Black holes in cern - Page 5
Forum Index > General Forum |
Archaic
United States4024 Posts
| ||
HamerD
United Kingdom1922 Posts
| ||
Wizard
Poland5055 Posts
| ||
FragKrag
United States11530 Posts
| ||
Asta
Germany3491 Posts
There are many many people who believe in the wildest things like telekinesis and ever since the quantum theory was developed they use it to give their bullshit a 'scientific' background. They say, 'according to quantum theory, everything is possible; so maybe quantum effects in your brain could effect matter all over the world'. They just don't understand what it means that an event has a probability of 10^(-15) to happen in any given year. So, to anyone who argued in that direction: On June 09 2008 06:21 ilj.psa wrote: To me even a "small chance" of destroying the Earth. Its something we should take an second look at No, even that depends on the smallness of the chance because if it is small enough, it might not even be worth that second look. | ||
aqui
Germany1023 Posts
On June 09 2008 07:26 Asta wrote: It's actually a common problem when your average Jack encounters quantum theory (or many other statistical topics): people just can't comprehend the numbers if they aren't good at math. There are many many people who believe in the wildest things like telekinesis and ever since the quantum theory was developed they use it to give their bullshit a 'scientific' background. They say, 'according to quantum theory, everything is possible; so maybe quantum effects in your brain could effect matter all over the world'. They just don't understand what it means that an event has a probability of 10^(-15) to happen in any given year. So, to anyone who argued in that direction: No, even that depends on the smallness of the chance because if it is small enough, it might not even be worth that second look. miniscule propabilities can mess up actual measurements in a way that you cant calculate an expactation value. at the right place/time in an chaotic process a tunneling proton or whatever can make quite a mess with your experiment. ofc this is has nothing to do with the lhc :p | ||
HanN00b
Germany1441 Posts
| ||
aqui
Germany1023 Posts
On June 09 2008 02:41 EAGER-beaver wrote: All this speculation over black holes is really kooky. As the article and many people have already pointed out, the earth gets bombarded with cosmic radiation millions of times more powerful then the latest cern particle accelerator can provide. Ultimately I think this accelerator is just another huge money sink. Solar arrays that attempt to collect information about comsic rays (at a fraction of a cost) could provide answers that would push theoretical physics much further then cern could ever hope to, but only the Japanese are trying this direction. whatever you mean by solar array, you know that a detector like atlas weights about 7k tons? its not like you could buckle that on an 747 an fly circles in the higher atmosphere... | ||
sith
United States2474 Posts
On June 09 2008 05:44 micronesia wrote: People are starting to exaggerate again so I'd like to complain. You should be 'shot'? I'm sure that was an intentional overstatement, but still, nobody has a 100% firm grasp on black holes, so it's unfair to expect the average forum goer to be comfortable talking about what is generally accepted about black holes by the scientific community. Being mad that people are complaining without the formal training is all well and good, but when the issue is whether or not the topic will severely affect the lives of those without the formal training, it's understandable if they are still interested in participating. The idea that black holes 'usually form from a mass several times the size of our sun' automatically means a smaller one can't be formed in the laboratory? I hope you are right, but I don't think this is any kind of self-evident truth. Has it been proven to a reasonable degree of certainty that tiny black holes will evaporate? There certainly is a theory behind it, but I'm not willing to wager on it right now. edit: I'm not saying your scientific beliefs are wrong, but just that you should consider being more polite to those with less knowledge than yourself. Yes, the statement "you should be shot" was a complete exaggeration, and I will concede that this is something everyone has an interest in. However, if you have no formal training, DO NOT ACT LIKE YOU DO. Do not delude yourself into thinking that because you read up about something on wikipedia and some blogs, that you have a complete grasp of the subject matter. I admit right now that I categorize myself among those without formal training and I do not entirely understand the forces at work here. Also, I didn't say that it can't be formed in a laboratory, for all I know this is entirely possible. I merely stated that it would have to be formed in a laboratory with unnatural forces (i.e. not gravity). And if it was, it would not have time to do anything in particular besides evaporate. Even if it was determined that there was a minute likelihood of the black hole destroying us all, what do you suggest? We cease all funding to projects like this? As the scientist originally said there's probably more of a chance a bunch of dragons pop into existence and eat us all (which he was not joking about, there is a probability somewhere that shows this is entirely capable of happening) I apologize for the tone in which I wrote, it's just that in my mind there is nothing worse than someone acting and speculating with authority on a subject they are completely ignorant about. | ||
Luddite
United States2315 Posts
1) create a black hole (it's not powerful enough) 2) have that black hole not instantly disapear (as woudl be expected from such a small black hole 3) make a black hole that would have any effect (it would still have a mass of only like, 1 kilogram... that's not to do anything. How much gravitational force do you think 1 kilogram would have?) The people saying it *could* be dangerous are basically saying "well if everything we know about physics is wrong, then maybe this will kill us all." That's true, but it would be equally true to say "if everything we know about physics is wrong, maybe starting my car will kill us all." | ||
