Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Sam of STL, MO — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 01:19:39 GMT

Can you define 'frivolous'? this is it. Next the plaintiffs would have us believe that time would stop and the entire universe would come to an end!! This is just a bid for publicity and notariety by two lonely souls. Sad.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Tom Crews, Hollywood, California — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 01:52:14 GMT

NOOO! DONT TURN IT ON! THE LORD XENU COMMANDS THAT WE NEVER OPEN THE PORTAL TO THE MULTI VERSE WE CANNONT FREE GALACTUS!

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Gary Cole, Bellingham, WA — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 02:22:30 GMT

Have these people spent more than 10 minutes researching their amazingly ridiculous claim?

Does the LHC have the power to create microscopic black holes? Yes it does, its' in fact one of the most interesting parts about the collider and one of the most anticipated areas of study.

People who think they're going to eat the world whole probably haven't ever taken a physics course though...

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

James Tankersley Jr, Middleton WI — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 02:26:29 GMT

Quote "not aware of a single instance where the conclusions of those reports have been contested or rebutted in any particle physics peer-reviewed or scholarly forum."

Actually CERN's own SPC Committee that gave the LSAG Safety Report its stamp of approval did so with a disclaimer that puts the entire report back into the category of "open question".

Quote "this argument relies on properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos that, while highly plausible, do require confirmation" - SPC Committee

This report is not well advertised that I can determine, but here it is: http://indico.cern.ch/getFile.py/access?contribId=20&resId=0&materialId=0&confId=35065

Unfortunately there is not a single irrefutable argument for the safety of creating micro black holes with velocities too slow to escape Earth. Not one.

Three strongly disputed assumptions… Micro Black holes are created or not, decay or not, grow slowly or not.

I hope I'm miscalculating, but I fear this might be a bit like playing Russian Roulette and not knowing how many cylinders are loaded, none, all?

LHCFacts.org (Don't miss this funny music video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1L2xODZSI4)

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Reg Fife, Boise, Idaho — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:01:17 GMT

I smell a sci-fi movie plot!;)

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Danny C — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:11:42 GMT

Here is the direct report the Saftey Group: http://lsag.web.cern.ch/lsag/LSAG-Report.pdf

Note specifically this portion of the introduction: "The LHC reproduces in the laborator, under controlled conditions, collisions of at centre-of-mass energies less than those reached in the atmosphere by some of the cosmic rays that have been bombarding the Earth for billions of years"

"but I fear this might be a bit like playing Russian Roulette and not knowing how many cylinders are loaded" - if that were the case, then Mother Nature has been playing it with Earth for 4 billion years.

This is what drives me nuts about the doomsdayers like Mr. Tankersley - this collider still won't be creating collisions of as high of energy as occur in nature *already*.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

R M Smith, San Angelo, TX — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:57:20 GMT

Mr. Boyle, about the most that can be said of these sad old worry-warts is that they have had their 15-minutes of fame. Please, move on, there is nothing interesting here.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Charles Kapplinger Jr, Clare, Michigan — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 04:25:53 GMT

Exactly when is the first day of LHC operation??? -- Since it may be our last day on Earth.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Mark, Indianapolis, IN — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 04:35:59 GMT

Astrophysics newbie here, just wondering about some background.

Could someone explain why a "microscopic black hole" doesn't pose any threat to physically damage something? Or if it does, what sort of damage, and why would it be insignificant?

I'm just curious about the science behind the harmlessness. Essentially, my question is, if a mini-black-hole were created, what would happen?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Brian, IL — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 04:36:01 GMT

I don't see the harm in waiting a few months for some peer review. You really can't be to careful when you're talking about ending existence.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Chris, Pullman, WA — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 04:44:07 GMT

To honestly suspect that a black hole generated by one this instrument will remain stable enough to do much of anything is pathetically ignorant...no matter how funny the YouTube music video is.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Carl Backworm — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 05:13:08 GMT

A single black hole out of control, and our last remnants would be the TV waves radiated to space, which might tell others how we wiped ourselves out.

Whether the collider should be started, I think is still a matter of more research, we must be sure that it wont finish us.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 07:00:10 GMT

CERN judging their own LHC is safe is like a drunk deciding he's all right to drive... with 6,700,000,000 passengers.
Who cares about a Higgs Boson particle or some quark gluon soup except a handful of frustrated nerds who have run out of ideas and have to experiment with forces they don't even understand. These frazzled physicists waste money and energy time and time again building atom smasher after atom smasher and end up with more questions, not answers. Now they've built one so powerful they say themselves it will create mini black holes at the rate of one per second! Which would change your life more; knowing they found some particle or getting crushed and sucked into a black hole along with everyone and every thing you ever cared about?
That sound like a good risk vs. benefit to you?!? Just because you can't wrap your mind around it does not mean it can't happen.
See for yourself;
http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org/anon1.htm
http://www.LHCDefense.org/
http://www.LHCFacts.org
http://www.SaneScience.org/
Popular Mechanics - "World's Biggest Science Project Aims to Unlock 'God Particle'" - http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/extreme_machines/4216588.html"

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Fabio Zwirner, Padova, Italy — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:37:09 GMT

The comment by James Tankersley contains false and misleading statements on the SPC report. The selected quote refers to the possibility of extending the complete safety proof, that has been provided for the LHC, to colliders of much higher energies that could be conceived for the distant future.

The conclusions of the SPC report on the LHC are quite clear: "To summarize, we fully endorse the conclusions of the LSAG report: there is no basis for any concerns about the consequences of new particles or forms of matter that could possibly be produced at the LHC."

Enrique Fernandez
chair of the CERN Scientific Policy Committee

Fabio Zwirner
member of the CERN Scientific Policy Committee
and coordinator of the SPC review panel

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

tired of scare tatics, Seattle, WA — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:08:40 GMT

WOW.... 10min in a physics class would tell you this is a joke. Besides we have NO athority over CERN. These too lonely souls just want to try and push their scare tactics to try and stop humans as a whole from advancing..... Run little guy run!

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Jason Martell, Lena, Wisconsin — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:12:38 GMT

Next they are going to sue Bill Gates, because of the possibility that a cyberknetic organism from the future might travel back in time to wipe out a boy named John Conner. Geesh people.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Joan — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:21:53 GMT

There is a very good reason the LHC will not produce black holes: The calculations done by Chandrakasar on the process of stellar collapse. His calculations demonstrated that a mass of at least 1.4 solar masses are needed for a black hole to form. This minimum mass is known as the Chandrakasar Limit.

