There is one prediction I can make with certainty. Eventually our species will cease to exist - not necessarily due to climate change but for any number of eventualities including an asteroid or meteor impact or a super-volcano or solar flares or even because of what happens at CERN with the Large Hadron Collider - BUT, with a high degree of certainty, some time in the future the Earth will be so changed it won't be anything like it is now.
"...Citing the conclusion of a lengthy cycle in the ancient Mayan calendar, certain theorists anticipate the end of life as we know it on December 21, 2012. These theorists believe that on December 21, 2012, the Earth will experience unprecedented, cataclysmic disasters ranging from massive earthquakes and tsunamis to nuclear reactor melt-downs. Until that day arrives - if it arrives - people no doubt will continue to speculate endlessly about how and when it will all be over." (A. Horlings)
One of the scientists who worked on the Large Hadron Collider safety report said these "microscopic black holes could spark a scientific revolution."
Why would anyone want to generate a black hole on Earth? Those at the super-collider want to study it and any other particles made by smashing protons into each other at massive speed, as close to the speed of light as is currently possible. But how safe is it? Those defending the idea say that a lot more energy is expendable by cosmic rays smashing into the atmosphere on a daily basis and we are still in one piece; the Earth is still safe from that kind of bombardment so mini black holes should not be a problem. But as noted before by me, black holes absorb matter and they grow. The accretion might grow faster than they evaporate, if they do; that is, if Hawkings theory is correct and we don't know that, do we?
The safety study concluded that the micro-black holes would live only a moment and then cease to exist - it's energy lost via Hawking radiation in less time than any accretion would take place.
And it won't operation at full power for at least a year:
"The 17-mile-round underground ring on the French-Swiss border is being readied for its official startup next month or so, but the proton-on-proton action isn't likely to reach its peak energy of 14 trillion electron volts, or 14 TeV, until next year." cosmiclog@msnbc.com.
"...[T]here's a chance that the LHC might create microscopic
black holes - as well as supersymmetric dark-matter particles, quark-gluon plasma, the elusive Higgs boson (a.k.a. the "God Particle") and other exotic stuff."
Many times in history things have gone terribly wrong. Scientific theories are shifting paradigms. They must be testable and science benefits from the highest level of scrutiny. In this case the results could be catastrophic.
MJ Dinkel (msnbc.com) suggests (July 03, 2008) "If we manage to create a microscopic black hole in the fabric of space and time, it may continue to grow exponentially in size and rapidness (at the rate of the universe's expansion), consuming everything around it. Sayonara!..."
BUT the folks at CERN are not worried and about 2,600 scientists working on this project do not appear to be worried. I'm not a scientist. I am not the doctor. If they are wrong I hope the end comes really fast because I don't like the idea of being SLOWLY stretched to infinity. I get it. We're all going to die anyway.
CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research) says nature has already done over and over again what the LHC will do and we're still here. The LHC will give scientists an opportunity to look at the results under a microscope.
The LHC, like other particle accelerators, recreates the natural phenomena of cosmic rays under controlled laboratory conditions, enabling them to be studied in more detail. Cosmic rays are particles produced in outer space, some of which are accelerated to energies far exceeding those of the LHC. The energy and the rate at which they reach the Earth's atmosphere have been measured in experiments for some 70 years. Over the past billions of years, Nature has already generated on Earth as many collisions as about a million LHC experiments - and the planet still exists. Astronomers observe an enormous number of larger astronomical bodies throughout the Universe, all of which are also struck by cosmic rays. The Universe as a whole conducts more than 10 million million LHC-like experiments per second. The possibility of any dangerous consequences contradicts what astronomers see - stars and galaxies still exist.
Nature forms black holes when certain stars, much larger than our Sun, collapse on themselves at the end of their lives. They concentrate a very large amount of matter in a very small space. Speculations about microscopic black holes at the LHC refer to particles produced in the collisions of pairs of protons, each of which has an energy comparable to that of a mosquito in flight. Astronomical black holes are much heavier than anything that could be produced at the LHC.
