International man of mysteries

Luboš Motl, Pilsen, Czech Republic — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:06:45 GMT

Nice interview! John Ellis always fascinated me by very modern opinions about new physics - that I always agreed with - that seem so spectacular in combination with his sage-like looks (sorry)! I hope that we are right about SUSY, and incidentally, whenever he wanted, he is welcome to write for The Reference Frame (up to twice a week).

International man of mysteries

S.B. Stein E.B. NJ — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:54:07 GMT

I can't wait to see what the results are. I would hope to have seen possible practical applications to keep those that would cut funding at bay. I am also waiting for those that purport to be members of the scientific community to call it "junk science."

International man of mysteries

Yoga — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:17:53 GMT

You know what...I must congratulate MSNBC to bring such detail analysis and keeping us upto date.

International man of mysteries

Carlos V. Ramirez, Bronx _Riverdale, New York — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:25:56 GMT

Keep up the good work, fellows!

We need this kind of research...

Carlos v. Ramirez
Industrial/Mechanical Engineer and Computer Specialist.

International man of mysteries

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:47:26 GMT

I think I saw the Higgs Bison when I was at Yellowstone.

Great interview. I love that his explanations are in common English. I really think he could walk into a 5th grade class and talk theoretical physics. I do wonder how much of what he explains he agrees with.

I noticed that Alan must have edited out the parts about stealing funding from starving and disease infested third world countries. As often as it comes up in the blog it must have been in the interview, right?

International man of mysteries

B. VA — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 21:11:28 GMT

Boyle, you idiot!

International man of mysteries

Ryan, Rochester, NY — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:05:24 GMT

Great interview. Very informative! Ellis' analogies and metaphors helped a lot. I can't wait for them to pump this thing up to full power. I am really pulling for the Higgs Boson and some evidence of dark matter. It will surely be a very interesting decade with all the discoveries that should come from the LHC.

International man of mysteries

Tim Hutcheson, Pensacola, FL — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:13:00 GMT

A comic interjection that just occurred to me --

Imagine a scene where The LHC is up and operating the very first time and scientists are just starting to dial in the first "picture" of the earliest universe. In fact they find the LHC is working even better than expected and they can see beyond the first microsecond of the big bang. They continue to make adjustments - now it works so well they can see back to just before the big bang. They look closer and closer as the image comes into clear view - and see a group of physicists sitting before a collosal instrument just as they push the button below a big red sign that says - "Start LHC" :o)

International man of mysteries

David Stratton — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:41:21 GMT

You mention a big bang theory which basically starts with an extremely small something and then "explodes" outward. We are at some point within that outward motion. Is there any way to determine or predict if we are really at some point in a cycle of universe expansion followed by contraction followed by a bang which causes another expansion, etc?

International man of mysteries

Victor Vovakes,Tempe,Az — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 00:01:02 GMT

The most complex in the universe can become so simple, so fast, in a lifetime. The most simple can become the most complex, and as the cycle goes. Good luck, John.

International man of mysteries

Michael Kent Oh — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 00:34:56 GMT

Very nice article. If that doesn't convince people that the collider poses no risk,nothing will. I think some people like their tinfoil hats too much to give them up,so there will always be the occasional nut job.

International man of mysteries

Trenton Quark, Tantalon Galaxy — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 01:09:44 GMT

John, How do you that Higgs is male ? The othehr postulate is that Higgs is at rest at the top of the hill.

International man of mysteries

Ralph Garner — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:10:59 GMT

I have repeatedly tried to tell the people that every time the USA or Russia tested an nuclear weapon, there was a greater chance of a black hole than at the LHC. There is more energy and temperature as well as countless particle collisions. I would hope that some physisist would comment on this to stop the rediculous attempts to put a stop to scientific Progress.

International man of mysteries

Delmar Fairchild, Barron, WI — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:46:49 GMT

I found your interview very informative and provocative.
If we find the Higgs Boson and it shows that there are objects that give weight where it is needed, wouldn't those particles also have smaller particles that must make up the weight and physical form of the Higggs boson? An infinity of smaller and smaller particles. The microscopic effect.

It wasn't too long ago (1964) we were taught in High School that there are neutrons, electrons and protons and that the native Indians believed in the circles of life and revered them. Maybe we already know about this from some other "Universal" means lost to time or position.

By this happening, wouldn't the Telescopic effect also come into play that shows where we are now was just another super large star that had condensed and exploded resulting in our "universe"? Each of our stars condensing and exploding could be resulting in an entirely smaller universe where their stars also condense and explode into still other smaller universes. And inversely our universal star was part of a larger universe that was also part of a larger universe, ad infinitum?

I know this is not something new. The way everything revolves around each other, following laws and doing what we expect them to do must have some significance in the scheme of the universes and seems it is logical that there are parts and larger parts that we can't see only because we don't have the means to do so at this time. I think our big bang may be easier to understand than what it is made out to be. Now we need to find a way to look past the Big Bang and see what was "there" before it occurred.

International man of mysteries

Don Strong — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:52:28 GMT

Good use of analogies throughout the interview. I've been following the progress of the LHC for some time now and it's very exciting to see that all the hard work and dedication is making this possible. Can't wait to see what new particles may appear (and decay) that no one saw coming.

