Suffering Extreme Anxiety Because of LHC in CERN - Please Help

Then, if not the opinions of someone like Stephen Hawking, who isn't beating a path (or wheel ruts) to CERN doors demanding they cease operations immediately, whose opinions do you rely?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I DO rely on their opinion. I am questioning why others are raising such concerns when so few major scientists in this field are worried.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

CERN's safety was only brought into question over an unstable magnetic coupling during one of their tests. It set their project back and because of the small explosion in regards to their equipment pushed tighter safety.

It's not like they were going to suck the whole world(or destroy it) through some black hole, it was just about the safety of how the equipment is managed. I didn't want to mentioned previously because obviously if you worry a great deal you might see more in it than there actually is to be seen.

The only people that are in danger are those that are working right next to the equipment and this is what these Safety changes are trying to lessen the chances of. You are more like to be eaten by a shark than have CERN effect you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hawking in asking to create a black hole, could create a special type of black hole that does not emit radiation... in fact... how does a black hole emit radiation at all from it's highly warped and distorted boundary? This is what i am worried about.

 

By Aether Wave Theory you can think about black hole radiation like about evaporation of tiny liquid droplet. The vapor pressure of such droplet increases with increased surface curvature of such droplet. i.e. with the decreased size of black hole. But for Earth would be dangerous even experiment, which could prepare so called neutron liquid, i.e. sufficiently large cluster of neutrons. Neutrons aren't very stable in their free state, but they can stabilize by the presence of another neutrons, so that the neutron stars are conditionally stable for billion of years. By the simmilar way, the signs of increased quark stability (tetra- and pentaquark existence) were observed as well.

 

I doubt your anxiety has anything to do with physics. Physics questions are merely tangible landmarks for your general sense of anxiety to latch on to.

If you had been born in a era for example when there was no physics, you would have found some other topic to anchor your anxiety.

Your problem is the anxiety...not physics.

And reading between the lines I'm guessing it probably has a bio-chemical origin.

Try googling 'Inositol' and "Panic disorder".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

"Experimental treatment for Panic Disorder has included nutritional consultation and the use of substances such as inositol, amino acid gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), glycine, glutamine, and the calming amino acid L-theanine. Treatment with GABA is both questionable and controversial, as orally ingested GABA cannot cross the blood-brain barrier. Orthomolecular therapy useful in the treatment of depression or which enhances the healthy functioning of the brain may have a role in the treatment of this condition."

 

Thank you. This debacle has gone on long enough.

 

Stop listening to those "others" and you'll be fine. Simple, really.

 

I cannot read all the replies in this thread, needless to say I was rolling on the ground laughing at some of the comments, lol

 

Michael83:

A very well written comment.

Yes, I believe we need to have everyone's attention on the fact that some theories in physics, which have been well-expressed, show that there might be a problem with the LHC, and to-date they cannot be disproven.

I believe that we need to direct science to find the answers to the safety questions that have been raised first. Then, if we can obtain the information showing the LHC to be safe, then go ahead with it. However, we're not there yet for the reasons previously articulated. It is just as valid to conduct science research looking for the evidence of the LHC safety, as it is to test the LHC, yet with the results that we won't possibly accidentally destroy ourselves.

Yes, many persons who post in these forums have an attitude of "who cares". Clearly, you do and I do. So do lots of others, though they don't post in these forums.

And no, we should not simply take the blithe assurances of the LHC proponents that nothing will go amiss. Perhaps not, but I've not seen the proof, and the attitude that has been expressed has been appalling. Yes indeed, why do we need this information the LHC might bring us to the exclusion of all other areas of science?

Why don't you send me an email, or PM me in this forum.

 

Hi there guys. I'm in almost the exact same situation as michael83, and found this thread after googling "lhc anxiety". At least I'm happy that I'm not alone and that someone else is thinking so similarly. My general anxiety story is a long and complicated one, so I won't go into details right now. Michael83, if you'd like to talk about this, please tell me in this thread, and we could perhaps exchange some mails. Unfortunately I can't PM you, and I don't know if you can PM me either.

Anyway, so..