According to the well-established properties of gravity, described by Einstein's relativity, it is impossible for microscopic black holes to be produced at the LHC. There are, however, some speculative theories that predict the production of such particles at the LHC. All these theories predict that these particles would disintegrate immediately. Black holes, therefore, would have no time to start accreting matter and to cause macroscopic effects.
Although theory predicts that microscopic black holes decay rapidly, even hypothetical stable black holes can be shown to be harmless by studying the consequences of their production by cosmic rays. Whilst collisions at the LHC differ from cosmic-ray collisions with astronomical bodies like the Earth in that new particles produced in LHC collisions tend to move more slowly than those produced by cosmic rays, one can still demonstrate their safety. The specific reasons for this depend whether the black holes are electrically charged, or neutral. Many stable black holes would be expected to be electrically charged, since they are created by charged particles. In this case they would interact with ordinary matter and be stopped while traversing the Earth or Sun, whether produced by cosmic rays or the LHC. The fact that the Earth and Sun are still here rules out the possibility that cosmic rays or the LHC could produce dangerous charged microscopic black holes. If stable microscopic black holes had no electric charge, their interactions with the Earth would be very weak. Those produced by cosmic rays would pass harmlessly through the Earth into space, whereas those produced by the LHC could remain on Earth. However, there are much larger and denser astronomical bodies than the Earth in the Universe. Black holes produced in cosmic-ray collisions with bodies such as neutron stars and white dwarf stars would be brought to rest. The continued existence of such dense bodies, as well as the Earth, rules out the possibility of the LHC producing any dangerous black holes.
Strangelet is the term given to a hypothetical microscopic lump of `strange matter' containing almost equal numbers of particles called up, down and strange quarks. According to most theoretical work, strangelets should change to ordinary matter within a thousand-millionth of a second. But could strangelets coalesce with ordinary matter and change it to strange matter? This question was first raised before the start up of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, RHIC, in 2000 in the United States. A study at the time showed that there was no cause for concern, and RHIC has now run for eight years, searching for strangelets without detecting any. At times, the LHC will run with beams of heavy nuclei, just as RHIC does. The LHC's beams will have more energy than RHIC, but this makes it even less likely that strangelets could form. It is difficult for strange matter to stick together in the high temperatures produced by such colliders, rather as ice does not form in hot water. In addition, quarks will be more dilute at the LHC than at RHIC, making it more difficult to assemble strange matter. Strangelet production at the LHC is therefore less likely than at RHIC, and experience there has already validated the arguments that strangelets cannot be produced.
There have been speculations that the Universe is not in its most stable configuration, and that perturbations caused by the LHC could tip it into a more stable state, called a vacuum bubble, in which we could not exist. If the LHC could do this, then so could cosmic-ray collisions. Since such vacuum bubbles have not been produced anywhere in the visible Universe, they will not be made by the LHC.
Magnetic monopoles are hypothetical particles with a single magnetic charge, either a north pole or a south pole. Some speculative theories suggest that, if they do exist, magnetic monopoles could cause protons to decay. These theories also say that such monopoles would be too heavy to be produced at the LHC. Nevertheless, if the magnetic monopoles were light enough to appear at the LHC, cosmic rays striking the Earth's atmosphere would already be making them, and the Earth would very effectively stop and trap them. The continued existence of the Earth and other astronomical bodies therefore rules out dangerous proton-eating magnetic monopoles light enough to be produced at the LHC.
Other aspects of LHC safety:
Concern has recently been expressed that a 'runaway fusion reaction' might be created in the LHC carbon beam dump. The safety of the LHC beam dump had previously been reviewed by the relevant regulatory authorities of the CERN host states, France and Switzerland. The specific concerns expressed more recently have been addressed in a technical memorandum by Assmann et al. As they point out, fusion reactions can be maintained only in material compressed by some external pressure, such as that provided by gravity inside a star, a fission explosion in a thermonuclear device, a magnetic field in a Tokamak, or by continuing isotropic laser or particle beams in the case of inertial fusion. In the case of the LHC beam dump, it is struck once by the beam coming from a single direction. There is no countervailing pressure, so the dump material is not compressed, and no fusion is possible.