The equivalent mass of the particles in the LHC, based on energy values, is less than that of a tennis ball. This is many orders of magnitude less than the Chandrakasar Limit.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

anonymouse — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 11:59:47 GMT

oh so now the US wants control over CERN and the collider? Why do you want to dictate what to do to all the rest of the world, I do not understand..
Now, GTFO please.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Vanessa Naubinway, Michigan — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:04:51 GMT

The United States invested 531 MILLION? That is the most alarming part to me...No wonder our economy is so bad with the frivilous way our government literally throws away our tax dollars, meanwhile our kids are getting a horrible education. Ummm that money would have been better spent elsewhere.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Duncan Dwyer, Portland, Maine — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:06:03 GMT

Well, the good news is that if the crazies are right this time, none of us will ever know. *poof*

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Sion West Orange NJ — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:03:09 GMT

"Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Steve Worcester, MA — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:03:57 GMT

Surely they can't be serious

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Noel Dill, Bolton Ma — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:12:34 GMT

Ah, although as one trained in physics I have no concerns about this going forth, it does remind me of the quote of mankind's last words: "Hey, look! It worked!"

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

MEF from Bama — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:18:02 GMT

I agree with Sam of STL, what a bunch of grand standing for name recognition. Deflate your egos boys and drop it. What losers.

"If we can't make a name for ourselves by doing something useful in the community we will do it by being a royal pain in the ass"

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Bubba, Georgia — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:31:56 GMT

Can I sue people who irresponsibly pray to deities? What if a poorly-phrased prayer caused God to turn us all into salt? Let's get a restraining order for 1000 years until we're sure nothing will go wrong. I swear, it's like watching kindergartners play.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Dane Petersen, Indianapolis, IN — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:37:56 GMT

Microscopic black-holes or not, the human race is destined for greatness. Great discoveries or great destruction. It is a fallacy to believe anything we do here on earth is anything other than the natural course of human evolution.

We are here at this impasse for the purpose of discovering why we can never agree with eachother. Fear is the cause of our distrust in others, distrusting ourselves as well.

God never wanted us to kill eachother over what we don't know about him anyway. Just live and be happy and protect your rights as a living entity of the universe.

The world will not end by our hands, the path cannot be taken without the prior approval of a vast conglomerate of entities throughout the galaxy.

Yes I'm wierd, and crazy, and possibly completely insane. But that doesn't mean that I'm wrong.

I like to chat
whyzguy3000@hotmail.com

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Dave S., Toronto, Canada — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:38:12 GMT

I think it is fair to question the "conclusions" of the CERN-generated safety report(s), since the authors clearly have a vested interest in seeing the project get underway. Theoretical physics is, after all, theoretical - and jumping into the release of massive energies with even a remote potential of (major)harm in order to attempt to prove the theories (which is, of course, the scientific model) is seriously risky. This is not a lab experiment which is containable with minimal damage if it does produce unpredicted results. The major point here is that the risks are to the entire planet earth and life itself as we know it. That makes the decision rightfully that of all humankind - not just a scientific panel somewhere, however well-intentioned they may be.

On the other hand, from a legal prespective I think these two Hawaii-based individuals don't have a prayer of truly affecting the progress of the LHC and CERN. They are clearly over-reaching the jurisdiction of the Hawiian U.S. District Court and they seem utterly unlikely to have any effect in Europe this way. So, to my mind, the best they can hope to do is to bring more public attention to the situation. In this regard they are clearly succeeding - but perhaps only among those of us who read Alan Boyle's Log. :)

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Avery, ORlando, Fl — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:38:48 GMT

Ya know, more than 60 years ago, during the project to develop the atomic bomb, some scientists voiced concerns that detonating such a device could possibly lead to a runaway nuclear reaction in Earth's atmosphere, thus destroying the planet. These people have the same mentality of those who warned sailors they'd fall off the world if they sailed too far... Some people are just afraid of unexplored territory, so sad.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Alex, Kansas City, KS — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:38:50 GMT

A rogue micro-black-hole might open and destroy France? The French have probably already surrendered.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

OU812 PDX — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:53:55 GMT

Ah, so this is going to be Half-Life in RL ;)

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Exeder — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:08:42 GMT

To be fair to the guys filing the suit, all physics experiments dealing with events that could possibly generate something that could damage the planet really shouldn't be performed on Earth. Nuclear weaponry is a good example of this, as the US has irradiated a large portion of North America thanks to the Nevada testing. It may be low level doses, but that doesn't change the fact that while we were experimenting we knew next to nothing about the forces we were dealing with.

The entire prospect of particle physics is both intriguing and potentially dangerous and the chance of progress, if the expense is the environment or human life, is not always worth it. Ideally, this would be research that should be performed on another planet, far enough away so that it would not provide any sort of threat. Unfortunatly we haven't developed far enough in the past few decades to be able to do that.

Most likely this research will proceed and they will gain valuable insite into the workings of the universe however it is not a trend we should readily accept.

I'll again refer back to the birth of nuclear power on this planet, with it we have introduced one of the most destructive forces in the universe into our society.

Would people today be willing to allow such research to progress? Though this is a paradoxical question we have to question all aspects of high level science and wonder if it is really worth the risk.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Michelle Parker, Chicago, IL — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:48:09 GMT

Oh, please. Filing ridiculous lawsuits is a fantastic way of getting publicity, and seeing as one of the two plaintiffs is an author...hmm. That's one effective publicity-mongering stunt. The fact that his counterpart, however, is a "retired nuclear physicist" kind of scares me, though...

Either way, other than the fact that these two have come up with some sci-fi movie-worthy claims about the end of the world being brought on by "exotic matter" or other such nonsense (please explain how, as the LHC's reactions occur naturally all through the universe, this "exotic matter" isn't...I don't know...everywhere?), I think I'm going to file a lawsuit against the atmosphere and all of its affiliates for thinning and allowing more UV rays through and putting us all at risk. The world MAY end courtesy of that, after all...right.