International man of mysteries

Joshua Davis, Cape Coral, Fl — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:45:08 GMT

I have been sucked into this thing just like all the top scientists. My wife thinks I am on the computer looking at porn. I just cant take watching the news anymore. This is exciting to me. I love science. I have always wondered myself about dark matter and how it affects us and everything around us. All of the different dimensions of time and space. I look forward to advancements in the scientific progress.

International man of mysteries

NT — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:52:15 GMT

What a waste of money!!!

International man of mysteries

John Doe, Seattle Washington — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 04:18:02 GMT

Could it be coincidence that there were 4 major earthquakes within a 24hour span of the test of the Particle Accelerator. Japan, Indonesia, Chile, Iran... Could it have some impact on the Earths Magnetic Field? How many more Earthquakes before the shut it down.

International man of mysteries

Timmy Two Moons — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 04:19:55 GMT

Michael Kent Oh, Ralph Garner.

Very condescending and elitist. Let me ask you. How do YOU know that the LHC wont end the world? Where did that knowledge come from? Did you earn that knowledge for yourself from a lifetime of study of physics, or did you read the great articles that Alan has been publishing and incorporate someone else's belief as your own. That is after all what it is; a belief. And you are being led around by this belief by those that are selling it to you. Call it religion or science, the behavior is the same. You are the sheep to the preachers (scientists) wolf.

Ellis himself said in this article that they don't know what they will find. They have an idea but they don't know for sure. They believe they know, but once again, its just a belief. They may find that the Standard Model doesn't fit at all, which means that we are tinkering at the edge of human understanding with a machine that has potential (however slight the risk is as told to us by those heavily invested in this machine) to create some very powerful unknown interactions with the unknown.

I'm not saying I'm opposed to the LHC, what I'm saying is that I'm opposed to the supreme arrogance I hear when a scientist and his sycophants have to condescend to mere mortals to defend their pricey toy.

A little humility will go a long way people.

amen.

International man of mysteries

Roger, San Antonio, TX — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 04:45:56 GMT

Maybe, some of the benefits of these experiments will lead mankind to space travel.

International man of mysteries

angelo cordisco — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:13:48 GMT

If they do find the darkmater,with the black holes
will they beable to understand the why are solar system was made in such a perfect creation or drawing.

International man of mysteries

Probir,Kolkata,India — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:21:53 GMT

Keep up the good work,
I can't wait to see what the results are.

International man of mysteries

Doug Sheehan, Kolobrzeg, Poland — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:23:47 GMT

It was nice of Mr. Ellis to answer the questions in a simple format so us non scientific people can understand. I look forward to more of his commentary.

International man of mysteries

Brad D. — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:33:14 GMT

The Cosmic Rays argument is indeed the main argument that CERN uses to support the safety of its experiments... that our planet is being constantly exposed to the influence of cosmic rays of energies which surpass that of the collider, and nevertheless the planet has not yet been destroyed by strangelets, black holes, magnetic monopole, or anything of that sort. Below is the rebutal of this argument.

First of all, following the astrophysical theory, which is at the basis of CERN’s experiments, the main event in the universe, which gave the maximum emission of energy in space was the Big Bang. CERN’s experiments are expected to simulate the energy conditions which existed about one trillionth of a second after the Big Bang. But the Big Bang is believed to have occurred more than 14 billion years ago. So where in today’s universe can we find the streams of protons of energy levels, which will be achieved in the collider? What cosmic events are able to produce them?

Secondly, if we consult the encyclopedia (Big Encyclopedia of Cyril & Methodius, 2008): "Cosmic rays are streams of stable particles of high energies (approximately from 1 up to 1012 GeV), reaching Earth from space (primary radiation), and also created by these particles during their interaction with the nuclei of the atmosphere (secondary radiation) which consists of all known elementary particles ". As we see, cosmic rays have a limit of 1012 GeV, while the collider will produce 1.4х1013, i.e. more than one order higher (naturally, since the experiments will be modeling the conditions which existed one trillionth of a second after Big Bang!).

Thirdly, collisions of protons in the collider’s counter beams are planned to be carried out at speeds, which practically equal the speed of light in vacuum. Arguing that the protons in cosmic rays have higher levels of energy then the planned energy of their collisions in the collider means arguing that they have much greater speeds. Is CERN ready to rebut the major principle of the theory of relativity, that any particle cannot exceed the speed of light? Therefore, the argument, that installations on Earth register cosmic beams with energies that are greater than what is planned in the collider, suggests that the detected rays where not made up of high energy protons, but of atoms of various heavy elements, and even micrometeorites, which is a big difference.

Fourth, moving at high speeds in space protons scatter along the radiuses away from the epicenter of their emission. They cannot have head-on collisions with each other for this very reason and also because same charge particles push each other away. This will be different in the collider, where their streams will be compressed by means of a magnetic field into dense beams and pushed together in counter directions: thus black holes will be strewed as sparks from under a grinding circle.
If particles with the energy which is planned in the collider even collide heads-on somewhere in the space vacuum, the resulting black hole will really disappear instantly since there will be vacuum around it, that is there will be no matter to absorb. But if the particles of ultrahigh energy manage to reach large material objects, there appears a black hole with all its characteristics. It is a well-known fact that there are plenty of black holes in space. Note that each galaxy looks like a spiral as though there was a huge funnel, which sucked in everything around it. Also, the matter in the center of each galaxy has minimal density. It looks like it may have been a consequence of black holes.