I'm interested in science, but no expert in physics. I am however an expert in worrying about pretty much everything catastrophic, from future pandemics to cutting edge science experiments gone wrong. Yeah, I guess my basic problem is a classic fear of the unknown.

First of all I wouldn't actually normally worry much about this sort of experiment, considering several particle accelerators have been built before and have been in operation for a long time, such as RHIC and Tevatron. The people doing and funding this obviously HAS to know what they're doing and they can't all be like the classic mad scientists you see in movies. However, reading posts from certain people and various web pages (LHCdefense.org and so on) have made me question if there is some real risk as some things seem unanswered.

The fact that I don't see any real debate on this issue among high-profile scientists makes me wonder about the real credibility of these "doomsday prophets". If there is a real concern and such a enormous risk for complete planetary annihiliation, why isn't this mentioned in the media apart from bad sensationalistic popular science articles usually concluded with reassuring statements from enthusiastic physicists? Or is there REALLY some huge scientist conspiracy going on, where Nobel prizes and careers go before the risk of destroying humanity as some seem to claim?

I have a few questions for Walter L. Wagner.. I've seen you post on several forums. If you and other likeminded are so concerned, why are you debating this on more or less hobby oriented internet boards? Why aren't you instead out in the real world campaigning to get some real answers directly from the scientists involved at CERN and in academia around the world for specific answers to your (probably) legitimate concerns? Why don't you go through the media and get a real debate going? After all, there seem to be some unanswered questions that the right people should be able to answer before turning the LHC on. Shouldn't we get these out of the way as soon as possible? If there really is only a few months left until we destroy our planet, shouldn't the last thing on your mind be sitting there discussing this with random people online? Almost seems like you don't really believe what you're saying.

And another thing.. I've seen you post the same comment entry to several blogs concerning the dangers of the LHC with a link to LHCdefense.org. I wonder if you're just doing the appeal to authority thing by saying "I am not without experience in science" and placing "(Dr.)" after your name? Doesn't that just make you even less credible, hurting your case?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And what's up with this Paul Dixon guy posting here for years about supernovas and other scary doomsday stuff without even replying back to anyone? He's supposed to be a real academic psychologist somewhere? Or is he just someone else using that guy's name and in reality some paranoid schizophrenic? Could someone mail or call him to confirm this? Anyway, what could ever change by posting stuff like that on one of extremely many smaller internet forums?

This became long but I just had to get this off my chest. Needless to say I'm both kinda frustrated and worried at the same time. I shouldn't go around worrying about this daily at such a young age. The LHC will be turned on this summer, and whatever happens happens. No offense really, but if we survive the LHC experiments and the same people start worrying on the internet about new accelerators and other experiments afterwards, I think your credibility is gone forever and that you owe me, michael83 and other overly anxious laymen some kind of apology for crying wolf over and over again and really scaring the shit out of us needlessly.

Sorry if I got a bit carried away at the end there and if I have misinterpreted anything, but this really bothers me. I hope you will answer all my questions.

 

I've read enough about this debacle of an experiment for it to confirm my worst fears.

Consequently, I will be papering the cupboard under the stairs with silver tin foil and sitting in it when they turn this thing on.

 

What the heck is "silver tin foil". Some kind of "paper"? Or metal made from silver and tin.

Anyway, typical of the junk responses we get so often in Sciforums.

To answer the more thoughtful response above, CERN is publishing yet another safety review which they say they'll publish on the internet towards the end of February, 2008. Other scientists are becoming concerned, in part because the continuing assurances by CERN that the "cosmic ray argument" for microblackholes proves the LHC safe, has been demolished. Nature would create such microblackholes at near-relativisitc speeds, and they'd pass harmlessly through earth. The LHC would create a least a small percentage "at rest" where they could accumulate in earth. See Wikipedia at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#Safety_concerns_and_assurances

That section was authored by a noted Wikipedian [not myself] who has close professional ties to at least one Nobel prize winner.

As to why the media does not get involved as much, good question. They do more so in Europe, but that is no excuse.

Why don't you query your local media?

