It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Fight to save Earth from tiny black hole

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 08:51 PM
Even if Hawkings is Wrong

"Still, let's assume that even if Hawking is a genius, he's wrong, and that such black holes are more stable," Landsberg said. Nearly all of the black holes will be traveling fast enough from the accelerator to escape Earth's gravity. "Even if you produced 10 million black holes a year, only 10 would basically get trapped, orbiting around its center," Landsberg said.

However, such trapped black holes are so tiny, they could pass through a block of iron the distance from the Earth to the Moon and not hit anything. They would each take about 100 hours to gobble up one proton.

At that rate, even if one did not take into account the fact that each black hole would slow down every time it gobbled up a proton, and thus suck down matter at an even slower rate, "about 100 protons would be destroyed every year by such a black hole, so it would take much more than the age of universe to destroy even one milligram of Earth material," Landsberg concluded. "It's quite hard to destroy the Earth."

As I remember it, the Hawkings effect has been observed, just not proven. They have seen energy emitting from tiny black holes, they just having proven why or how.

That's what I remember, but I could be wrong.

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 09:17 PM
reply to post by Sublime620

That's more comforting, but about the Hawking Radiation being observed: it was only observed in computer models I believe.

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 09:24 PM
Did you know that United States had the first one? How come they aren't being sued. So if the US Government can do this and not harm the earth then the people in Switzerland can do it too. im sure the government wouldn't test something that turns the world inside out killing EVERY SINGLE PERSON on earth including the government because that would be pointless. But the one in Europe is much bigger than the one in the US.

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 09:43 PM
My opinion on this,m is that eventually we are going to start rreaching tech that could potentially des... oh wait. we already have. And we're still here. Fair play to us then.
Alright, that aside, the more we learn, the bigger the explosion our mistakes could make. (Or implosion in this case actually [I think anyway...]) IF we want to get out there and see the stars up close, we have to tackle and master dangerous things. We have to start somewhere. We can sit on it forever, since I don't think this could ever be entirely safe, or take the risk and get it done.

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:13 PM
Putting a hole in space time is no small matter. I suppose it could eat earth and then dissipate. We are to far away I suspect from other matter for it to continue to exists after it eats the earth. The matter here just is not enough to keep it going. Of course there is the possibility that we might see some evidence of the black hole before it is created since it puts a hole in space time. Maybe that crazy tsunami had a cause after all.

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:21 PM

Originally posted by LDragonFire

Although CERN scientists have already ruled out the possibility in a safety review, Mr Wagner and Mr Sancho say there is at least a small chance of annihilation of the planet and perhaps the universe.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

The only thing I'd be concerned about is the stupidity of the scientists involved. Really... the annihilation of the universe?
Oh Satan I grow bored of the ignorance.

[edit on 2-4-2008 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:31 PM
Just wanted to lend my support to this incredible thread. Ldragonfire I hope you keep us abreast of the situation, I for one will be watching this thread.

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 12:22 AM
Now, I don't believe what I'm about to say for a second. I'm just throwing a "what if" out there for people to mull over.

What if our governments have concluded that there is, in fact, an extraterrestrial threat? What if we attempted to reverse engineer their technology and weapons, but we failed miserably? What if the best we could make was CERN? What if the CERN is actually a giant hostage taking device, and our world leaders are basically planning to tell these aliens, "Back off or we'll annihilate the universe!!!"

Like I said, I don't believe it. I'm just asking "what if?"

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 07:06 AM
reply to post by antar

heh heh heh you said abreast...

ok anyway here is what we are talking about:

And some one mentioned aliens intervening in case of potential disaster.

I do find it interesting is is so far behind it's intended start up date. I believe is was meant to go online in 05 or 06.

