Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
fox123

The Hadron Collider

By fox123, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Father Ted

Father Ted

Posted
Posted

Apparently since the experiment all digital clocks have been going AWOL, the clock on my phone went 12 hours ahead and then 20 minutes back! It was also on the radio discussing it...

the_bowman

the_bowman

Posted
Posted
how the fook does a "magnet " fail ?

it's one of the simplest devices in the world to construct :dunno:

i'm losing confidence in these boffins

I think they're superconductivity electro-magnets :thumbup:

Zingari

Zingari

Posted
Posted
I think they're superconductivity electro-magnets :thumbup:

sorry , i thought it was one of those red horseshoe shaped things that you buy in toy shops :P

Fox You Forest

Fox You Forest

Posted
Posted
Apparently since the experiment all digital clocks have been going AWOL, the clock on my phone went 12 hours ahead and then 20 minutes back! It was also on the radio discussing it...

Dont talk wet. :giggle:

Daggers

Daggers

Posted
Posted
...he clock on my phone went 12 hours ahead and then 20 minutes back! It was also on the radio discussing it...

And this month's award for "Crappiest excuse for being late" goes to...

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Apparently since the experiment all digital clocks have been going AWOL, the clock on my phone went 12 hours ahead and then 20 minutes back! It was also on the radio discussing it...

Your clock's gone AWOL??

Bloody clocks, you take your eye off em for a moment and they just bugger off! :P

Asha

Asha

Posted
Posted

To be fair to Father Ted, my clock is about 25 minutes behind, and that's only happened recently.

But I doubt it's anything to do with the LHC.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
Im not sure if im the first one to post this but. . . Were all gunna die!!!! :eek:

Not while it's switched off we're not.... and even when it's switched back on it is MASSIVELY unlikely

Zingari

Zingari

Posted
Posted

it's just been on the radio that loads of people have been attacked in the shower by their watches ,

i reckon they are probably seikos

Jaspa

Jaspa

Posted
Posted
You sure your not a Dyslexic Duck? :whistle:

Pretty sure yeh <_<

Not while it's switched off we're not.... and even when it's switched back on it is MASSIVELY unlikely

I know, i was joking :rolleyes:

lookwhaticando

lookwhaticando

Posted
Posted
it's just been on the radio that loads of people have been attacked in the shower by their watches ,

i reckon they are probably seikos

:crylaugh:

Has the thread title always been spelt wrong?

Must've been. :ermm:

Bert

Bert

Posted
Posted
Has the thread title always been spelt wrong?

No mate. Some people think they're hilarious.

  • 2 weeks later...
DB11

DB11

Posted
Posted

Greetings

Many people have asked the question : will the LHC create a black hole that will destroy the earth ?

Answer : No. Nyet. Non. Nein.

<insert your language's version of "NO !" here>

With 110% certainty. Without the slightest bit of doubt.

Why ? Let's go through this step-by-step. Please forgive me in advance for the CAPITAL letters from time to time. And this is a long answer.

a) It is clear people have in mind "black holes" of the type theorized by astronomers. Though it is not 100% certain that any actually have been seen (really), almost all are sure they exist.

These black holes are ENORMOUSLY, INCREDIBLY, HUGE, DENSE stellar objects, MANY times more massive than our entire solar system resulting from the collapse of a gigantic star. They MUST be this massive in order to be able 'trap' light and 'suck in matter' and become 'black'. Our Sun, hugely larger than the Earth, is not nearly big enough to create a black hole.

So, it goes without saying that there is NOT enough energy COMBINED in our entire Solar System, never mind our little accelerator at the LHC, to create these kinds of black holes. Remember E=mc^2 ? We cannot now, and will never in our future, create an accelerator with enough energy E to create any new particle with mass m greater than a dozen or so _individual atoms_, vastly vastly smaller than the tiniest speck of dust on the computer screen in front of you.

So WHAT are the media talking about ?

b) Theoretical physicists have developed a really terrific theory called the "Standard Model' which explains everything we have seen so far in the subatomic world. and I mean everything. BUT ! it does NOT account for gravity. Gravity is handled by Einstein's General Theory, which is a completely different type of theory than the SM. The ultimate goal for theorists is to construct a theory which can explain BOTH the Standard Model, and Gravity within a single mathematical theory.

**Now, there are many, MANY attempts to construct such a theory - lots and lots of weird and wacky ideas around trying to come up with a solution. NOTE ! so far NOT ONE of these ideas has ANY basis in experimental fact. Zero. Nada. It is probably the toughest problem modern theorists are facing, and so they are trying very hard to come with an idea, any idea, that _might_ work.

Some theories have more exotic ideas than others. And not are "created equal", in other words, some ideas are weirder than others.

Now one particularly _unlikely_ idea is that there are 'higher dimensions' of space and time. One (remember, of _many_) theory states that there may be the remotest of remotest of chance that the LHC _might_ be able to create new types of particle related to these higher dimensions of space. Some marketing genius (I am joking) called some of these hypothetical new particles "quantum black holes". Perhaps to generate media interest in the wildly hypothetical idea of extra dimensions.

Well, did it ever generate interest ! BUT BUT BUT !, these new objects are NOT, repeat are NOT, the same as an astronomer's "black hole". They are something TOTALLY DIFFERENT, which would weigh the same as about a _half-dozen_ gold or lead atoms, and live less than a billionth of billionth of a second before decaying into other particles. It turns out to be very unfortunate that those theorists chose the name "quantum black hole".

OK, I think we can all agree that something weighing the same as a half-dozen atoms and living less than a billionth of a billionth of a second is not going to be 'sucking' anything into it. Never mind that it is hugely improbable that these things even exist in the first place.

We are safe.

So why the fuss ?

c) People in the media heard 'black hole', probably assumed it meant the same as the enormous astronomical objects in space, and thought: "if we make one of those, it'll destroy the earth !'.

But of course, the theory including higher dimension does NOT describe this type of black hole, and moreover, that theory was very very hypothetical, much more so than others.

Think about it : did any of the media reports you read refer to any credible scientific sources for their claim ? No, they didn't, because there aren't any. No, they always refer to 'critics', or 'some people say', or other vague phrases. This way wild media stories run away from reality.

Ah, you say, but you are just giving me a 'theory', which could be wrong.

d) NO ! As we speak, the earth is being bombarded by cosmic rays with energies MUCH MUCH HIGHER than the LHC, as has been doing so for billions of years. Even if you do not believe a word written above, you must agree that if the LHC could create a destructive black hole (worse than crazy !) then Nature will have done it already with cosmic rays. It hasn't. Not here, nor on the moon, nor on the Sun or any other cosmic body, all of which are being bombarded with extremely high energy cosmic rays.

Conclusion : there is absolutely nothing to worry about. This is an example of a media story gone crazy, kind of like Orson Welles' famous

"war of the World's" radio broadcast in 1938.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War..._Worlds_(radio)

If you would like a more technical explanation of why the LHC is safe, but still very readable, look here:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.3414

best regards,

Marcello

P.S. please tell all your friends also not to worry.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...