Conclusion: The investments made into the collider are more than 8 billion dollars. And consequently, even in the face of the risk, the entrepreneurs who invested in this business, as well as the physicists who are looking to get Nobel prizes, will always have a desire to take that risk. They need to get familiarized with the theory, which proves that the Large Hadron Collider experiments pose real danger of destruction to the Planet (http://dovgel.com/engl/apok-e.htm)*. I do not think, that after that CERN employees will still want to act a role of space suicide-bombers. But how can we get them to consider the new theory if it is known, that "the strongest fortress is the human head" (K.Marx) and that "most harm is not from ignorance but from the knowledge of a great many things which are actually not true " (F.Najt). This is the main problem!

The above mentioned theory (http://dovgel.com/engl/apok-e.htm) explains in an easy to read format the appearance of matter, the effect of gravitation, the nature of black holes and proves that CERN experiments are capable of destroying the planet. It is urgently needed to have an independent safety study of the planned experiments. Please ask people to familiarize themselves with the theory and facilitate getting it considered on due levels. There is very little time left!

[ALAN ADDS: So many questions, so little time: I'll take a stab at some of these, although the editing tool for comment responses does not make it easy with long messages like this one:

[1. Big bang: I think you're confusing the proton experiments with the lead-ion experiment (ALICE). ALICE is the experiment that duplicates the conditions just after the big bang, following up on the RHIC experiment. The heavy-ion collisions should produce subatomic regions of quark-gluon plasma, or QGP, where particles that are typically tightly bound inside protons, neutrons, etc., are more free-flowing. QGP is thought to exist at the heart of neutron stars. Here's more information about this phenomenon from Brookhaven:

http://www.bnl.gov/RHIC/QGP.htm

[2. Even though you say that encyclopedia was published this year, it's horribly out of date, or else the writers must have been looking at limited circumstances for cosmic-ray collisions at Earth's surface. Cosmic rays have been observed in the atmosphere at several orders of magnitude above the top energies expected at the LHC. One of them, seen in 1991, had an energy of 300 exa electron volts (EeV), which is 20 million times more powerful than the LHC's 14 TeV collisions. That particle was nicknamed the "Oh-My-God Particle," playing off the "God Particle." Similar events have been spotted since then. Here are a few references to ultra-high-energy cosmic rays, including a Science article that has restricted access:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/ohmygodpart.html/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_cosmic_ray

http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/citation/2000/508/3

[3. Yes, 99.999999 percent of the speed of light is pretty fast, but cosmic rays in space are even faster and more energetic (see above). That doesn't mean that they go faster than the speed of light. When you get to relativistic speeds, one decimal place makes a big difference in energy - as you can see if you play around with this Relativity Calculator:

http://www.1728.com/reltivty.htm

[4. You seem to be mashing together the "at rest" collision argument and a false claim about supermassive black holes in the centers of galaxies. The proton-proton collisions won't create a black hole sitting in the middle of the detector. In fact, *if* a black hole is created, it would be detected by the spray of particles coming out of the detector. If the "at rest" argument applied in the detector, it would apply to other cosmic-ray collisions we observe as well. As for supermassive black holes, the astronomical observations indicate that the galactic centers are actually much more massive rather than less massive, due of course to the black hole. This Backreaction posting delves into the most improbable scenarios for an "at rest" black hole:

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2008/04/black-holes-at-lhc-what-can-happen.html

[Your conclusion: You seem to be assuming that the 10,000-plus folks involved in the LHC experiment are not up to speed on particle physics, but the truth is that they generally know more about the subject than you or I do. Maybe they don't know the ins or outs of amateur theorizing, but believe me, they don't suffer fools gladly when it comes to how the subatomic world works. (I do suffer fools a bit more easily, because I'm pretty ignorant myself.) Also, the folks investing in this are not entrepreneurs, but rather research agencies that don't have a profit-making motive. CERN does license some of the technologies involved with data processing or the mechanics of the collider, but they don't make a dime from the discoveries. The same basically goes for Energy Department / National Science Foundation support of U.S. activities in this field. There have been several safety studies conducted for CERN, the latest of which was reviewed by an outside panel of experts as well as the peer reviewers for a scientific journal.

[My conclusion: I see why it's so difficult for real scientists to counter the arguments of folks who are in many cases basing their fears on inaccurate information. It takes a lot of work to marshal the references, and the arguments just keep on coming anyway. It's hard to sway these folks - just as it's hard to sway the proponents of intelligent design and the Face on Mars. I think it has something to do with the universe's increasing entropy and the arrow of time. ;-) ]

International man of mysteries

Ed Norris, Tyler< Tx — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 08:59:55 GMT

For Tim Hutcheson, Pensacola, Fl. What if when that group of physicists see just before the big bang and what they see turns out to be GOD?!!!

International man of mysteries

Bob Ryan, Durham, NC. — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 10:54:38 GMT

Re: "The Higgs is a door..." analogy. Nice way to transfer information we already have to understanding a different subject. We collect bits and pieces of information which mean little to us until we acquire that last piece of essential information that brings it all together to creat a "concept" that we can use to move on to another problen to solve. Creating the concept allows us to "compact" the bits and pieces to "knowledge" which we then use to solve other problems. Some people call this process "hunches" or "intitution" or "gut felings".

"Any solution to any problem creates additional problems needing solution." I believe this to be true regardless of your field of interest.