Besides - when has scientific progress ever been made without some element of risk?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

S G, Romeo, MI — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:53:20 GMT

There is no progress without risk. We must boldly take steps into the unknown, to walk into a room and turn the lights on. Humankinds curious nature is to do this researh not because it is easy but becasue it is hard.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Josey in New Hampshire — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:09:52 GMT

Ok, so I am a big supporter of scientific research. Black holes are one of the greatest discoveries and mysteries out there and the fact that we're making inroads to understanding them is, in a word, amazing.

That said, how can someone say without a doubt that 'Oh, that won't happen' or 'this is perfectly safe' when we've only begun scratching the surface on this research? Everyday we learn new things that debunk previously held beliefs in science, physics, and the natural world. Black holes are created amongst some of the most powerful forces in the cosmos, and we think we can predict and understand them in a matter of years?

So am I for continuing research? Absolutely. But please, please, please, take the time to do it right. Because when you're playing with forces of this magnitude-- even in small quantities in controlled environments-- the consequences of faulty assumptions could be huge. And the Universe doesn't offer do-overs.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Stephen Cradock, Van Nuys, California — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:19:24 GMT

James - if you read the brief SPC Committee report you linked, you will see that the remaining concerns that you refer to apply ONLY to collision energies much higher than those to be explored by the LHC. The conclusion the committee draws is unequivocal - [quote] we fully endorse the conclusions of the LSAG report: there is no basis for
any concerns about the consequences of new particles or forms of matter that could
possibly be produced at the LHC.[/quote]

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Anonymous — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:30:17 GMT

Has anyone asked Stephen Hawking or Richard Feynman their opinions? I bet they have some pretty opinions FOR this apparatus.

[ALAN ADDS: Unfortunately, Richard Feynman is dead, although I'd love to know if his writings would shed any light on the current issue.

[Stephen Hawking was asked about this black-hole scenario in an LA Times interview a couple of months ago:

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/12/science/sci-hawking12

["Q: If black holes are created in the Large Hadron Collider, will we be in danger of getting eaten up by them?

["A: The LHC is absolutely safe. There is no danger that collisions between particles at the LHC will cause a rip in space-time and destroy the universe. Particles from collisions far greater than those in the LHC occur all the time in cosmic rays, but nothing terrible happens."

[By the way, the background materials filed by the government note that micro black holes would be created at the LHC only if classical general relativity wasn't quite right due to the effect of extradimensional physics. Also, the materials say that the black holes would not be totally "black" ... Hawking also addressed the question of not-quite-black holes in the LA Times interview:

["Q: According to general relativity, white holes, the opposite of black holes, which spew matter into the universe, can exist. But we’ve never found them. What would we see with our telescopes if we did?

["A: When black holes are large, things fall in. but they give off very little Hawking radiation. So they are essentially black. But when they are very small they radiate more than they accrete. So they are essentially white. Black and white holes are the same, just with different boundary conditions. If the boundary conditions are that particles are going in, but nothing is coming out, we call it a black hole. On the other hand, if the boundary conditions are that particles are going out but nothing is coming in, we call it a white hole."]

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Josh, El Dorado, AR — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:44:15 GMT

The truth of the matter is that the LHC is one of the last unexplored frontiers of science. Do we know exactly what will happen when it is fired up? No, we quite simply do not. Scientists think they know what will happen, but hey, the've been wrong before.

But by the same token, a lot of people thought that Columbus would sail off the edge of the Earth trying to find the New World, and no one really knew what would happen when we exploded the first atom bomb or shot a man into space either.

What has happened to our society that we are afraid of scientific explortaion?

Buy me a ticket over there and I'll 'turn the key' myself.

Best of luck to the LHC scientists.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Justin Probert, Traverse City, Michigan — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:11:57 GMT

Seems to me that it would be basic common sense to err on the side of caution. I'm all for scientific exploration and "let's see what happens when we mix this with fire", but we are exploring new territory here (theoretically sound but unpracticed is still new territory, and it would be arrogant to assume otherwise). The odds of a catastrophic or 'negative' side-effect may be a million to one, but it's one of those things you would hate to be wrong on, and if there is the chance that no one would be around to regret it or be held accountable, shouldn't we do the responsible thing and look at reasonable safety/countermeasures, or some sort of 'pre-experiment track record' rather than "we should be o.k."? Even the response "nothing to indicate a potential threat" indicates that the project team is fine with basing decisions only on what they know, not what they don't know. Assuming you know more than what you don't know is assuming too much.

No micro black holes 'may' appear, or the Earth's gravity 'may not' be slightly altered sending us spinning into the sun. Heck, it may only cause a 'small' positron explosion taking out only 'most' of Europe. Who knows for sure? No one. So why gamble with such stakes? I'm sure there were a few explosions in the lab during the discovery of gunpowder before Chinese scientists knew what they had. Is a few years more of deliberation and inspection on behalf of prudence asking too much? Once we reach a more agreed-upon mark of 'reasonable' prudence and confidence, then I say go for it, but how do we determine what is "reasonable prudence"? That should be the next debate.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Delmar Fairchild, Barron, WI — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:15:12 GMT

Notice where the Lawsuit is being addressed? Even though it is Mr. Wagner home state, Hawaii is a liberal state, hence passing laws or judgements through the Judiciary bench instead of the Legislative branch of our government. Our Congress has already passed laws to give money to the project which they used. One judge will control the opening of universal knowledge. Is he a Scientist or anti-science? You will have no choice. Some Judges consider it only their's to make laws from the bench, not uphold the ones made by the congress and signed by the Presidents.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Trenton, NJ — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:25:03 GMT

GEEEZZZZ! I hope they don't plan to start this thing up on December 21st 2012!!!

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Pam, New York, NY — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:48:09 GMT

We created the first atom bomb. We cannot stop the march of science, even if it kills us. The atom bomb would have been created by someone else, if not us. If the results of the experiments prove dangerous, it would happen at some point in history because scientific exploration will march on. Until we are gone for good. It's in our nature. But that doesn't mean there should not be oversight and care taken in the process of running the experiments.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Mike B Hudson, Ohio — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:49:32 GMT

The sky is falling, the sky is falling. You bunch of chicken littles.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

K Frost — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:49:37 GMT

Now, I'm not that bright, but even I know that the LHC won't be creating any black holes bigger than the ones that naturally appear all over Earth at all times. Yes, they naturally occur. But since they can't reach critical mass, they disappear within nanoseconds. Maybe certain folks need to start leafing through a few basic physics books.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Gphillip — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:00:37 GMT

Never trust a quote taken out of context. Since copy-paste is so easy, and James gave the reference so he knows it, it's obvious he has his own agenda and is using scare tactics to try and accomplish his ends. Here is the entire paragraph. The out-of-context quote by James above is really a side discussion talking about using Neutron Stars to quantify any risk from a collider with much higher energy than the LHC.