Concern has been expressed that a 'runaway fusion reaction' might be created in a nitrogen tank inside the LHC tunnel. There are no such nitrogen tanks. Moreover, the arguments in the previous paragraph prove that no fusion would be possible even if there were.
Finally, concern has also been expressed that the LHC beam might somehow trigger a 'Bose-Nova' in the liquid helium used to cool the LHC magnets. A study by Fairbairn and McElrath has clearly shown there is no possibility of the LHC beam triggering a fusion reaction in helium.
We recall that 'Bose-Novae' are known to be related to chemical reactions that release an infinitesimal amount of energy by nuclear standards. We also recall that helium is one of the most stable elements known, and that liquid helium has been used in many previous particle accelerators without mishap. The facts that helium is chemically inert and has no nuclear spin imply that no 'Bose-Nova' can be triggered in the superfluid helium used in the LHC.
So if they are right, we have nothing to fear but fear itself.
To-date the LHC has been plagued with technical problems and its startup has been delayed, this time, until November of 2009. The tentative plan is to test it at half power, not to turn it on at full energy for at least another year.
Q: What is the Large Hadron Collider?
The `LHC' is the largest, most expensive scientific experiment ever created. It is located along the French and Swiss border and it will collide tiny particles at nearly the speed of light to create conditions that may not have existed since the first fraction of a second after the big bang almost 14 billion years ago.
Q: Why all the concern now?
When funding for the LHC was approved decades ago, scientists believed that there was no reasonable danger. A few years ago CERN scientists predicted the LHC might create tiny particles called micro black holes at a rate of 1 per second.
Q: What is a micro black hole?
A micro black hole is a particle trillions of times smaller than an electron but it is so dense that any other particles it touches would be collapsed into it.
Q: Are micro black holes dangerous?
Unknown. CERN believes that micro black holes would either evaporate or grow too slowly to be dangerous. Other scientists believe micro black holes would not evaporate and might grow quickly. One scientists believes micro black holes might create dangerous radiation as it grows.
Dr. Otto Rössler's theory is that when an mBH (micro black hole)
accretes a charged particles they will not go straight into the
mBH, but will circulate around the mBH creating magnetic fields
that would strongly attract other charged particles thus
accelerating the growth rate.
Q: Do cosmic ray impacts with Earth prove the LHC is safe? This theory is flawed. Particles created from cosmic rays strikes with Earth travel at nearly the speed of light. If neutral micro black holes are created from cosmic ray impacts with Earth they would pass through Earth and into space adding to the dark matter (non-light emitting matter) in the universe. The LHC collides particles head on and some particles produced by the LHC will be slowed down enough to be captured by Earth.
Nuclear Physicist Walter L Wagner discovered that cosmic ray
impacts with Earth do not prove that LHC created micro black holes
would be safe. CERN promised to produce a new safety report in
response.
Q: Do physicists believe that micro black holes would evaporate? One Delphi study found that opinions of physicists differ significantly on their belief that micro black holes might evaporate or not.
Scientist James Blodgett conducted a survey of physicists in 2004
that found that physicists' estimates that Hawking radiation would
fail ranged from 0% to 50% (0%, 0%, 0.000000001%, 0.1%, 1%, 1%, 1%,
2%, 2%, 7%, 10%, 10%, 30%, 35%, and 50%).
Q: Dr. Hawking believes micro black holes could evaporate, could he be wrong?
Yes. Several theoretical scientists studied Dr. Hawking's theories and concluded that Dr. Hawking was mistaken, micro black holes would not evaporate.
