If you were worried by the Large Hadron Collider, prepare yourself for a shock, Monster machine, black holes, strangelets, CERN LHC

It's the Holiday even though I get to work. So I will email him tomorrow night instead.

Hoppy easter Everybody!

But I will keep adding info as I find it. This here is a PDF paper by tom.

[link to static.twoday.net]

------------------------------------------------------------
​

This is an alternate link for the article we have already, in case you can't get it to load.:

[link to www.slideshare.net]

And here is the 1st article that we could not originally find for free:

EARTH PRECESSION AND MICRO BLACK HOLES
[link to www.slideshare.net]


***I was able to download both of these 2 Nexus articels to my computer. ****

Last Edited by Elouina on 04/20/2014 04:18 AM

Or you might ask the question, LHC is just 1 40 millionth of the power of cosmic rays...how is that dangerous ?

Sounds like water down the sinkhole!

[link to youtu.be]

Very cool, The Sky at Night last month was all about the sounds of the Cosmos, I hope this clip will play in the US

[link to www.bbc.co.uk]

Happy Easter.

Thanks for finding the other article, I started reading it but it's quite involved so I will have a closer look tomorrow. One thing that struck me was that it was written before the re-evaluation of the frequency of big meteor airbursts, I wonder if that would help to fill out the picture.


Thread: Chelyabinsk sized meteorite impacts are more frequent than previously believed

[link to www.nature.com]

No, I don't think there is any relation to Toms theory. The reason being that they upgraded the frequency of those big meteor airburst explosions to every few hundred years. Tom was discussing explosions that are a bajillion times more frequent.

Total nonsense. Published for the primary reason to scare people and make money.

Yup, jobs for mathematicians masquerading as physicists.

ancient GLP'ers remember those PPZZZZZZZ-BLAZAR IS COMING threads
they already opened Pandora's Box

Martin Rees and Frank Close were both expressing genuine concerns and the review at RHIC ( and later LHC [link to cds.cern.ch] ) did take place, here it is [link to arxiv.org]

+1

And "Sir" Martin Astronomer-Fuckface is one of the biggest quacks to ever draw breath.

I'm sure he holds you in high regard too.

There may be an unexpected twist in the tail, it may not appeal to the most sceptical reader but it must be mentioned. So far we have seen that the Pierre Auger observatory is detecting the air showers from ultra high energy cosmic rays which had the energy of many tens of millions of times higher than we could generate in the RHIC, Tevatron or LHC.

There is a theoretical limit in the energy that a cosmic ray ( that has travelled some distance ) can have, it's 5e+19 eV ( 5 followed by nineteen zeroes ). This level is called the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin limit or GZK limit for short. The PAO has seen a small number of particles at energies higher than the GZK limit. This is a concern for physicists because it contradicts the current understanding of particle physics.

One group of scientists has submitted a paper with a radical explanation, that these ultra high energy cosmic rays are actually made of strangelets, the very matter we were so worried about creating in the RHIC and LHC.

[link to arxiv.org]

Whats more, and this is even further down the rabbit hole, it is just about possible that unexplained patterns observed in earthquakes could be due to small lumps of strange quark matter passing through the Earth.

[link to arxiv.org]

I think by now the PAO deserves a direct link.

[link to www.auger.org]

and just look at the beautiful skies they get

[link to vimeo.com]

Oh wow. That's probably one of the scariest things I've read.

So dim-witted these scientists are allowed to tinker with things so incredibly powerful and beyond human brain comprehension... Innocent people pay the price with their lives,

You title and opening post are insinuating that PAO is a collider with many times the power of the LHC, is it not ?

If it is, it's blatantly a false premise.

A collector and a collider are about as similar as an apple and a potato.

That's why I asked

So you knew that the LHC was the worlds most powerful man made particle collider and you were intrigued, good.

The purpose of the title is to attract people who are uneasy about the LHC and colliders in general. Doing a search I found lots of doomsday CERN and LHC threads full of different concerns.

I was struggling with how to end the first post. PAO is equivalent to ALICE, ATLAS or CMS but nobody has heard of them and collisions with energies many orders of magnitude higher than LHC are happening over the PAO every day. I think the combination of UHECR distant source, atmospheric collisions and the PAO detectors is equivalent to the LHC, but on a mind bending scale.

I first heard about PAO a couple of years ago and was struck by its enormous size and the phenomenal energies of particles it was recording as well as its 1% of LHC pricetag. The existence of ultra high energy cosmic rays like the oh-my-god particle is the main argument used by physicists as to why the LHC and other colliders should not be feared, and that was the point of my thread.

To be honest very little LHC concern was expressed, I think maybe people fear the CERN organization more than the machine and the PAO scientists look like a friendly bunch.