Shame on you James for playing the "quote out of context" game on these readers.

And I quote:

"In particular, at the LHC energy, any danger for the Earth on time scales lower than or comparable to the natural lifetime of the solar system can be ruled out on the basis of its contradiction with the observation of white dwarf stars of known mass, age and other properties. This conclusion, while entirely valid for the LHC, would need further work to be extended to conceivable future colliders of much higher energies. A powerful argument applicable also to higher energies is formulated making reference to observed neutron stars, but this argument relies on properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos that, while highly plausible, do require confirmation, as can be expected in the coming years."

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Paul, Palmdale, California — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:04:54 GMT

Dear Mr. Fairchild,
""Hawaii is a liberal state, hence passing laws or judgements through the Judiciary bench instead of the Legislative branch of our government.""
So you are saying that conservative judges do not do the same thing?
Just because something is "true" to you does not make it "true" for the rest of us.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Bjorn Anderson, Roskilde, Sweden — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:17:38 GMT

I find it hilarious that people are getting worked up over an experiment that cannot, in any way whatsoever, harm mankind or Earth. Anyone with any background in physics or astronomy should know that no harm can come from the LHC. In addition, we have already conducted experiments similar to the ones scheduled to be done at the LHC. Come on people! This is proven science, more dangerous things are done by children with matches.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

John M W, Hot Springs, SD — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:21:39 GMT

Go, LHC go. I have read all the blogs above and believe only the uninformed are raising concern. I am not a physicist but have had some training. Joan referred to the Chandrakasar Limit which is one approach. I believe another is to consider the event horizon. That is the danger posed by a black hole. The black hole does not simply reach out and pull stuff in. You have to get inside the event horizon. I believe if you calculate the size of the event horizon formed by the black hole from the impact of protons head-on, it's radius will be very small, even too small to trap adjacent atoms. After all, our galaxy, the Milkyway, has a giant black hole at it's center and I haven't heard anyone being concerned about the earth being sucked in. I think people who are filing law suits against the LHC should do some simple math calculations. The only winners in this suit are the lawyers!

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Michae; Cox — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:21:55 GMT

"Dissed"? A question over the most complicated big science project is "dissed"? What up, yo, got any REAL words to describe this with?

"Dissed". Jesus.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

guy s newell — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:28:10 GMT

Mr. Fairchild is simply suggesting that the law suit was filed in Hawaii because not even the judges in California could read it out loud without laughing.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Matthew, AZ — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:42:23 GMT

So, if the morning after they fire this thing up and you wake up to find you don't exist, know that I said goodbye and thought well of you.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Thomas J. Theobald, Kansas City, Missouri — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:12:49 GMT

While I understand the nature of the threat the plaintiff suggests, it is unfortunately mistaken and not grounded in math. The court was right to dismiss this case.

While 14 tera-electron-volts sounds like an enormous amount of energy (and when it comes to colliders, it is), this amount of energy is focused in a space smaller than a single atom - it is the energy that is stored in the protons that are rushing around in a circle there, to make a gross simplification.

That energy, bound up in those protons, makes each one equivalent to approximately 2.5x10-23 kilograms (which is about 1,000 or 10,000 times the normal mass of a proton, I'm too lazy to check right now). Assuming two collide, and their combined mass converts directly with 100% efficiency into a black hole (as was specified to be one of the fears of the experiment), we're now looking at a black hole with a mass of 5x10-23 kilograms.

That's 0.00000000000000000000005 kilograms. One cubic centimeter of water (about the volume of the end of your first finger) has a mass of 0.01 kilograms. That's a pretty lightweight black hole.

"But wouldn't a black hole eat and get bigger?" comes the question. Yes, indeed it would - and it would be so microscopic that it would probably pass through any shielding, eating a little here and there as it went, and assuming it wasn't travelling at escape velocity, would eventually orbit the center of gravity of the earth, slowly growing until one day it just ate the planet.

However, the plaintiffs have forgotten a key element: black holes radiate, in a fashion called "Hawking Radiation." A black hole of the size of two protons at 14 TeV would radiate at a terrific rate of speed, and would evaporate rapidly.

How rapidly? Try 10 to the -83 power seconds.

So, while it might be created, it would evaporate so rapidly that it would only be visible to detectors watching it die in a splash of photons (and other particles).

It's a nice, romantic concept that someone might end the earth doing one of these experiments, but we're no where nearly so powerful as to do that yet. In fact, Ben Bova wrote a science fiction novel about such an accident called "Earth" (good book), if I remember the title right. That's what made me originally learn the math to figure this stuff out. In order to genuinely threaten the earth with a man-made black hole, you'd really have to start getting holes with masses ranging above the millions of kilograms - and we are centuries from being able to generate the kind of energy necessary for that sort of collider.

[ALAN ADDS: The court hasn't quite dismissed the case yet. That question will be considered at a time yet to be set. The novel "Earth" was written by David Brin, not Ben Bova (at least the novel about world-gobbling black holes), and it is a good one. In fact, I recommended it as a CLUB Club book selection four years ago: http://groups.msn.com/AlanBoylesCosmicLog/clubclub.msnw?
action=get_message&mview=1&ID_Message=572 ]

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

DianeD, Whitestone, New York — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:16:10 GMT

Some questions please, and one extemporaneous comment:

1. What is the LHC exactly for and why do we need the world's largest particle collider?

2. Why are we colliding particules on purpose, anyway?

3. What does Stephen Hawking have to say about it?

4. Can such LHC be converted to, or be used in the development of new weaponry?

Quite frankly, sounds like a great new Bond movie idea.

[ALAN ADDS: Everyone is free to weigh in on these questions, as always. We have a big package coming up in which I'll take a swing at most of these questions. We're just waiting to get a little closer to the startup.]

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Amazed — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:20:31 GMT

Shades of Tesla and the Tunguska region.

It's been fun reading you all.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Brenda, TN — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:21:11 GMT

Where's Samantha Carter and Dr. McKay when you need them? Oh, wait, they went through the Stargate to another galaxy. Can someone please send a message through the wormhole?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Frankie123 — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:24:47 GMT

To be on the safe side, if this thing does create murderous holes, etc, lets 1st put all the scientist and their families right beside it.