"black holes do not radiate" [1]
"The possibility that non-radiating `mini' black holes exist should
be taken seriously; such holes could be part of the dark matter in
the Universe" [2]
"the effect [Hawking Radiation] does not exist." [3]
"2) infinitely delayed Hawking radiation; 3) infinitely weak
chargedness of black holes" [4]
"it is possible that... the behavior of the black hole is stable"
[5]
[1] arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0008016, Trans-Plankian Modes, Back-Reaction, and the Hawking Process, Prof. Dr. Adam D. Helfer (2000) [2] arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0304042v1, Do black holes radiate? Do black holes radiate? Prof. Dr. Adam D. Helfer (2003) [3] arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0607137, On the existence of black hole evaporation yet again On the existence of black hole evaporation yet again, Prof. VA Belinski Paper. (2006) [4] pdf Abraham-Solution to Schwarzschild Metric Implies That CERN Miniblack Holes Pose a Planetary Risk, Prof. Dr. Otto Rössler (2008) [5] arxiv.org/abs/0808.2631 On the Stability of Black Holes at the LHC, M. D. Maia, E. M. Monte (2008)
Q: Do cosmic ray impacts with Neutron stars prove the LHC is safe?
Unknown. Some scientists theorize that neutron stars or white dwarfs might stop cosmic rays, and because these types of stars to not disappear into black holes neither would Earth. Other scientists theorize that neutron stars and white dwarfs would not stop cosmic rays, so these stars do not provide safety proof.
Q: Would scientists purposefully risk danger to Earth?
Scientists have been willing to take calculated risks in the past. CERN scientists believe that the Large Hadron Collider is an extremely important experiment and they might be willing to accept some level of risk.
Q: Have any of CERN's particle physicists expressed any concerns?
Some CERN particle physicists may have some concerns [1] but they have been asked to represent LHC safety as zero risk regardless of personal opinion. [2]
"We don't want to know if it's possible we will blow up the
world-because, quite frankly, we already know the answer. And the
answer is, quite frankly, despite all the testing we will ever
do-yes. It's possible. That doesn't help us.
What we want to know is if we are going to destroy the world. And
we can't know this with certainty, but in reality, we don't really
care about certainty. We care about whether or not it's
probable-that is, likely, that we will destroy the world. So again,
possibility-irrelevant. Likelihood-key." [1]
"Chief Scientific Officer, Mr. Engelen passed an internal
memorandum to workers at CERN, asking them, regardless of personal
opinion, to affirm in all interviews that there were no risks
involved in the experiments, changing the previous assertion of
`minimal risk' " [2] Part 34, Page 18.
[1] RE: LHC Dangerous? by yy2bggggs on Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:27 pm UTC ,
XKCD (12 Apr 2008)
[2] Affidavit of Luis Sancho, US District Court Hawaii, Luis Sancho
(March 2008)
A century ago the radical theories of a young and inexperienced Dr. Albert Einstein were arrogantly rejected by the established physics community until proven correct by experimentation.
Today the genius of Professor Dr. Otto. E. Rössler is an inconvenient truth and his concerns similarly largely ignored as are calls by other senior scientists for independent safety review and to proceed slowly.
Nobel winning scientist Frank Wilczek recently joked (paraphrase) "If this does cause the end of the world, I will not only be very surprised but very embarrassed!". That pretty much sums it up!
KONO (April 20, 2009) says not to worry because
Buddha would smile
if the universe blows up:
"Don't worry even if they blew the Universe up it would regenerate and since no one is there to observe how long its taking to reform it would actually happen relatively fast and we would right back here on a Earth like planet with a new history to try and learn what the previous Universe failed to. Matter is neither created nor destroyed. This law is never violated even with regards to Quantum Tunneling. The Universe lives forever in a cycle of Death, Birth, and Rebirth... This is the Yin/Yang Duality that Buddha sought relief from. I like to think Buddha would smile at a Black Hole. How about you?"
Related Content
See the following websites for additional information:
www.inyourface.info/
www.lhcconcerns.com
www.lhcdefense.org
www.global-risk-sig.org
www.angelsanddemons.cern.ch/
wikipedia.org
www.mathematik
www.scientificblogging.com
http://arxiv.org
Permalink: http://inyourface.info/ArT/Sci/CaT.shtml
Today is Tuesday September 07, 2010