic research is going to feed people, generate electricity, cure cancer or open doors to new technologies."

This is wrong at all levels.
Think about this:
Man discovers why mass has gravity.
Man now knows how to undo gravity.
Man builds ant-gravity devices to lift things.
Man builds anti-gravity vehicles.
Man builds anti-gravity suits for people.
Man no longer needs anti-gravity vehicles.
The list can go on and on. The prospect of the higgs boson is almost mind boggling

Doomsday debate update

BH, Pittsburgh, PA — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:00:00 GMT

I am not even sure why people are attacking the LHC... is it purely fear attributed to mini black holes or is it something deeper? The fact that people are attacking the LHC shows the narrow mindedness and true ignorance that has hindered the progression of science since the beginning of scientific thought. Who knows where are technology would be today if the Romans never squashed the great greek scholars and crushed the pursuit of intelligence thriving at Alexandria.
The LHC embodies an idea of what it means to be human, the search for understanding, the ability to ask "why?" An innate human quality is to yearn for a deeper understanding of our existence in this universe, whether this is approached via a religious approach or a scientific one, the idea remains the same. To attack the LHC to is attack the one quality that has allowed us to progress as an intelligent species so that we may have the ability to ask the question "why?"
The LHC is not going to destroy the earth, this is absurd, enough said. If anything, it may destroy some naive notions that a few people cling to about the origins of our planet and the universe, but surely this is of no consequence. The LHC is a pinnacle of achievement and should be recognized as such. It is our greatest attempt as an intelligent race to better understand life, not destroy it. It is truly a technological marvel, and the main feeling bristling thorugh the air should be excitement, not fear. The LHC is just one more stepping stone in answering the ultimate questions of "how and why are we here?", and if it cannot, then surely its predescor will try. Indeed I look forward to the bright future of discovery the LHC may provide by illuminating a gloomy past. Humans strive to investigate themselves and the universe we are in, but the true nature of investigation is the joyous moment of discovery. Thankfully the creators of the LHC believe in and know this feeling, and hopefully one day so will the confused people who seek to destroy scientific thought.

Doomsday debate update

Bob H — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:47:30 GMT

Why do we THINK we even need to mess around with this stuff? I believe some things should just be left alone. Just because some scientists come up with some calculation about a theory, doesn't mean they have to go play with it at everyone elses expense. There are alot of more real problems in the world that rate a whole lot higher than this thing.

Doomsday debate update

Can't stand your ignorance — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 18:45:45 GMT

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't particles collide at near relativistic in our atmosphere all the time (cosmic rays)? All this seems to be doing is doing this in a place where they can be easily observed. If this was a doomsday machine I think all this would be moot because "mini black holes" would have devoured our world billions of years ago.

Doomsday debate update

Mike, Long Island, NY — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 19:16:59 GMT

Aramis:
How do you propose scientists decide what research will or won't be fruitful before the research is done? Even cancer research doesn't always lead to a cure in every case. But every project tells us something valuable, which can then be used to look in new directions that may turn out to be fruitful.

If people like you had your way Columbus would not have sailed across the Atlantic, because even in his time people debated the usefulness of such a costly and risky venture. Where would you be now if he didn't?

What about the early astronomers? Copernicus, Aristotle, Galileo - how was their research applicable to the problems of the time? But without their knowledge to build on there would be no satellites, no moon landing, no space program at all. Many advances in materials engineering, physics, medicine and chemistry have stemmed from these programs. And further into the future I suspect we will reap even more rewards - all stemming from the work of the early pioneers.

So not all research yields immediate results. And we can never know what gem of knowledge may lie under what, as yet undisturbed corner of our world, but that is why we look everywhere. And in the future how can we know how some piece of seemingly useless information may be part of a great advancement?

Doomsday debate update

troy, fargo, nd — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 19:24:55 GMT

You doomsayers are just like the people who thought Project Trinity would set the atmosphere on fire. If you spent as much time writing your local lawmakers about things that really matter as you do spreading misinformation on topics like this, the world would be a better place.

Doomsday debate update

Maxwell, Rapid City, SD — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:11:26 GMT

The paranoia and ignorance shown here makes me wonder if destruction of the earth would be such a bad thing.

For God's sake people, turn off the Sci File Channel and the video games and read real book written by a qualified scientist.