They say it's safe right? Then they shouldn't worry !

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Hans G — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:29:42 GMT

What's the problem.
We always wanted to know what happend inside a black hole.
Here is our chance!!

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

matt — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:39:35 GMT

This whole thing is ridiculous. You may consider the concerns and worries about a "mini black-hole" viable, but all the doomsday worries are based on theories- people are just scared. The phenomenoms they are afraid of this thing creating are not understood by us beyond more than theories.

We can't understand a black hole until we can either make one or directly explore one- so why don't we just go find one and check it out? ...yeah right.

Even the scientific methods used to locate potential black holes through telescopes (using theories involving gravity bending light) are based on just that- theories again. And we can't even verify those are correct until we can travel to an object we've detected in space by that method and check to make sure it is where we predicted. ...Since space is the only place we believe black holes exist.

My point is that unless these events that are claimed to be at risk of happening are scientifically understood, their worries are only worries and should not even be looked at seriously in a court system where everything revolves around proven facts.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

R. John Galt, San Diego, CA — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:54:58 GMT

Idea for a t-shirt:

"CERN attempted to create the God Particle, and all I got was this lousy black hole."

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Jefell, Syracuse, NY — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:03:03 GMT

Where does the money come from for building such garbage? Why is this world in the state that it is in? People today are lacking a relationship with GOD more than ever.. Seek GOD. www.getshook.com

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Peter, Boulder CO — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:05:49 GMT

Theoretically there is no danger from the LHC. Mark, the reason a micro-black hole wouldn't harm anything is the theoretical Hawking radiation, which causes a black hole to evaporate over time. The black holes created by the LHC should evaporate much faster than they grow, causing them to disapate almost as soon as they're created. Of course, Hawking radiation is only theoretical, but then again so are black holes.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Mo' Mass to hold you down wit — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:22:53 GMT

Not enough mass to suck us all in including the light around us. They would essentially have to create matter to generate enough mass. If that were the case the moon would probably hit us and sheer gravity would kill us before getting sucked in the black hole.

Wow I think I came up with this all on a public school education.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Mo' Mass to hold you down wit', somewhere, WI — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:25:50 GMT

All that money spent we could have burned it as an alternative fossil fuel and help keep oil cost down

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Van Baker, Bloomington, Ill. — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:26:26 GMT

How does one calculate the odds of something bad happening when the experiment you are attempting has never been attempted before? This is a case of either/or: If the black hole achieves the necessary excitation it will continue to grow (at whatever rate) and these guys won't be able to stop it, or launch it into space. If there is even 1/1,000,000,000,000 chances of doomsday, is it worth risking 7 billion lives?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Zantetsu — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:37:41 GMT

CERN..."God particle"...

You know the Ancient Babylonians thought they could reach God by building a tower high into the sky. Of course this is impossible, but the arrogance in the thought they could angered God, and he afflicted them with multiple languages, halting the project and changing mankind forever.

What changes are we in store for?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Jason, SW KS — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:38:52 GMT

Ya know, everyone has to die, eventually. Why not make it fun? :) I mean come on...what could be cooler to watch than a microscopic black hole slowly eating a person? Sounds like an awesome 'House' episode. :P I wonder if it would hurt....the plus side, say it was on your arm, time would slow down around the event horizon, and for a while, your arm would stay younger. So many potential markets for these things. :P OK, here's the best: A black hole GUN!!! YAY!!! But they should make the black holes a little bigger, so we can teach our kids to not step in them. Science is GREAT!!! Anyone should be more than willing to listen to any other side of an argument. If they don't want to listen, they are probably hiding something. 'Hey junior, wipe your feet, for Pete's sake, I don't want black holes all over the carpet!' But upon further examination, perhaps we should call them 'holes of color' :P oh wait, that would be the ABSENCE of color wouldn't it? aw fiddlesticks! Black holes it is. :P

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Lex, Minneapolis, MN — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:48:07 GMT

The problem is you know that someone curious will want to go beyond the normal and make little microscopic black holes, and they would just think: hmm.. what happens if i put in just a little more energy. Then its way beyond any safety report or initial physicics calculation isnt it?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Brian — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:56:11 GMT

Being that I a physics major, LHC doe have the ablity to cause great harm, but not in the ways listed in this and other articles. The danger lies in the x-rays, and magnetic radiation it WILL generate, almost 7 billion time more than anything a human is exposed to in their average lifetime. THAT is what we should be worried about!

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Andy Niese, Eau Claire, WI — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:56:55 GMT

Mark, the theory is that any black holes that would be created would be very low-mass, and would evaporate via Hawking radiation BEFORE getting a chance to gobble the earth.

People say that "you aren't doing anything that cosmic rays aren't doing in the atmosphere anyway". The difference (as I understand it) is that C-rays are going nearly light-speed relative to the earth when they strike the atmosphere, letting any singularities pass over or through the earth, whereas the head-on collisions in the LHC could create black-holes STATIONARY relative to the earth.

I wouldn't want any black holes sitting around unless we know 1000% whether it will evaporate before sucking up our whole civilization. Why not have additional safety reviews, conducted by independent parties and scientists outside of CERN? This is one call you really don't want to eff up.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Rob, Sacramento CA — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:01:41 GMT

Seems to me the two idiots who filed the lawsuit have spent more time watching Sci-Fi movies then researching actual scientific facts. How much additional tax money is this frivolous lawsuit going to cost everyone?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Gary Young, Lexington, KY — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:07:26 GMT

While reading all of these comments, I can't help but hope and pray that the human race gets as excited about slowing global warming, reducing pollution, controlling the increasing acidity of the oceans, and stemming overpopulation.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Gphillip — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:11:43 GMT

Of course, I could be wrong. It happened once before. Big mess.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

J5, Ann Arbor, MI — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:25:25 GMT

Even if this does destroy the planet, I'm not terribly concerned. If we all die, then who will be left to regret it?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Scott Hall, Richmond, VA — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:34:04 GMT

Wrong Court!!! So would CERN even listen or care about a US Federal Judges decision? What a waste of time and taxpayers money. If you are serious, please go to Europe and file in court there!