A personal exercise (related to the Higgs door analogy):

Sit back, relax, close your eyes and imagine what "Nothing" looks like.

International man of mysteries

Van, Bloomington, Ill. — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 12:16:19 GMT

It's hard to believe that scientists like Ellis who have wanted something like the LHC for so long would pour all their energies into a really thorough investigation of the possibility of disaster. For example, when he says there's no chance of microscopic black holes consuming the earth, is he not relying on one of Hawking's theories that has not even been tested? I've also heard that some of the arguments against calamity were drawn from papers that dealt with other, much less powerful colliders.

International man of mysteries

Van, Bloomington, Ill. — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 12:18:56 GMT

By the way, how much did this thing really cost? A few weeks ago people were saying $7-8 billion. This week we heard $9 billion. Yesterday some reports mentioned $10 billion. I just read an article that suggested it only cost $4 billion. Who's telling the truth? And what is the yearly cost of operation?

[ALAN ADDS: I address this in a factbox called "LHC by the Numbers," which is attached to every story in our series on the LHC. If you've just been reading the blog you may have missed it: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24601895/ ]

[Here's what I said in the factbox:]

Cost: $6 billion to $10 billion

Why the wide range of estimates?

Europe’s CERN research organization says it’s investing $6 billion. Adding the value of other contributions since 1994, including the detectors, boosts the total to as much as $10 billion. To some extent, it depends on who’s doing the counting and what the currency rates are. [I'll add that the $4 billion figure probably comes from a time when the dollar was stronger.]

[I don't have enough time to delve into the operating-cost question in depth, but I do know that the Energy Department has said stopping operations on the LHC would affect $10 million per month in federal spending. So it's a safe bet to say that when you include the expense by CERN's European members as well as the scores of other nations, the cost amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars per year.]

International man of mysteries

Robbie Withey, New Bern,NC — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:07:26 GMT

to David Stratton: I believe that does occur, the known universe began from a single point explosion,has been expanding for billions of years & will continue to for billions more until all heat has been exhausted causing a contraction for billions & billions more years until, like a black hole, the universe contracts back to a singularity or white hole,then the process starts all over again. it could theorettically go on forever. we're talking time scales so immense it boggles the mind...

International man of mysteries

Dave, Toronto, Canada — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:49:30 GMT

"It would be great to come across a real surprise" and Ellis' other comments about all of the things we do not know about what we are going to find - what incredible paradoxes!

They completely and utterly justify this new step in man's quest to understand - AND they inevitably lead to absolute terror in the minds of those who do not share this thirst for knowledge.

So, the debate will never end, just like religious belief will never disappear from basic human psychology. We both fear the unknown and crave knowledge about it, and to those who comprehend it, this scientific endeavour is a great step towards enlightenment. At the same time, it will inevitably cause massive misgivings in those who do not understand or who do understand but do not have a risk-taking personality make-up.

We cannot wish away those who fear, so perhaps more articles of this sort, more public explanations of a comprehensible nature, might at least reduce the hysteria. That is the best we can hope for.

International man of mysteries

Mike DePaolo, Boston, Ma — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:54:18 GMT

In response to David Stratton, Wednesday Sept. 10th 7:41 pm.

Despite everything we don't know, we do know that it is impossible to see/experience anything that was, or occurred before the big bang (if there was such a period), because all information is constructed of the space/matter/time/radiation that arose from the big bang. It's like looking at an ice sculpture (analogous to the universe as we know it today) and trying to predict what the last ice sculpture was (if it was an ice sculpture) by looking at the puddle of water from which the ice sculpture was made. Maybe the water comprised something else, just like the 'everything' of our universe may have comprised something other than our universe. It's impossible to determine, therefore there is no cycle that is provable. In fact Hubble's findings indicate that not only is the universe expanding, but it's accelerating. If there was ever a cycle, this is the end of it! Some variable in that cycle had to change!

International man of mysteries

Adam Long, New Brunswick, Canada — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 17:49:45 GMT

Okay, I am an amateur reader when it comes to particle physics, but I've done some interesting reading on string theory, which has yet to be mentioned when talking about the LHC. Does this in any way tie into experiments at the LHC to prove or disprove the theory, or does it have nothing to do with string theory at all?

[ALAN ADDS: Glad you asked that, Adam. For space purposes, I had to edit out some of the questions from my Q&A with John Ellis, including a question on string theory. Here it is:]

QUESTION: Some of the string theorists I’ve talked with, like Brian Greene and Lisa Randall, look to the LHC to provide new data to back up one or the other of their theories. I know it’s been a complaint in the past that string theory is almost more like philosophy or metaphysics than actual physics, because there are so many possibilities for the way things work that it’s hard to nail down any one particular theory. Do you think that the LHC will provide some insights in to that aspect of physics and string theory?

ANSWER: String theory includes lots of elements which have never been seen. It includes supersymmetry, it includes extra dimensions, it postulates that elementary particles are not tiny little points but they’re extended objects like pieces of string. So there are all sorts of conjectures in string theory that have never been verified.

The LHC, I think, could verify some of those conjectures. It could, for example, find supersymmetric particles. It could perhaps find extra dimensions.

Now if you find some of these things, that doesn’t prove that string theory is right. But at least, I think, it would give the string theorists some encouragement, or maybe give their critics some encouragement, that they’re not completely crazy. If some of these elements that exist in string theory would be found, that would be great.