You alarmists are just looking for attention in your failed lives just like the nut Salazaar.

Doomsday debate update

Steveo, Los Angeles, CA — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:49:43 GMT

If a black hole is created, and it quickly consumes the earth - so quickly no one suffers. Will it matter at all? Who would it matter to?
We all are going to die, and the universe certainly doesn't notice us - the rest is just ego.

Doomsday debate update

Frank Glover Rochester, NY — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:51:12 GMT

"Look, I know scientists like empirical research, but let's face it, nothing discovered in sub-atomic research is going to feed people, generate electricity, cure cancer or open doors to new technologies."

LOL! You don't know that. Equally esoteric research in the 1930's led to nuclear power (for good and ill) as we know it today.

"While enjoy understanding the universe, I accept that there are limits beyond which we can never know what is happening."

And you cannot know if and what those limits are, without actually investigating.

That's what science is, and how it differs from faith.

Doomsday debate update

Delmar Fairchild, Barron, WI — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 22:36:44 GMT

Maybe we will find we can actually confine and control a mini black hole and use it to produce a consistent amount of energy.
A black hole that gobbles up matter at a consistent but slow rate, but gives it back as energy which we convert to running our cars, heating our homes, fueling our factories and etc. The rate would be in relation to the end of earth's time. The Earth's fuel would just about be used up when the sun finally loses it's fuel and burns up Mercury, Venus and the Earth. Man would be gone anyway and the black hole would be just another part of space.
The cost of producing usable electricity would be shared by all peoples of the earth on a rate of population per country. The higher the population, the lower the rate as will be noted below.
We could confine it to a non populated section of earth. We could call it Audrey III because we could feed it with our deceased population. What a way to know you will be part of helping your fellow humans forever. The higher the population, the less your fellow countrymen would have to pay. After all the higher population provides the most fuel.

Doomsday debate update

Chris Blaze, Vancouver BC — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 22:47:55 GMT

You know, so many of us are looking foreward to what CERN might provide us with: energy, 'god particle', and so many other 'theoretical' positives. If we had put a fraction of the funding into the study of renewable energy resources (sun, wind, water), maybe we could come up with alternate solutions that don't involve the potential destruction of the planet (which seems to be where it's all headed anyways, what with pollution, ozone layer depletion, contamination of soil and water, global warming, and the depletion and extinction of 1% of earth animal species per year). Makes me wonder why we haven't put nearly as many resources into fixing the problems we have already created as is being put into CERN and military research. It all gives me flashbacks to 'the manhatten project' and the atomic bomb. Yeah we now have nuclear power and all the peripherals, but how many lives did that cost? Oppenheimer himself said "I am become death, destroyer of worlds", while many of the other creators and scientists were of the same opinion. We only opened doors to bigger problems. Do we really have any doubt as to what will happen when we find out this research can produce an ungodly amount of power? Weapons. And then maybe some will be put to 'good causes' to shut everyone up. This is all about power, politics and who's 'bigger and better'. All this talk of 'bettering the human race' is really just frustrating because if we were putting as much effort and funding into helping the world as we are into CERN and military, maybe we'd actually see some change. What's the rush to jump into projects like this? Fix the problems we do have, then think about creating more...

Doomsday debate update

jdtseattlewa — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:03:01 GMT

matthew, bemidji
A person who certainly knows more than me about this, but still perhaps not engough to ask exactly the right questions to the rarified crowd that claims "no problem" has pointed out that the micro-black-holes that may be bombarding us now are presently thought to be generated by interactions with cosmic ray particles, those hotrods of the universe, which naturally impart such a velocity to the resulting MBH that it skitters off for parts unknown, even right through the earth, or sun, possibly being captured by a neutron star that happens to be in a likely location. The LHC will end up generating these MBH's within the parameters of the earth's rest frame (reletivisitcally speaking). Also, the collision will be head-on, meaning that the starting velocity and vector of the MBH may or may not be above the escape velocity of earth, or the sun. The numbers I've read being bandied about on the subject of a black hole or holes growing to swallow the earth range from 5 Billion years to 50 months. I guess we have the potential to learn a number important things here, like, can we generate the things (some folks have calculated up to 1 per second during the run), is Steven Hawking correct in that a small enough black hole should evaporate, and last but not least, my favorite, the solution to the Fermi Paradox (where are all those intelligent aliens anyway?)
Me no Luddite by the way, just wondering if all those Billions of euro's expended on the LHC are burning a hole in some folks's sense of caution. the pressure to go ahead and the fear of being stopped must be enormous. Just the national prestige at stake is enough to sink any number of battleships.