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
i think it is 100000 times more likely that you will kill all humanity by dropping a toothpick in a particular way. just relax. | ||
ArC_man
United States2798 Posts
On June 12 2008 14:04 Luddite wrote: As someone who is actually working on high energy physics research, I find this whole "debate" over the LHC hilarious. The reason physicists haven't bothered to "justify" whhy the LHC is safe is because it would never occur to a physicist that it would be unsafe. There's literally nothing in physics that would suggest that the LHC could 1) create a black hole (it's not powerful enough) 2) have that black hole not instantly disapear (as woudl be expected from such a small black hole 3) make a black hole that would have any effect (it would still have a mass of only like, 1 kilogram... that's not to do anything. How much gravitational force do you think 1 kilogram would have?) The people saying it *could* be dangerous are basically saying "well if everything we know about physics is wrong, then maybe this will kill us all." That's true, but it would be equally true to say "if everything we know about physics is wrong, maybe starting my car will kill us all." Yup. From what I've heard from seminars and talks, if one of these "black holes" created could destroy the Earth, it would've happened already (since these things are formed naturally also). Just like how the fusion reaction in ITER won't create a bomb, it doesn't have enough energy. | ||
goldenkrnboi
United States3104 Posts
On June 09 2008 01:10 H_ wrote: That would be hilarious. "Flight security, what's in that bag?" "A black hole." "JESUS CHRIST" i rofled honestly though, i'm a little disturbed about this, but if the experiment is allowed to be performed, then here's to hoping it doesn't end the entire freakin world. | ||
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
That is why we're doing it: we don't know what will happen. If they knew what would happen, they wouldn't need to do the experiment. There's no getting around this fact. The physicists are saying, "Trust us, we're experts." but the only use they're putting their expertise to here is to find things they don't understand, so they can play with them like children playing with matches. There's no urgent need for high-energy physics research on Earth, the only home of the only known life in the universe. There is too little to gain, and too much to lose by rushing to do this research on Earth instead of in space, where it can be properly isolated, and the potential for damage limited to the test apparatus. It's not a "small chance" or a "very small chance" or "an insignificant chance" of disaster, it's an unknown chance, because they're doing something unprecedented for the very reason that they don't understand it. | ||
Zalfor
United States1035 Posts
bush is probably going to go in looking for WMD tho at the lab. WMD there is... | ||
zuqbu
Germany797 Posts
Brian Cox: An inside tour of the world's biggest supercollider http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/253 It's not the first time mass media is creating a panic against the reasoning of science. They could be raging "Meteor coming!" or "Black Hole coming!" since every scientist will say, yes, it's just a matter of how long we'll have to wait as the probability is getting higher every day it does not happen. We might have to wait one million years but… ZOMG METEOR LET'S DUCK AND COVER | ||
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
To the people who are afraid of black holes being formed by the LHC: incoming particles from space regularly collide with particles in our atmosphere at far higher energies than the collisions that will occur inside the LHC. If those upper atmosphere collisions haven't produced any Earth-destroying black holes in the history of the Earth, then why would the much less energetic collisions in the LHC produce any? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-energy_cosmic_ray Topic over. | ||
betaben
681 Posts
hey guys! bear in mind that the same physicists that say it's safe are the ones who brought you the concept of the black hole too. They know more about their hypothetical model that they created than your fear of the unknown will tell you about something you've made up in your head because you don't really know what they're talking about. do you think just because you're scared of things you don't understand allows you to know more about the model they created? hell, some physicists believe black holes don't actually form completely. Why do you believe them when they tell you scary things, but not when they tell you it'll be ok? I sometimes think people just like to live in fear. Please also bear in mind that the same physicists that say there is a small chance of the end of the world-whatever happening are the same ones that would say there is a small chance of your next fart ending the world. so if you think small chances - no matter how small - are not worth taking, I'm expecting you to never fart. or breathe. or do anything. in fact, don't even do that. | ||
True_Spike
Poland3400 Posts
| ||
Schnake
Germany2819 Posts
On June 08 2008 22:52 HypnoticPoo wrote: Dr. Arkani-Hamed said concerning worries about the death of the Earth or universe, “Neither has any merit.” He pointed out that because of the dice-throwing nature of quantum physics, there was some probability of almost anything happening. There is some minuscule probability, he said, “the Large Hadron Collider might make dragons that might eat us up.” HAHA dragons. Exactly what I wanted to quote. ^^ The concerns are real for the public but scientists pretty much agree that there is no risk involved. So, the chance of anything bad happening at CERN, such as black holes is practically impossible. Black holes to appear: highly unlikely, even if, they would dissolve immediately Strange matter: exotic theory, no proof as of yet Magnetic monopoles: also theoretical, no evidence found yet (though scientists have been searching for it). Source:: http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/0,1518,544088,00.html (German) | ||
| ||