[ALAN AGAIN: Here's a link to my interview with Brian Greene where the LHC came up:]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17738478/

International man of mysteries

aej, florida — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 18:08:43 GMT

thank you for reassuring us that this will not cause any harm to the earth. i was in fact very concerned:/

International man of mysteries

Rich Zerb, Nashua, NH — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 18:15:43 GMT

Great Interview, I would love to be a part of his team.
The idea that the LHC will somehow fill in or solve the fundamental issues with the "Standard Model" of particles would be great, however I believe it will cause more questions then answers. I do not believe the Higgs particle or “GOD” particle will ever be discovered; instead I believe we will eventually find that there is no “GOD” particle and the “Standard Model” is incorrect or need to be re-thought.

International man of mysteries

daniel busan, ladera ranch, CA — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:52:08 GMT

Tim said earlier: "What if when that group of physicists see just before the big bang and what they see turns out to be GOD?!!!"

They will probably hide it and pretend they found nothing!!!

International man of mysteries

Frank Glover, Rochester, NY — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:12:03 GMT

'John Doe,' You live on a planet that's prone to occasional quakes, volcanic activity, et cetera. Espically along the well known tectonic plate boundaries. Deal with it, or move to a geologically dead wold like the Moon...

I have lived in Miami for a time, and I have a friend in Houston who, at this very moment, is deciding wether or not to leave town for hurricane Ike. (she bailed out for one other storm, already) That's the potential price you pay for living on the Gulf or Atlantic coast as well. Midwest? Expect an occasional tornado, Toto. Upstate NY? Expect an occasional major snowstorm. No particle accelerators, no divine punishment at work here, it's just in the nature of Mother Earth as she is today.

International man of mysteries

Tim Hutcheson, Pensacola, FL — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:07:17 GMT

For Daniel Busan: No, I didn't say that. Ed Norris said that.

For Ed Norris: My comment was a only a joke. On the serious side though, there is the possibility that our universe is, for us time-bound humans, only one of an infinite progression of such bangs. Who knows, maybe it just takes about 14 billion years for rocks and evolution to produce another LHC. Oops, sorry just joking again. :o)

International man of mysteries

Bobby Fissue — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:37:31 GMT

I must admit, I am dissappointed. I was sure that the reason we'd never encounted intelligent life in the universe is that any sentient species eventually passes a funding bull for construction of an LHC.
Back to the drawing board, tongue firmly planted in cheek.

International man of mysteries

Israel Sadovnik/ Socratus. k-gat. israel — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 08:44:23 GMT

The mad CERN.

In 1906, Rutherford studied internal structure of atoms,
bombarding them with high energy a- particles.
This idea helped him understand the structure of atom.
But the clever Devil interfered and gave advice to physicists
to enlarge the target. Bomb them!
And physicist created huge cannon-accelerators of particles.
And they began to bomb micro particles in the vacuum, in hoping
to understand their inner structure. And they were surprised with
the results of this bombing. Several hundreds of completely new
strange particles appeared. They lived a very little time and do not
relate to our world. Our Earth needs its real constants of nature.
But this was forgotten.
What God carefully created, is destroyed in accelerators.
And they are proud of that. They say: we study the inner structure
of the particles. The clever and artful Devil is glad. He again has deceived man.
Physicist think, that an accelerator - is first of all the presence of huge energy.
And the Devil laughs. He knows, that an accelerator - is first of all the Vacuum.
But this, he has withheld from man.
He has not explained that the Vacuum is infinite and inexhaustible.
And in infinity there is contained an infinite variety of particles.
And by bombing the vacuum, one can find centaurs and sphinxes.
But my God, save us from their presence on Earth.
========= .. ========.
Rutherford was right.
His followers are mistaken.
Why?
Imagine, that I want to plant a small apple- tree.
For this purpose I shall dig out a hole of 1 meter width and 1,20 m depth.
It is normal.
But if to plant a small apple- tree, I shall begin to dig
a base for a huge building (skyscraper),
or if to begin drill ground with 10 km. depth,
will you call me a normal man?
========== .. ===============.
Imagine a man who breaks watches on the wall.
And then he tries to understand the mechanism of the watches
by thrown cogwheels, springs and small screws.
Does he have many chances to succeed?
As many as the scientists have who aspire to understand
the inner structure of electron by breaking them into accelerators.
If not take into account the initial conditions of Genesis,
the fantasies of the scientists may be unlimited.
========== . ======== .
The physicists can not indefinitely break the particles.
The science can not eternally develop to “mad infinity.”
============= .. =============.
==============…
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.socratus.com
http://www.wbabin.net
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
http://www.wbabin.net/physics/sadovnik.pdf