Doomsday debate update

James Tankersley Jr., Middleton WI — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 05:38:59 GMT

Article: "CERN spokesman James Gillies told me today he wasn't aware that any papers had been served."

Copies of documents related to serving the legal papers to CERN are available at: http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=50

Doomsday debate update

Henry, Skipton, England — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 08:48:40 GMT

One reason there are so many starving people:
Over breeding / Over Population
Same reason for pollution.

No matter... This project is a WASTE of money and energy which Must be directed towards solving global suffering of all lifeforms. The money and effort directed towards "defense" industry and toward wars is the greatest waste of human resources.

Kill your Televisions. Bring your family and communities Together again. End your bitter religious and racial prejudices. EDUCATE people about real things and down-to-Earth living.

Do not submit to those who believe they are the "chosen ones".. i.e. the politicians and the self-proclaimed 'elite' families. They are ruining your lives because you allow them to control you.

Think and use your brains. Think OUTSIDE the box.

Doomsday debate update

James Tankersley Jr — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 23:00:16 GMT

I am assisting in educating about the potential danger and counter unsupportable public relations statements of “no danger”, “don’t worry…” concerning operation of the Large Hadron Collider.

The physicists involved, actually a majority of experimental physicists really really want to believe that this type of experimentation is safe, otherwise it could shut down a huge amount of science research.

The problem is not only might it be unsafe, it might be really really unsafe.

A primary issue is that the energies are so high that the experiment may collapse some particles into ‘micro black holes’. (CERN estimates possible creation at a rate of one per second).

If these exotic particles evaporate or grow extremely slowly, then there would be no problem. However several PHDs in Math and Physics and other theoretical sciences (I can provide quotes and links) believe that BOTH might be false. Micro black holes may likely NOT evaporate and they likely might grow relatively QUICKLY.

That might mean that in a matter of just perhaps a few years or decades a single micro black hole could grow so large that it might actually collapse the entire Earth into it.

CERN wishes to start operating the LHC experiment later this year and is planning to release a study that will attempt to prove safety. But it might not be possible. And the fear is that the experiment might go forward anyway, with the hope that it will prove to be safe…

The alternative is hugely negative for the thousands employed by the experiments and who have been working for years to conduct their experiments. Big stakes for careers, science, prestige, funding, etc.

A court case before US Federal Courts to compel reasonable proof of safety has its first hearing on June 16, 2008 in Hawaii.

More information is also available at other sites, including LHCFacts.org and LHCDefense.org (wealth of quotes, links, articles, etc. from independent sources and credible experts).

Cheers

Doomsday debate update

James Tankersley Jr — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 23:08:09 GMT

Matthew, Bemidji writes: "...are they a threat. all current information about the topic points to no."

Unfortunately, current information is so lacking that no physicist knows for certain. The lawsuit estimates that the risk can be calculated in the range of a 50% probability that the Large Hadron Collider might pose an existential threat to the planet (might destroy it).

Estimates might certainly change if CERN's safety study can reasonably prove otherwise, but currently we do not have good reason to support claims of "no risk". That assertion is not supportable with respect to the LHC based on completed, released and verified studies.

Doomsday debate update

RAVEN — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 04:21:13 GMT

Matthew.. casually speaking... I was under the impression that a black hole's energy or force (how fast anything would be consumed)...is in fact related to the size of the black hole starting with width. Now, I delve casually into my favorite subject astro-physics now and then as a generlly bored curious person would do (OK maybe not...)So, that being said I think that we really do not know what the outcome will be once this accelerator turns on. What I am saying in an ideal world based on the research and all the planning that any small infraction in the processes of this machinery and we then will find out. Lets accept the fact the we really don't know exactly with certainty at 100% what the outcome would be in the event of a malfunction either. I chuckle here thinking at the vastness of the machinery required to act on such small particles we know and are yet to try and identify. Look at the size of things here.! What my concern is truly is that we could effectuate change in what we thought were the only or the known particles. I say we still have a few unknown particles left in door number one. That being said, I just hope they have in place as best as they can plan for and create a back up plan for the unknown. Many things have been and will continue to be discovered by accident as we all know. This could be another one of those discoveries by accident, no doubt. I hope their life (really death)insurance is paid up thats all!