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Mike, Long Island, NY — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:43:57 GMT

There are like four people on this thread who have the understanding to even comment. The rest of us fall into two catagories: The ones who submit our ignorance to the experts, and the ones who think we are smarter than the experts. The latter comprises all the jokers who think the end of the world is at hand. What rock do you guys keep crawling out from under? It must be pretty big for the lot of you to fit.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Gphillip — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:44:56 GMT

OK, you want odds? How about this? The Earth is hit by say one hundred Cosmic Rays with 1,000 times the energy of the LHC every day. It has been for 4 Billion years, and it's still here. That alone puts the odds of distruction at about 16 Trillion to one against. Now if you look at the much greater surface area of all the planets and the Sun in our solar system, which are all still here, the odds against distruction go up to about 100 Million Trillion to one. If you consider all the stars in our galaxy, you are up around 10 billion billion trillion to one against destruction. The only reason CERN wont quote these odds is they don't want to admitt that there is ANY chance of destruction. It's that little hidden tiny lie that scares people. If they would just be honest and admitt that the odds of destruction are one in a million trillion trillion, or whatever, we could have a resonable discussion about whether or not we want to take that chance. It's that little hidden tiny lie that bothers us all. We shouldn't have to lie to do our science. And we shouldn't be lied to by those in the know.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

John Joeky — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:41:51 GMT

I think most of the people who dismiss the idea of danger are actually the most ignorant ones here. I seriously doubt most of them even understand the science that they are endorsing. Stephen Hawking talks of the theoretical existence of primordial black holes in A Brief History of Time. He said that these, theoretically, could contain the mass of about a mountain. But because of their size, they would evaporate until they hit a certain mass, at which point they would explode. I think that the best way to understand the safety of these man-made black holes is that their mass is so immensely insignificant that they will evaporate within microseconds. But I'm not a physics expert. However, if it takes 16 billion years for a mountain-mass black hole to evaporate, I'd think that a proton-mass black hole would evaporate almost instantly.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Mike, Phx, AZ — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:40:49 GMT

Hey, let them turn it on. Europe doesn't support the USA in anything so if it eats them with a black hole no biggie. Since they are creating mico sized Black hole is should not eat more that 1/2 of Europe at best.
Then we can learn from their mistakes.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

James Tankersley Jr, Middleton WI — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 02:30:12 GMT

"The comment... contains false and misleading statements on the SPC report."

I would like to thank those responsible for producing this important report.

However, the section of the SPC Committee's report addressing Micro Black Hole safety contains only one sentence directly validating the cosmic ray and neutron star argument used repeatedly in the the 2008 LSAG Safety Report to show empirical evidence of safety from stable neutral micro black holes.

Quote: "A powerful argument applicable also to higher energies is formulated making reference to observed neutron stars, but this argument relies on properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos that, while highly plausible, do require confirmation, as can be expected in the coming years.”

I think this statement speaks for itself, "properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos that, while highly plausible, do require confirmation"

If Enrique Fernandez and Fabio Zwirner are arguing that properties of cosmic rays and neutrinos somehow prove safety conclusively only up to Large Hadron Collider energies, and only require confirmation for colliders of higher energies, then I would be very interested in hearing their argument!

The equation still looks fairly similar to me:

Three strongly disputed assumptions… Micro Black holes are created or not, decay or not, grow slowly or not.

(And the cosmic ray arguments while highly plausible, do require confirmation, as can be expected in the coming years.)

LHCFacts.org

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Neyveli, Tamil Nadu — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 08:52:49 GMT

How on Earth do u say experiments like this has already been conducted. Head on collisions is new, 14TEV is new, Luminosity which determines the collision rate is 100 times more than any other collider built so far. RHIC fireball event, Bosenova-Einstein explosion are two events that arent expected to happen at RHIC but still happened. Everything never goes to our expectation. If this s what dat occurs naturally at far higher energy then why is d collider built if we can actually use detectors in space even some already were used. RHIC fireball event and Bosenova explosion should have happened in cosmic rays as well if collider event is analogous to cosmic rays.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Neyveli, Tamil Nadu — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:08:56 GMT

Chandrasekar limit is not derived in this Gen. All new models violate it.MBH are diff. from Blackholes. Right that event horizon is d one dat matters for accretion of matter. But at some relative momentum it has to strike d wall of tunnel where interaction with atoms could occur so does proton beam interaction with it (possible) if some weird physics happens as always in the past which eventually pushed the limits for various phenomenons. Accretion rate will be very very small at first but might increase with size as it Gobbles more and more atom.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Van Baker, Bloomington, Ill. — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:45:56 GMT

Is any level of risk acceptable? If scientists are that sure of the physics and the math- if they know how the experiment will turn out- why continue with it? If naturally occurring phenomena produce the same kind of miniature black holes, why not trap them somehow and study them? In short, isn't it true this sort of very expensive work does little except to stroke already bloated scientific egos? What benefit can the average inhabitant of this planet expect to gain from this experiment?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Bill — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:03:40 GMT

well Ludlites and flat earthers in the 21st century
who would of known or guessed. Fire it up and let science move forward

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

J Mercer — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:47:59 GMT

Science this and physics that. Does anybody else just think that it's time for humans to stop messing with things that really don't concern us? The human race in constantly striving for answers- and every answer just leads to more questions. Or problems in the case of our planet's current state. I don't really care what wonderful things this machine will do for science or what horrible consequences it might have. I just think that there are things in this world and beyond this world that we should have nothing to do with. The more we invent and create and study in terms of science, the deeper the hole we're digging for our planet and the environment.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Cesar Mendoza — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:35:48 GMT

Just because we can do a thing,does not mean we must do this thing.If there is just one person with a doubt,we owe it to ourselves as humans to err on the side of caution,unless we degrade ourselves and believe the majority of us is more important than the few.It's not a perfect world but it is the only one we got.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Don Pointer, Buckhorn, New Merxico — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:16:40 GMT

Actually, our galaxy, a spiral galaxy, has two black holes in the middle. Black holes evaporate, a process whereby protons are quantum transported out, forming the Strange Attractors we see as patterns of stars and galaxies in the Universe. A tiny black hole will most likely evaporate too quickly to be detected as a black hole.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Gphillip — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:57:27 GMT

Yes, It's probably not quite correct to even call these "slammed together" protons Black Holes. In fact they are really just a couple or few very condensed and energetic protons that will evaporate almost instantly, before they could p[ossibly absorb anything else, even if they were prone to, which seems doubtful. It's clear these are not the traditional black holes that have the gravitational attraction to pull in large objects from great distances. These are tiny sub-microscopic spots of very condensed matter that would be highly unstable if they exist at all. The fact is, no one knows for sure untill the experiment is done, but I for one am not convinced that anything can be observed other than a little flash of light. That is, if a "Black Hole" is created and evaporates in the order of Planck time or less, then it really never existed at all, since it can't be measured. The only thing we can say that existed is a little tiny flash of light, which is all that I expect the LHC to detect. Of course, I could be wrong.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Billy, Eau Claie, WI — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:32:52 GMT

The Science of Discovery. it is interesting that Colombus is mentioned.