International man of mysteries

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 09:39:38 GMT

Brad D. (addendum to Alan’s answers in a loose format)
1 GeV is the mass of a proton, more or less, so the bottom end that the encyclopedia gave is about proton/neutrons adrift or electron traffic. 1-10^12 GeV is basically the bulge in a bell curve. On the low end you get drifting electrons at well less than 1 GeV and on the high end, well, see Alan’s answer. As far as where they come from, low energy is solar wind kind of stuff, up to 10^12 is from nova and other anomalies. The really high energy comes from …? I don’t know. But it’s there. As far as head on, solar wind doesn’t have a whole lot of head on collisions because it’s leaving the star radially. It’s produced radially from any given point, throughout a star, so inside the star you get all kinds of collisions. Once it leaves the star plasma dynamics take over and the magnetic fields the wind produce regulate its flow. So it goes from completely chaotic to fairly laminar. Higher power radiation comes from outside our system. So It’s coming from all over to begin with. It’s further diffused by the magnetic fields in our system. The net effect of coming from all directions and being diffused is that it loses any directionality and appears to come from all over evenly. That would make the odds of a high energy head on collision higher than they would be in average empty space but lower than they would be in the area between two supernovae. In those areas you get naturally occurring concentrated streams of ultra high energy cosmic radiation moving in opposite directions. Collider conditions but with higher energy. If stable MBHs are created naturally they’d be produced by the bucketload there and then drift out across the cosmos at whatever residual speed they had. That means they’d shower the universe. If it’s only metastable then no shower of black holes. So there can really only be concern if MBHs are actually created, which I personally doubt, and they’re metastable. Metastable, in this context, pretty much means Hawking Radiation. There is also some possibility of spontaneous return to a normal matter state, but if that were to happen I think it would happen immediately so no metastable. If MBHs are metastable and Hawking Radiation is correct then the question becomes how much radiation is there. There is some speculation that the rate is different for high mass and low mass black holes. After that question is answered you have to ask how fast they eat. They would be extremely tiny, I figured the radius before, might have posted it, but I’m not going to look. They would be adrift in a world that’s mostly empty, lots of real estate between a nucleus and an electron field. So the first thing to look at there is the mean time between meals, the amount of energy a meal will provide and compare that to the loss rate. Every credible analysis I’ve seen has Hawking Radiation prevailing. The second thing you need to look at is whether they can even eat. They are so tiny that you can’t actually get any particles into them. If quarks are tiny to a proton the way that electrons are tiny to an atom they’re still really huge compared to a MBH. That may preclude the possibility of a MBH being able to consume anything. Maybe the only way they can cause a problem is if millions of them eat each other and go from micro- to milli- black holes. If you look at all the proton collisions the LHC will produce and have them all fall to the earth below you may not be able to put enough together to do that. They won’t puddle up. They’d be gravitationally diffused as they drifted through the earth, if, or rather *if* they didn’t get captured by atoms. They may be gravitationally bound to atoms they come across. In either event you have to look at how meta they are in that metastable state. The only way you get to worry is if:
1. MBHs are created in conditions similar to those in the LHC.
2. MBHs are metastable and not stable.
3. There lifetime is shorter than the time necessary for any and every cosmic radiation created MBH, at whatever it’s drift speed is below the body’s capture velocity, to reach that body.
4. MBHs are able to eat.
5. The rate of accretion is higher than the rate of decay.
1, 4 and 5 are questionable. 2 is almost a given. 3 is laughable. That is because over the lives of the stars and planets we can see these collisions would have taken place inside or near them leaving their resultants in a capture scenario. Yet, we can still see them. And that works with time correction.

Frank,
I think “John Doe” was trying to say why were there 4 major earthquakes within 24 hours after lite up but not 4 within 24 hours prior to. Yes, we live on a world with seismic activity but if I do something and that something is immediately followed by a spike in activity you have to wonder if there is a cause and effect relationship. If there is a magnetic trigger then we should see similar flare ups following high solar flare activity. This is another thing I’m not going to check.

International man of mysteries

Tim Hutcheson, Pensacola, FL — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:39:31 GMT

More comedy from the web -- normally I wouldn't promote this but they did such a nice job and we do need our sense of humor....

Watch the LHC Compact Muon experiment live on webcam :o)

http://www.cyriak.co.uk/lhc/lhc-webcams.html

International man of mysteries

Mike DaGrossa, Richmond, Virginia — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 23:36:31 GMT

"OK, so some people are going to say, “Black holes … those big things eat up stars?” No. These are microscopic, tiny little black holes. And they’re extremely unstable." this quote I think says it all really. If you table is unstable you throw a sugar packet under a leg and move on. If you're handy with wood working you perhaps make another leg or shim the leg to make it stable. These scientists better have one hell of a sugar packet or really know how to shim the leg.

Another thing. No one really knows if the experiment is going to be useful in any way. I think that question needs to be answered first before they push a button.

[ALAN ADDS: When Ellis talks about a (theoretical) subatomic black hole being unstable, that's a good thing. That means the black hole would decay into other particles very quickly. A stable black hole would not be as good, but the recent safety report showed why even a stable black hole of the size that may (or may not) be created in the LHC would not gobble up the planet.

[As for the idea of waiting until we know exactly how the experiment will be useful, that's a little like requiring a college to tell me exactly how my son will use his degree before I send him off to that college. No ... Rather, I see that graduates of that college have succeeded spectacularly in the past, and that gives me confidence that the college education will be useful.]

International man of mysteries

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 02:20:37 GMT

I don't use shims. A table is unstable because one leg is too long. I just cut down the long leg, then cut down the long leg, then cut down the long leg, ... , then buy a new table.