As far as searching for the GOD particle, and beyond...

I have to agree with ONE;

"...we don't know all that we don't know..."

RAVEN

Doomsday debate update

Jeremy G., Greensboro, NC — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:15:21 GMT

Aramis Rosicrux:
Without sub-atomic research, we might never have discovered, for instance, superconductors. This discovery led to, among other things, the MRI machine.

I hope you never have a brain tumor; your life might be saved by a device created from "wasted research".

Doomsday debate update

Dave — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:17:07 GMT

I've seen The 5 Scenarios To The End Times...and it seems to me, mankind has done a pretty good job of screwin' up this planet so far.
A machine that may create a 'black hole' doesn't seem to far fetched. And it only takes ONE man to hit the wrong button!...Then we'll all be seeing ... GOD.

Doomsday debate update

rich rizzo, New York, NY — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:54:37 GMT

The 1990 David Brin Novel actually predicts this scenario among others and won the HUGO Award in 1991....check it out

Doomsday debate update

Dario, Cali — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:31:55 GMT

looks like someone has weapons of mass destruction...

thinking about this, wasnt the guy that invented the atomic bomb concerned that it could consume earths atmosphere in the explosion? and they still checked it out

Doomsday debate update

thegoodguy.net — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 16:24:23 GMT

The scientists involved in the LHC experiment have admitted to not knowing what the results will be - whether they will find the Higgs bosons that they are looking for.

Correct me if I'm wrong - RESULTS is only half the synonym of the word OUTCOME. The other half is CONSEQUENCES.

If they are unsure of the results, how can they claim anything regarding consequences.

The truth is-- they don't know what the OUTCOME will be - the results and CONSEQUENCES.

The truth is - scientific experiments can and have gone wrong in the past. That is why we use guinea pigs.

But in the LHC experiment the guinea pig is not a lab mouse. It's the planet Earth.

Claiming that they can "control" it is beyond comprehension to me - when they DON'T KNOW THE OUTCOME.

They say the ODDS are like winning the lotto. Well every week a lotto winner (sometimes "winners") are announced.

World War I and World War II evidenced the human race's capacity in slipping into the rabbit hole of collective madness.

There may be no World War III, but the LHC experiment will do.

Remember lone and persecuted Galileo against ALL the other scientists/astronomers?

For me, a truly intelligent scientist is one in a million. All the others for all their "brilliance" are just monkeys who like to poke at things and see what happens.

Doomsday debate update

ron melbourne australia — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:27:09 GMT

firstly how acurate is a safty report since noone know how it will react in certin ,

there is always a grave danger when messing with the unknowen How meny of you people have your own veiws

Personlly i think its a expensive flee show and if it does work it could possibly do more bad then good

hence what would happen if you can recreated god matter "what will it do will it be heavy???? will it expaned and if the contaner they have it in LHC 27kms of A instument that screws with subatomic particals"

A big bang alright chinobl x5

Doomsday debate update

Kabir , Katsina — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:04:40 GMT

WE MUSLIMS ARE AT EASE WITH THIS EXPERIMENT OF LHC. ALMIGHTY ALLAH HAS COMMANDED US IN THE KORAN TO SEEK KNOWLEDGE WHEN EVER WE CAN. HE SAID THAT IF WE CAN BREAK THE HEAVENS LET US DO IT. BUT WE SHOULD KNOW THAT IT IS ONLY WITH HIS PERMISSION THAT WE CAN DO IT. SO CARRY ON GUYS, CONTINUE TO SMASH THE DOLLARS!!

Doomsday debate update

Grayson Secor, Etowah NC — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 00:36:42 GMT

Read through all of the comments from this page. You will find that the people that are for the particle accelerator know what they are talking about, while the religous buffs "think" they know what they are talking about. If you are going to make comments on things like this, do your research instead of making factless accusations.

Doomsday debate update

barry, victoria , B.C. — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 02:57:05 GMT

" 0 + 0 = 1 "