So thanks for your feedback, I think I came close enough to the line without stepping over it, like a salesman or a lawyer maybe ;)

Wow, those threads are linked together like spaghetti. So the upshot is we all died 3 years ago? Sorry I don't have time to read 40 pages of doom ;) I think these worries crop up quite frequently but until colliders can exceed the energies of cosmic rays we call all sleep easy.

Except that none of that actually exists.

A high-energy particle from space is not like a beam of particles in a collider, that was my point.

One goes right through you on a regular basis, the other would punch a small hole right through you if you somehow got in the way of the beam itself.

This is a matter of single particle collisions Vs a beam of particles, one carries a much higher magnitude.

Just wanted to make the differentiation.

I agree about sensationalist journalism, especially where physics are concerned. Was just having this conversation with someone the other day while they were freaking out about the IceCube detector.

Yes they are quantitatively and qualitatively different. The LHC as you say produces a beam with a tremendous number of particles, so that the sum of their kinetic energies is something like an express train, that results in a lot of hot graphite in the event of a beam dump. I read somewhere about an accident at a smaller collider that resulted in the beam cutting through the steel beam pipe. The advantage this gives the LHC is that 100 billion protons gives you the chance to spot rare events and ghostly particles.

PAO on the other hand can study individual collisions at energies the LHC can't hope to reach but so far it has only seen 2 collisions of the very highest energy level.

Could you be a little more specific?

Here is a thought. Every second your body is bombarded by 200 cosmic rays in the GeV that's 1,000,000,000 eV range. You are your own mini particle detector. Anyone got super powers yet?

[link to scienceblogs.com]

Low energy collisions are far more dangerous then the higher energy collisions.

I wouldn't worry about black holes.

Conventional science would tell you that all you need to do is get enough matter in a small enough space to create a black hole.

It's BS....


Besides, it doesn't take much real thinking to realize how much garbage science is out there.

Just look at all the videos you guys posted about sound in the cosmos.


Here's a tip, light and sound are basicaly the same thing. Light speed is the fastest you can go right... but at what speed does light travel... it slows down and speeds up depending on the matter it is traveling through, sound has the same properties.

You wanna know what travels faster than light? Sound does, through ultra dense material, FACT. What happens to the sound energy traveling through ultra dense matter as it runs out, IE the sound traveling through a stars mass hits the boundary between dense matter and space, well that energy has to go some where, it get converted into another type of radiation.


Black holes are a bs idea, maybe you should ask them what type of black hole, cause there are 4 proposed types, and ask them which universe is said black hole going to appear in cause there are 3 of those.

Here, this guy does a better job explaining this than me:

I'll add this as well.


The definition of a black hole is determined by matter in a planck length.


What's a planck length? Well most physicists would give you the wrong answer, saying something like:

1.616199(97)×10−35 metres.



Here's a more fitting description:

First, protons and electrons are not the only particles. A particle that interacts much less that a proton or electron, and can therefore get much closer to other particles, is the neutrino. Electrons and protons are "fermions": two of the same particle cannot exist in the same place at the same time. A neutrino has no electric charge and is a "boson": the number of neutrinos that can exist on top of each other, that can even pass through each other, is unlimited.

The Plank length is the smallest distance that can be measured. This does not mean that the distance between two objects cannot be less, but that any distance you measure will be so uncertain that nobody will know for certain that the distance is less. Many of the limits within quantum physics apply more to measurement than to existence. If no distance measurement less than 1e-35m can ever be measured, then there is no way to verify whether or not such a distance can exist. You could say it is more a limit to what we can know rather than what can be.

Dr. Ken Mellendorf
Physics Instructor
Illinois Central College





Now do you understand that they are defining a theoretical object based on a limitation of human measurement, rather than the limitations of what the universe can do?

It's already by shown by liquid helium that at extreme high temperatures, and extreme low temperatures, matter changes into something more like a plasma, it just compress to something harder than diamonds and neutron stars.




It's assumptions built on misinterpretations.

I think they said the risk of strangelet production ( very, very small ) was even smaller in the more powerful LHC than it was in the RHIC

[link to news.bbc.co.uk]

Like a lot of things there is an inverse power relationship between energy of cosmic rays and their frequency like this nice graph shows.

[link to upload.wikimedia.org]

So the most powerful events occur at less than one event per 100 km^2 per year. At the other end of the scale you have 1 GeV cosmic rays appearing at a rate of 1000 per m^2 per second.

OK, tell me what happens when the escape velocity at the surface of a star ( call it Rs ) exceeds the speed of light?

I have read the first article now, thanks. I wonder what Tom would have to do to turn his idea into a theory that a) makes strong predictions and b) is falsifiable?

Trying to find/measure and store *subtle energy*

It's the new rage, didn't you get the memo?

Last Edited by Tampa Heather on 04/22/2014 09:23 AM