International man of mysteries

Sandose — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 20:56:22 GMT

Man will be responsible for its demise on the surface of this earth. We fail to learn from history and experience and as such are doomed to keep making the same mistakes. Our scientific and technological advancement is growing at a geometric rate BUT sadly enough, our ability to control man's inventions is growing at an Arithmetic progression. Case in point, nuclear waste storage is a problem today. These same scientists who developed the nuclear science failed to develop a reliable method of containing any mishap just the way one could be injected with an anti-vernom when bitten by a snake.
Furthermore, having a selfish ambition due to technological advancement is no licence to destroy the world. Nations can choose to do what they want with their country but putting the entire earth in jeopardy simply because some crooked scientists are trying to figure out some abstract theories must have consequences. We do not have any convincing research to show that the so-called experiment about to be performed by CERN is safe. The world is surprisingly quiet. Maybe the powers that be know certain things that we do not know. Crying foul after the fact will definitely be irrelevant.

International man of mysteries

Tim Rommes, Washington, UT — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:34:34 GMT

sandose,
Was there any specific safety concern or just the hope that vagueness would conceal the empty nature of what you said? When you talk about nations imperilling the earth you *are* talking about bio-weapons, right? That's the only world wide jeopardy I can think of. Of course, that's after thinking. And that doesn't involve CERN. You were talking about CERN, right? No, it was snakes. I guess there are snakes at CERN. Man, it's just so confusing. I guess if you have any specifics you can post them and clear things up. Otherwise I'll just assume that someone said it is "dangerous" so now your scared because it's "dangerous" which really doesn't mean anything.

International man of mysteries

Kathryn Atchison, Ks — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:58:38 GMT

Good Luck On Your Journey! May God Be With Us! I pray this becomes a Blessing to our world, all the money that has been spent, maybe you can create food for the starving and water for those whom are thirsty!

In seaech for God and his creation ask the Holy Spirt he was sent to lead us into all truth! May you all be God fearing men for we must answer for what we do in life! As for my motto: One hundred years from now it will not matter where your house was nor what kind of car you drove or how large your bank account was, but the one thing that will matter, is that you know Jesus

God said: for the elects sake he will cut time short, if he didn't there would be no one saved. If ya wanna put the money somewhere put it into God's work, you will be blessed more! I do not expect for you to post this but please see that the great minds of CERN receive this message! Maybe it was a Blessing your machine was brought to a halt! Consider the flowers of the field for their creation will never be mastered by man, that is the creator's handy work!
May you all recieve this with a blessing and may the words be burnt into your minds forever, each day you awake remember me as you work on a machine to accomplish God's work. Please pray your work is not in vain and your selfish deeds are a Blessing to the Universe. May each one recieve a blessing today and look Up for the soon return of Jesus Christ to save our world from distruction, sin and Satan! I pray you become as wise men! Bless you and Your famlies!

Blessings, kathryn

International man of mysteries

Josie Parent. Tickfaw, La. — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 18:18:19 GMT

In Revelations 6. I have envisioned that we are going to self destruct by means of nuclear energy in the END of the world. But, before the END comes we will go thru bad weather changes, starvation, diseases, dying...and then maybe the Nuclear death would be a merciful blessing.....
What can be hoped for as education about our past with this MACHINE? Are they trying to figure out the planets and why they are Circular not Square or Triangular?
They were formed from pieces of all the planets out there. This is the reason our human bodies have some of each of the elements in those planets. (We are sort of like "living" planets.)
Okay...so maybe that is what happened in the BEGINNING, when these pieces of planets' dirt collided with each other....and alive humans formed from the BIG BANG Electrical Force that gave LIFE to US....the pieces of DEBRIS!!!!!!

International man of mysteries

Mike Christy, SC — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 04:02:03 GMT

The REAL, World eating Black Hole, is the economic hole that the politician have gotten us into. A trillion dollars, and counting. Sounds like the Hedron Super Collider was a real bargain. Maybe we could get the mini black holes, if produced, to eat the politicians. If we have to put out all the money to "save" our economy, our children's children will still be paying for all the Yuppies who were never happy, no matter how much money they aquired,and had to cook the books to make even more money for themselves (They did share it with the shareholders). Science, no matter how hard to fathom is better than throwing money down our "Black Hole."

International man of mysteries

or,tel aviv,israel — Tue, 05 May 2009 02:01:04 GMT

Nice interview...

International man of mysteries

socratus — Fri, 29 May 2009 14:51:07 GMT

Lao Tzu and Physics.
============== . .
#
Dao generates the One,
The One generates the Two,
The Two generates the Three.
The Three generates all things.
All things have darkness at their back
and strive towards the light,
and the flowing power gives them harmony.
/ Tao Te Ching, Chapter 42, Lao Tzu /
============= . .
Comment: Cosmo genesis.
1.
In the beginning was Vacuum/ Dao.
The Vacuum/ Dao is not died space but according to
Quantum theory it is Energetic space : T=0K.
2.
Dao generates the One.
It means:
The Energetic (Infinite/Eternal) Vacuum space generates
energetic virtual particles- frozen light quanta..
They are in rest/ potential condition and written by formulas:
C/D = pi, E = Mc^2, R/N = k, h = 0, i^2 = -1.
They can change its rest/potential condition and become active.
We call this active Energetic particle Electron: e^2= ahc
3.
The One generates the Two.
It means:
The Ones (frozen light quanta and Electron) create Proton.
4.
The Two generates the Three.
It means:
As result of interaction between Electron and Proton
the atom was created.
5.
The Three generates all things.
It means:
The atoms create all things.
6.
All things have darkness at their back
and strive towards the light,
and the flowing power gives them harmony.
It means:
The Quantum of Light is hidden in everything.
But as the ‘Bhagavad Gita’ says:
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form.
They do not know My transcendental nature and
My supreme dominion over all that be.
/ Chapter 9. Text 11./
========== . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab0=Scientists&tab1=Display&id=1372
===================== . .