Regards,

 

Except that it hasn't. If micro black holes were stable and produced at TeV energies, then they would be everywhere. As Rpenner on PhysOrg points out, they would form a thermal 'gas' throughout the universe and so there would be several near Earth and moving below escape velocity. They would be pulled into the middle of the Earth and start oscillating. If they were dangerous, they would have already destroyed the Earth. They certainly would have destroyed things like 10 billion year old stars.

The universe is 13+ billion years old. A micro black hole created moving at relativistic speeds relative to some other stellar object could, indeed would, be moving at very slow speeds relative to us. If black holes were such a danger, we've been in such a danger for a very very long time. Yet here we are.

At least put some thought into it. If cosmic rays bombard the Earth all the time with more than a TeV of energy, think of all the black holes we'd have in the universe after 13 billion years. Yet we, and other stellar objects, remain. Implication? Either micro black holes aren't stable or they don't interact with stellar objects fast enough to be a danger over cosmic time scales. Either way, we're safe.

 

Micheal your problem here may be a form of escapism. You have spoke much about your life but it does not seem to contain any comments on relationships with anyone.

Do you think the anxiety stems from other areas?

 

Your obviously not a scientist but just some Joe Blow who has named himself after a German composer.

I suggest you look up Faraday Cage

 

Actually, I was named by my parents [what a novelty], not by myself. The only German composer I know of with a similar name is Richard Wagner. Are you confusing him with me?

Your idea that a Faraday cage would protect you is ...

Anyway, I'll not be responding further to this banality.

 

Actually, the implication is that we likely do have lots of micro black holes [check into primordial black holes]. Imagine one travelling at 0.001c some distance away from earth, and then infalling. It would speed up, strike earth at a little faster speed [but anything out there infalling would, by definition, strike earth at greater than escape velocity, right?], and pass right through our planet. It would absorb nucleons during its transit of earth dependent upon its 'diameter' or schwarzschild radius. [Imagine a tiny tunnel drilled through earth the diameter of 1 Angstrom]. The big ones [on the order of 1E12 Kg, according to Wikipedia], the kinds that Hawking envisioned would last some 13 billions years before ending their evaporation in a final evaporative frenzy, would possibly absorb some 1E20 nucleons during transit. Earth could be hit by millions per year, and we'd never even notice the mass loss. Think how many more we could be hit with that were that much smaller, and absorb that much less mass during transit, and we'd never notice. Only if we make them so that they have a speed while transiting earth of less than escape velocity could they accrete and grow, because they would repeatedly pass through earth and grow larger, absorbing more and more with each pass. That's why miniblackholes are considered by some to be a good candidate for the missing dark matter of our galaxy. We can't detect them, unless one happened to drift REAL SLOW past a star, get pulled in gravitationally, and absorb enough mass during transit to slow it just below escape velocity. Then, the poor star's a goner. But, as you indicated, any that would be created by striking earth are certainly not going real slow relative to earth [and since we sit nearly unmoving in the Milky Way, also relative to our galaxy], but are traveling at nearly c. Hardly a candidate for stopping in a star.

Regards,

 

Looking forward to the new CERN report.

Do you have any references or links to papers or names of these scientists? I'd be interested in reading some more in-depth about it.

Which Wikipedian?

Well, I live in a pretty small country, I am only 22, and I know nothing about physics more than the average guy and would probably just end up looking more like a paranoid lunatic than a legitimately concerned citizen, and the attention would soon, if not immediately, drive away from the actual issues if I actually ended up getting the attention from the media in the first place. Only people knowing what this is about at the technical level will be able to get anything done. Speaking of which, I'm curious what have and are you doing to raise awareness?

 

Hm. I don't really think I'll worry anymore about this before someone more qualified (like a physicist with actual credentials in academia) has the same concerns. If there are someone out there that you know about, please tell me.

Michael83, I suggest you try to do the same thing. In conquering all kinds of fears and worries, a combination of positive distractions to keep your mind occupied, and facing your fears slowly, seem to be very effective methods, just give it some time.

I guess rpenners posts about WLW at physorg says what I needed to know for now.

See:
forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=5684&st=210
and
forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=5684&st=240
and
forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=5684&st=330