Large Hadron Collider Concerns

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by __your_Zahir_, Aug 10, 2008.

  1. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    That's highly amusing!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Not only is he much weaker in particle physics than he claims, apparently he didn't gain much from law school either!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    HAR!!!

    What a dope! (Is he actually qualified at anything besides growing flowers?)

    We can now add to his CV list:

    Fraud
    Crook
    Liar
    Charlatan

    and

    Dope
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    To rpenner:

    Thanks for the response. I think I get it now. There seems to be nothing wrong with my physics, but clearly I did not correctly appreciate what that physics and the existing moon implies. As I knew next to nothing about the parton+parton->black hole generation physics I was in some sense a victim of the anti-LHC forces' neutral black hole “bug-a-boo.” I did not understand why the latest safety reports only considered the neutral back hole. I thought they were ignoring the possibility of charging a neutral black hole. I knew that scattering would rapidly stop it / them, once charged. (Hell even air stops much more massive alpha particles in less than one third of a meter.)

    I agreed that the existence of distant neutron stars was “reassuring” but not “water tight” proof because perhaps, as the Argentine Auger experiment suggests, high energy cosmic rays could be very directional beams or relatively short duration on cosmic time scales. - Sort of “bullets” fired into space – not likely to hit many neutron stars, but that does not apply to the moon. We KNOW it is being hit by very high energy cosmic rays and that it is still there. That fact, combined with the physic for charging I outlined, I think, is very strong defense FOR the safety of the LHC against even against the “bug-a-boo” of a neutral black hole some of the anti-LHC forces fear.

    I now also understand why Walter is focused on “strangelets” – he knows about the charging physic I suggested and that Earth and moon are still here.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2008
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Lamont Cranston Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    137

    As far as I'm aware, he doesn't have a qualification in growing flowers. Could this be why he's so good at it??

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Good Point.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Not everything is done through book larnin'.
    Sounds to me like WLW is an amateur physicist with a good knowledge of the subject.

    He is worth his weight in gold here on SF as he always starts a good row.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2008
  8. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
  9. Dr Mabuse Percipient Thaumaturgist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    714
    They have put up webcams at the LHC so the world can observe the day to day happenings there and hopefully alleviate some of the fears.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Such strong language! rpenner this is a family place!
     
  11. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    There are actually some good papers around---it is one of the triumphs of effective field theories that you need to know only very little about the underlying theory to get some serious calculations done. If you're interested in this, we could try to find some papers from arXiv.
     
  12. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Thanks, but I am too old and lost deep interest in physic about 30 years ago when I became much more interested in how the mind works.

    BTW, I do not mind being called "goofball," especially since in this case I sort of deserved it. I had all the facts and should have put them together correctly, but was just so annoyed with the safety report saying they were calling the gravitational interaction a "Coulomb Interaction" only once far from where the section that did the gravitational analysis under that label, that I could not think clearly. I did not appreciate that this latest safety report was really a supplement to the earlier one and necessitated by the anti-LHC people construction of the neutral black hole "bug-a-boo." - Why it only addressed the gravitational interaction (was not ignoring and hiding the fact with the hidden definition of their, to me at least improper "Coulomb" label for a gravity force. - Usage of "Coulomb" may have changed since my time, but years ago it could never refer to gravity.)

    Anyway "goofball" is really mild, compared to "you sack of shit" etc. that I have been called here so my skin is quite tough from prior abuse. I took pleasure to learn that my physics was ok, just not integrated with fact we have a moon etc. I do really think that the moon is much better defensive argument than the distant neutron stars the safety report cites.

    First because if anyone (like me) knows that the neutral black hole can become charged by passing thru electron orbitals, the moon has plenty of electron orbitals but the neutron star has none.

    Secondly, as I explained, the Argentine Auger data strongly suggests that very high energy cosmic rays may resemble "cosmic bullets" not permanently generated spherical expansions from their source.

    I.e. one can argue, as I did, that the existence of neutron stars is "reassuring" but not "water tight" evidence as if these rays are short duration (on cosmic time scale) directed beams, most neutron stars would never have been hit by them. We KNOW the moon is at least now being hit by these high energy cosmic rays.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 12, 2008
  13. rpenner Fully Wired Staff Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    I disagree.

    For hypothetically stable sub-femtometer black holes, I beleive neutrons and protons (with the smaller Compton wavelength) would more easily be absorbed. Thus, in matter they should tend towards a postive charge.

    I believe that the data is suggestive that the likely source of such cosmic rays are extragalactic black holes (also known as Active Galactic Nuclei, AGN) and as such the neutron stars and white dwarfs in our galaxy should recieve roughly the same flux as we do. (I was under the impression that the majority of studied white dwarfs and neutron stars were in fact in our galaxy, less than 50 kpc away, and the Auger report describes correlation with extragalactic sources up to 75 Mpc away.) Extragalactic sources have long been favored by the astrophysical community since none of us wants a natural process capable of making 10^19 eV protons in our backyard.

    http://www.auger.org/news/PRagn/AGN_correlation.html
    http://arxiv.org/abs/0712.2843

    Thanks for not taking offense. I was reacting to your font changes more than your content.
     
  14. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    You are probably correct as know more than me, but it would seem too tough to call with confidence until one has a handle on exactly how improbable the Tiny Black Hole chance of "eating" an electron is on each pass thru the bound orbitals of atoms. In footnote I guessed that its chance of "localizing" an electron (as a "particle") inside the EH would be approximately the fraction of psi^2 inside the EH. This of course is some sort of dynaic function of time with possible two peaks as it passes the two sides of the orbit. (And about dozen other integrations to do - see my footnote for most of them.)

    I am 100% confident you are correct if the EH gets close to a barion (or quark?) but that rarely happens whereas the TBH will pass thru "zillions" of orbitals with each meter of advance.

    I.e it boils down to which is bigger:

    Much higher probability to eat the meal but rarely is any meal served.
    vs
    Very low probability to eat any served meal, but zillions of meals are served with each meter of travel.

    Hope I did not lose you in that sophisticated math.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    but I bet you get what I am trying to say.

    I must leave now - perhaps I can get back to the Auger stuff, but do not now have time to even visit your link. Thanks for it.
     
  15. Xelios We're setting you adrift idiot Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,447
  16. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
  17. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Nice one Billy. I found it on Amazon.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Have you sold many?
     
  18. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Only about 150. I wrote it to try to get more students into the hard sciences (by scaring them to wonder if its cosmic disaster is possible. - It is).

    It is not an “enthralling read”, as its purpose was to try to interest some people in physics who had no interest in that. So I did make the first four chapters background about the characters - where their ancestors came from, what happened to them, how they made their money, why one was killed by the Nazi etc. - Sort of a "hook." - Some people are like me in that if they read four chapters, they feel they might as well finish the book. If you a liberal arts student and read it you will painlessly learn some physics and hardly realize you are doing so.

    I rarely mention it – only when it directly relates to someone else’s post. I have never posted the cover as you did – thanks. (Where do I send the $5?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )
     
  19. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    The thing with books is that you can earn off them for years.
    If you wrote a book a year and could sell a thousand copies of each title per year, you would soon have a nice source of income. Different thread however, so lets get back to the LHC.
     
  20. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
  21. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
  22. Forceman May the force be with you Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    206
    When will the LHC experiment resume?
     
  23. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    They'll be taking it slow.
    Who knows, perhaps the design is not good enough to cope with the speeds they want to achieve.
    Bridges fail. Why not Large Hadron Colliders.
     

Share This Page