International man of mysteries

socratus — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:52:19 GMT

God and his Universe. !!!
#
Once upon a time, 20 billions of years ago, all matter
(all elementary particles and all quarks and their
girlfriends- antiparticles and antiquarks, all kinds of
waves: electromagnetic, gravitational, muons…
gluons field ….. etc.) – was assembled in a “single point”.
And after there was a “Big Bang”.
The scientists wrote very thick books about this theory.
But nobody wrote the reason of the “Big Bang” because
nobody knows it.
I know the reason.
The action, when the God compresses all Universe
into his palm, we have named ‘a singular point’.
And action, when the God opens his palm,
we have named the ‘a Big Bang’.
============ ==============.
The Catholic Church adopted the theory of Big Bang
as a good proof of God existing. And Pope Pius XII
declared this in 1951.
http://discovermagazine.com/2004/feb/cover/
#
The masses in the Universe are very few.
The distances between stars are very far.
About 99% of the matter in the Universe is unseen.
Nobody knows what it is.
But God using his > 99% Hidden mass of the Universe
take control over the < 1% Visible mass of the Universe.
He is a smart physicist and mathematician .
He smiles and laughs when others say:
‘ The formulas are cleverer than men’.
========== . .
#
How can God using 99% Hidden matter
take control over 1% of the Visible matter?
Here is the scheme.

THE GENESIS. (scheme.)
1.
In the beginning was Vacuum some kind of
Infinite/ Eternal Energy Space: T = 0K.
2.
According to Quantum Theory this Infinite Energy Space create
‘ virtual energetic particles – frozen light quanta’. They are in
‘rest’/ potential condition and have following physical parameters:
C/D=pi , E=Mc^2, R/N=k , h = 0 , i^2=-1 .
3.
Moving Quantum of Light is a Photon.

Planck: h =E/t h = 1, c=1.
Einstein: h =kb h =1, c =1.
4.
Working Quantum of Light/ Photon is an Electron.

Goudsmit-Uhlenbeck: h(bar) = h/2pi , c>1.
E = hf,
Sommerfeld: e^2 = hca (Electron).
The Lorentz transformations.
5.
Star formation:
e- -> k -> He II -> He I -> rotating He –> plasma reaction -
- -> thermonuclear reaction: ( P. Kapitza , L. Landau,
E.L. Andronikashvili theories ),
( Theories of superconductivity and superfluidity.).
a) hf > kT
b) hf = kT
c) kT > hf
6.
As result of Star formation Proton was created.
p ( Proton)
7.
Evolution of interaction between Electron and Proton:
a) electromagnetic,
b) nuclear,
c) biological.
8.
Laws:
a) The Law of conservation and transformation energy.
b) The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / law.
c) The Pauli Exclusion Principle/ law.
9.
Testing:
a) Theory - Dualism of Consciousness
(consciousness / subconsciousness.)
b) Personal practice. – Parapsychology. (Meditation.)
============ . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
http://www.worldnpa.org/php2/index.php?tab0=Scientists&tab1=Display&id=1372
========== . =========== .
#
I want to know how God created this world.
I am not interested in this or that phenomenon,
in the spectrum of this or that element.
I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details.
/Einstein/
#

International man of mysteries

Copper Sink of Texas — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 23:53:46 GMT

Great interview. I love that his explanations are in common English. I really think he could walk into a 5th grade class and talk theoretical physics. I do wonder how much of what he explains he agrees with.

International man of mysteries

Mike — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:04:19 GMT

I am really enjoying the series.

International man of mysteries

Joe — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:37:12 GMT

Really well writing and informative article, thanks a lot guys!

International man of mysteries

Vidyardhi Nanduri — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 23:08:58 GMT

SUB:COSMIC POT -ENERGY OF THE UNIVERSE-
Ref:Dark matter-Fermi Symposium/Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology-SLAC-Nov 2009
NEED UNIVERSE MODEL
Cosmic Pot Energy: New Projections byVidyardhi Nanduri
PAPER PRESENTED AT SPACE TELESCOPE SCIENCE INSTITUTE- MAY 2003-
ASTROPHYSICAL LABORATORY SYMPOSIUM
FIGURE : PROJECTION OF COSMIC PLASMA COMPLEX STRUCTURE
This projection in three tier constitutes one Universe Cosmic Pot beyond 10^9 Parsecs
beyond the spiral-spherical groups.
http://sd.stsci.edu/astrophysical_laboratory/proceedings.html.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/21526401/Cosmic-Pot-Universe-2003
and Cosmology Structures New Modeling 2003 -
http://www.ociw.edu/ociw/symposia/series/symposium3/proceedings.html
This projects Cosmos beyond the Universe that accomodates Multi-Universe Concept.
Two articles were published in Cosmologyreview [dot] com website outlinng details
More Projections leading to these concepts are available in books by the author
One can search through http://www.scribd.com/doc/17291010/COSMOLOGY-VED
AS-INTERLINKSBOOKS-INFORMATION
Vidyardhi Nanduri