Colombus wasn't looking for a new world, he was looking for a new passage to the Far East and stumbled across the Americas. You could argue this "discovery" in both positive and negative light - the expansion of Europeans into the Americas or the collapse of the Native Americans following colonization of the New World.

So if you really want to look at Colombus achievement in a true light, he failed, but look at the cool stuff he found along the way.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Human Being — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:52:12 GMT

I have concerns, but in the grand scheme of things going out in a black-hole is alot better than withering away from cancer, starvation, disease, or random acts of violence committed on one human by another. It's certainly alot more poetic and ironic a fate than we deserve as a species.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

jdteseattlewa — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:55:06 GMT

I think everyone would be able to let go of this concern if we had a couple of percentage-wise answers from the Physics community:
1. Does eveyone with the relevant experience agree with Stephan Hawking about small black holes evaporating? If not, why not, and what they believe the percentage chance is that Hawking is wrong.
2. What is the percentage chance of any LHC collison products being created at angular velocities below that of gravitational escape of at least the earth.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

steve naples, florida — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:58:44 GMT

Well i smell a scifi movie being made about this...oh wait there is one its called The Mist by stephen king...

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

L.G. Los Angeles, CA — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:02:06 GMT

I randomly came across this interesting little debate. The remarks regarding nuclear weapons has some truth; ideally such projects should only be performed in the safest environment (ie not on earth), but this is obviously not practical. I think such fears are unwarrented with this project- I mean, we have an energy crisis and we still haven't developed a self-sustaining fusion reactor, don't think we'll be making black holes anytime in the near future. However, I do think back the movie "The Quiet Earth."

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

jdtseattlewa — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:02:51 GMT

John MW, Hot Springs
Of course, you have to get to the event horizon, the event horizon is there, however, as a result of the force of gravity, something that doesn't operate only if theoretical Physicists find it convienient to do so for the course of a particular experiment.

It seems to me the heart of the matter is do MBH's evaporate, as Hawking expects, and how soon do they do so. What does the high powered end of the community say about those who dispute Hawking's contention about the fate of an MBH?

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Stephanie, Toronto, Ontario — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:10:28 GMT

"There is a very good reason the LHC will not produce black holes: The calculations done by Chandrakasar on the process of stellar collapse. His calculations demonstrated that a mass of at least 1.4 solar masses are needed for a black hole to form. This minimum mass is known as the Chandrakasar Limit.

The equivalent mass of the particles in the LHC, based on energy values, is less than that of a tennis ball. This is many orders of magnitude less than the Chandrakasar Limit."

Thats not true. We aren't talking about a star slowly collapsing due to its own gravity and internal pressure. Black holes created by natural stellar processes do have a cut-off for their mass, but only because neutron stars are stable to a certain density, and without an outside force, they will stay as neutron stars and not collapse any further. Doesn't mean it isn't possible by other mechanisms. Theoretically, if you have enough energy to smash enough matter into a sufficiently tiny space, you can make black holes with diameters of 1 mm or smaller if you so pleased.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Chris, Ny, Ny — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:23:39 GMT

I am so glad the clowns and naysayers that talk about us not doing this or not trying that have little control over our future in science. Your attitude completely confounds me and would have felt right at home in the 13th century repressing knowledge for no good reason other than they do not understand it. People that say we should not be spending money on these kind projects but should be instead spent on making their gas guzzler more affordable by reducing gas prices are simply terrifying in their shortsightedness.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Mr.Goppy, Forest Moon of Endor, Endor — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:29:59 GMT

HAWKING RADIATION FOR THE WIN!!!!!! (and the salvation of earth =D)

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

MiseryCreek, Austin, TX — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:12:29 GMT

First, addressing Delmar Fairchild's conspiracy theories concerning liberal judges "legislating from the bench", how is it that people like you can make EVERYTHING into a political issue? Your comment is utterly irrelevant and deliberately inflammatory. Save it for your "We never went to the Moon" chat room.

Second, what a lot of readers seem to be losing sight of is that this blog isn't about whether or not the activation of LHC is safe or responsible. It's about a retired physicist and a science writer filing a lawsuit to stop Congress from allocating any more money to the project on the grounds that it hasn't been sufficiently failsafed. What are their motivations? Who cares? The only possible outcomes are the US continues to be invested in the project or not.

The LHC is going to be activated regardless of what the judge decides. Worrying about what happens next is like worrying about getting killed by a falling satellite - it's not going to change a thing.

Either LHC will do more or less exactly what the physicists operating it think it will or it won't. In the worst case scenario you won't have time to panic or even realize what's going on before you get to find out if your particular brand of religion is the right one.

Given that I'd rather see US interests represented in the likely event that this thing goes off without a hitch and important scientific discoveries are made.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Terrell Davis — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:58:55 GMT

Mark, Indianapolis, IN (Sent Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:35 AM)

Mark-

Without getting to involved... it breaks down like this:

Blackholes really aren't black. They emit energy, look up 'Hawking Radiation'. It is scientifically proven that Blackholes eventually evaporate, and cease to exist. The Blackholes that could possibly be created by the LHC are smaller than microscopic. They would have more matter around them than they could consume. They will eat their fill, and then blink out of existence without having done anything, except give the Pros from Dover something else to study and ponder.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Douglas, 4th Dimension — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 22:29:45 GMT

Hey, hold my beer for me and I'll throw the switch on the thing myself..better change the constitution to the constitional right to bear a black hole also, every thug out there will want one, now lets get to work on a stable worm hole, now there is something we could all appreciate.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Daniel, Las Vegas, NV — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 20:47:54 GMT

"Q: Could the cosmic microwave background radiation be a form of Hawking radiation?

