It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance
Bang on! My thoughts exactly!
Without wishing to seem like a cad, I have to point out some things.
First of all, in order to have the sort of affects you are concerned about on the magnetic field of this planet, the LHC experiments would have to be drawing energy on a scale equivalent to that of a small stars daily output. They aren't, not even nearly, not even a legitimate fraction of the necessary power level.
The machinery and intention of the LHC experiment is to essentially look up the skirts of the universe, to observe directly the mysterious construction of her undercarriage, so to speak. This is a very different concept to something like the creation of atomic weaponry. Although the two watersheds of physics share some similarities, what with both involving concepts not widely understood in the periods to which they are relevant, they could not be more different in terms of the risks involved.
An atom bomb is still far more dangerous to the fate of the world, than the LHC, and if one leaves aside the possibility of one detonation leading to mutually assured destruction, that single nuke would still be more of a threat to human life, and the state of the planet as a whole, than the LHC running at increased power, even drastically more power than is currently planned for. They could run at another hundred percent of what power they are using now, and STILL fail to present a threat to the world as a whole, equal to that posed by a single psychotic fellow who likes to bludgeon people with a pair of hammers.
originally posted by: eriktheawful
1 Joule of energy is enough to light up a 1 watt LED for 1 second.
1 Joule is the same as 6.24×10^18 eV (electronvolts)
17 TeV is 1.7 x 10^13 eV (electronvolts)
So....17 TeV is not even enough to light a 1 watt LED up for 1 second.
Imagine how many electronvolts it takes to light up a 60 watt light bulb for hours.
When operating at design parameters, the LHC will have two beams of protons, where each beam consists of ~2800 individual bunches, and each bunch contains ~1011 protons. Each proton will have energy of 7 TeV, so the energy of each bunch of protons is ~ 7*1011 TeV, i.e., 110,000 Joules (or 110 kilo Joules). A bullet fired from a rifle typically weighs 4 grams, and can have speeds of up to 1000 m/s when it leaves the barrel. This corresponds to an energy of about 2000 Joules, i.e., roughly 1/55 the energy of one bunch of protons. Anti-tank shells (used in WW II) had energies anywhere from 150-800 kilo Joules.
An electron volt gives a proton enough kinetic energy to accelerate to 0.005 percent of the speed of light (3 x 108 meters per second). One trillion electron volts (TeV) would take it within a hair's breadth of the speed of light (99.999956 percent). But, again, one TeV is not big news, energy-wise; a TeV also holds roughly the kinetic energy of a fast-moving ant. The key difference, of course (and the reason why physicists are thrilled), is that an ant is much larger, and thus heavier (around 0.1 of a gram), than a proton (1.65 × 10-24 of a gram). So while a TeV may not seem like much by our standards, it is a huge amount of energy for a single proton. If you imagine bunches of protons, numbering in the tens of billions, whizzing toward each other at breakneck speed, with a few colliding every time they pass each other (based on probability), you can see why the LHC has become physicists' favorite new toy. According to CERN, each proton beam will be made up of 2808 bunches—and each bunch will consist of 1.15 × 1011 protons, once the LHC reaches its full potential. At its peak, then, each proton beam will have an energy of 362 megajoules (MJ), or over 200 times the energy of the Tevatron's beams (which is just over 100 kW hours, roughly half the average American family's weekly power use).
In their paper, Ali, Faizal, and Khalil offer a different interpretation for why mini black holes have not been detected at the LHC. They suggest that the current model of gravity that was used to predict the required energy level for black hole production is not quite accurate because it does not account for quantum effects.
According to Einstein's general theory of relativity, gravity can be thought of as the curvature of space and time. However, here the scientists point out that this geometry of space and time responsible for gravity gets deformed at the Planck scale. They have used the new theory of gravity's rainbow to account for this modification of the geometry of space and time near the Planck scale, where the mini black holes are predicted to exist.
Using gravity's rainbow, the scientists found that a little bit more energy is required to produce mini black holes at the LHC than previously thought. So far, the LHC has searched for mini black holes at energy levels below 5.3 TeV. According to gravity's rainbow, this energy is too low. Instead, the model predicts that black holes may form at energy levels of at least 9.5 TeV in six dimensions and 11.9 TeV in 10 dimensions. Since the LHC is designed to reach 14 TeV in future runs, these predicted energy requirements for black hole production should be accessible.
Read more at: phys.org...
In a new paper, physicists Ahmed Farag Ali, Mir Faizal, and Barun Majunder have shown that, according to a new generalization of Einstein's theory of gravity called "gravity's rainbow," it is not possible to define the position of the event horizon with arbitrary precision. If the event horizon can't be defined, then the black hole itself effectively does not exist.
"In gravity's rainbow, space does not exist below a certain minimum length, and time does not exist below a certain minimum time interval," Ali, a physicist at the Zewail City of Science and Technology and Benha University, both in Egypt, told Phys.org. "So, all objects existing in space and occurring at a time do not exist below that length and time interval [which are associated with the Planck scale]. As the event horizon is a place in space which exists at a point in time, it also does not exist below that scale."
When Ali talks about "all objects," he literally means everything around us, including ourselves.
Read more at: phys.org...
originally posted by: Raven1354
1. Are they going to try to open a gateway to a another dimension?
2. Is the picture on the above article link of a entity from another dimension? I don't believe its pareidolia due to its not gas or physical object in the vacuum tube but pure light!
3. What will happen if they power up yet cant dump the beam/power off the LHC what happens then? I don't think they even know?
4. Could this be what is talked about in the bible of opening the gates of hell? Entities that take over human bodies?
Crazy world we live in at the moment especially with all this slight of hand reporting and instigation of wars and economic collapse! Now throw in increased seismicity time to find your maker and ask for safe passage.
I will check back in later after I get a nap! My brain is strained after this weeks collection of data on lots of subjects and projects I am working on!
Stay Frosty and stay safe!
P.S. could use some help fixing links, qoute and vid embed thank you