The context to this question is Hawking’s radical prediction in 1974 that black holes could emit thermal radiation, thereby allowing some black holes to ultimately shrink and disappear. The cosmic microwave background radiation is the remnant radiation left over from the Big Bang.

A: In the slow inflationary scenario, the cosmic microwave background radiation is not Hawking radiation. However, the fluctuations in the microwave background detected by WMAP (a NASA spacecraft) can be regarded as Hawking radiation from the inflationary period. Thus, in a sense, Hawking radiation has already been observed. So maybe I should get a Nobel Prize.

Q: According to general relativity, white holes, the opposite of black holes, which spew matter into the universe, can exist. But we’ve never found them. What would we see with our telescopes if we did?

A: When black holes are large, things fall in. but they give off very little Hawking radiation. So they are essentially black. But when they are very small they radiate more than they accrete. So they are essentially white. Black and white holes are the same, just with different boundary conditions. If the boundary conditions are that particles are going in, but nothing is coming out, we call it a black hole. On the other hand, if the boundary conditions are that particles are going out but nothing is coming in, we call it a white hole."

this is an excerpt from the stephen hawking interview at some school or other...

"It is scientifically proven that Blackholes eventually evaporate, and cease to exist."

this is an excerpt from terrel davis, above.

this page:

http://www.universetoday.com/2007/06/20/are-microscopic-black-holes-buzzing-inside-the-earth/

describes the possibility of ancient MBHs inside planets and stars, even the gas giants Saturn and Jupiter.

http://www.auger.org/news/PRagn/AGN_correlation.html

desribes the speed at which the particles that strike our atmosphere are traveling at (Approx. "100 million times higher than the most powerful particle accelerator on Earth..."

http://www.interactions.org/quantumuniverse/qu2006/summary/

gives a summary of what the LHC project is proposing to discover

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=163

describes the life span of a black hole

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=572

describes how long it will take a black hole to eat the earth: "If you factor that in [Hawking Radiation], it would probably *never* consume the whole Earth.

and finally:

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=139
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/black_hole_sun.html

both describe what a black hole is capable of sucking in and how gravity is affected by mass, respectively.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Robert, Coon Rapids, Minnesota, USA — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 01:59:06 GMT

Fly you FOOLS!!
Anyone with a shred of intellect could tell that this is really the forge where the One Ring will unmake the world and bring on the arrival of Jesus Christ... In the Year 2060, as foretold by Issac Newton...
***
Okay.. got that out of my system.
Contact your local Bone Marrow Donor Center and you might be able to save someones life, beats whining about nonsense like this.

Peace Out.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

TF — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:47:11 GMT

Instead of wasting our time and money on trying to reproduce the sun on earth or building this huge dangerous machine we should have used it to find what force controls gravity...once we find the answer to that, it would really change the world in to many ways to explain...control gravity and you will be able solve a lot of our problems,energy,transportation,weather etc.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Golota, Ufa, Russia — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:06:44 GMT

Ребятки!
Не так страшен протон 14 TeV, как то огроиное и могущественное, что за ним скрывается.

На уровне квантовой гравитации даже причина и следствие меняются местами. Поэтому может статься, что когда-нибудь эти LHC вывернут нашу Вселенную наизнанку - поменяют нашу светлую материю на "тёмную" (dark matter), материю - на антиматерию, нынешнюю Вселенную - на прошлую или будущую.

Скорее всего, это будет обычный гамма-всплеск, который оповестит Вселенную о гибели очередной цивилизации.

http://bolshoyforum.org/forum/index.php?topic=14924.msg534520#msg534520

[Rough translation:

Guys: A proton at 14 TeV isn't as terrible as the power that's hidden behind it. At that level of quantum gravity, even cause and effect can be reversed. Therefore, it's possible that sometimes the LHC turns our universe inside out - it can change our bright matter into dark matter, our matter into antimatter, our present universe into the past or the future.

Most likely there will be the usual gamma-ray burst, notifying the rest of the universe about the loss of another civilization.]

[ALAN ADDS: Just because I translated this message doesn't mean I agree with it. It does go to show that unreasonable fears about the frontiers of science cross national boundaries. I'll have more later in the week about the LHC and scientific frontiers. In the meantime, check out CERN's Web site for background:

http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/Safety-en.html ]

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Charles Kapplinger Jr. — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:52:06 GMT

Please remember that astrophysicists and the physicists at CERN are often wrong.

And please note that the Big Bang theory is quite wrong (and obviously so).

CNN.com and AP report --
“Scientists plan to hunt for signs of the invisible "dark matter" and "dark energy" that make up more than 96 percent of the universe, and hope to glimpse the elusive Higgs boson, a so-far undiscovered particle thought to give matter its mass.”

The concepts of “dark matter” and “dark energy” are spurious. These concepts are based upon the incorrect Big Bang theory.

So what is the purpose of the LHC??

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Logan Thomas, Bridgetown, Barbados — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 18:46:03 GMT

I just want all of these scientists to think for a moment about something other than their possible fame after testing this monstrosity. What if this thing really does do something catastrophic? what if it really does destroy our world, is it worth the lives of nearly 7 Billion people, and the other countless species. Is a silly little science project really worth an impending oblivion? I do believe that out of all the experiments and monstrosities that man has created this one is the most likely to end it all. Oh yes i'm sure many lives have been lost to this machine, and the "visionary" scientists refuse to think of anything other than betterment for themselves more than others.

Ok imagine this machine does no damage, and everything these scientists have dreamed of can be discovered through this machine, SO WHAT? Mankind will learn something else, that they don't need, it will never end, eventually they will find a way to destroy everything, if not this time, eventually.

You Selfish people, YOU would put everything at stake just to learn a little fun fact?

If this machine does destroy the earth, may you all live forever with the blood of trillions of beings on your hands.

Please do the right thing. I know this may seem corny but; With great power comes great responsibility. You men and women have at the moment, the greatest power. So please be responsible.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Chuck, Vacaville, CA — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 21:21:02 GMT

I think that this whole thing is a waste of money. We have spent millions and billions of dollars to build something that could possibly destroy the earth. We could of used that money to help our country. Our economy is horrible right now and not to mention we currently have a deficit in the trillions. This whole project is a waste. But what do I know, Iam just a college grad who hopes to actually live life.

Doomsday lawsuit dissed

Amber,Fl — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:26:01 GMT

When will people learn that playing God will get you no where. If anything it's Karma.