In response to a serious shortfall in its budget that came to light last year, CERN looks set to delay the start-up of its Large Hadron Collider (LHC) by twelve months. The measure is part of a new long-term plan published by the lab’s management, which proposes the transfer of SFr500m – about £210m – from other areas of CERN’s budget to pay for the collider. According to the plan, the LHC would not collide its first protons until April 2007.
CERN delays collider start-up

The above article is from Mar 27, 2002

And some more information about the people involved:

Wagner, who studied physics and conducted cosmic ray research at the University of California-Berkeley, claims a restraining order on Fermilab and the Energy Department, which helps supply the accelerator's superconducting magnets, would shut down CERN's Large Hadron Collider, the newspaper said. He said CERN hasn't properly addressed concerns that the research conducted at the collider might create a miniature black hole or some other form of matter that might destroy the Earth, the newspaper said.

The LHC, which has been operated by CERN since 1994, aims to create as near as possible conditions which existed in the Universe a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang when particles collided at great speed, thus giving physicists an insight into the Universe's origins. "Researchers will sift the debris from these primordial recreations for clues to the nature of mass and new forces and symmetries of nature," reports the New York Times. The 27-kilometre accelerator built to conduct this experiment on the France-Switzerland border will commence its latest experiments in particle smashing in May
Injunction sought against Large Hadron Collider

So if I'm correct it's supposed to go online next month?

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 07:31 AM
You know I was thinking:

When Gates tested windows for the first time live, didn't he get the 'blue screen of death'?

In all seriousness, what if something similar happens with this thing?

I mean, most of us are agreeing that the risk is astronomically small (pun is fun) that it will gobble up the planet, because of how infintestimal these mini-black holes are. But what if Black Hole 2008 gets a 'blue screen'? Will it spiral out of control? What if they forgot to carry a zero when they were programing it? Will it create a black hole the size of a hockey-puck?

[edit on 073030p://3u23 by Lucid Lunacy]

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 07:36 AM
So everyone's concern seems to be a black hole, but I ran into this article...

"Time travellers from the future 'could be here in weeks'"

Just bring on "The End" already and everyone just hang on and go for the ride...


posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 07:37 AM
It was on of yesterday - the smallest black hole ever found, only 2.8 times larger than the Sun. As long as we can simmulate the conditions in this black hole, I say - YES, we can create a black hole. We only need to bend space to a small portion of space, and the matter will fall into it. However, I am not sure if the black home could be self-sustainable ... but there is hope it could !

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 07:39 AM
reply to post by RabbitChaser

Dead Link.

Can you highlight the key points for us here?

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 08:11 AM
It's not the astronomically low chance that bothers' me, Its the result.

If you were to say there's an astronomically low chance it will empty your bank account, that's one thing. If you say the chance is your right leg will be shorter than your left, that's another.

But the stakes on the theoretical table (the premise we seem to all be accepting here) are 'total' annihilation. Hmmm, high stakes no? So tell me, considering the potential loss, who has the right to say no one other than our illustrious and esteemed scientists should have a say in whether this particular experiment should proceed?

If I were you next door neighbor, and you knew I was tinkering with something that could destroy not only my home, but yours as well, is it unreasonable to demand an opportunity to 'stay' the 'experiment?'

I don't care to discover just how 'experimental' their experiments are. I'm sure you must all be aware of the problem; it's not what we know, it's what we DON'T know that troubles us here. Now, I'm not one for the suppression of science, frankly, physics, for me, is like baseball for some - I'm an aficionado of the field.

But I must say, NOTHING, including what we see as the 'potential for discovery', should override a person's right to demand satisfaction that their safety and well-being are not being cast aside as inconsequential or 'acceptable' risk.

After all, if a catastrophe is precipitated by this bold experiment (even if the result is not total annihilation) what are the scientist going to say to those subject to the devastation? "Oops! Sorry, science and all that, you know?"

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 08:20 AM
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

This may be what he was referencing:

The research of Stephen Hawking, Albert Einstein and the physicist Kip Thorne has shown that time travel is theoretically possible, but no-one has yet found a way to produce the energy necessary to keep a "wormhole" open.

Telegraph Article Source for Above

The 2 would tie in nicely together...To achieve time travel, one would need an incredible amount of energy. So much so, to maintain an open wormhole.

A particle collider/accelerator seems it would do the trick.

Just my $.02


posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 08:26 AM
The collider tunnel contains two pipes enclosed within superconducting magnets cooled by liquid helium, each pipe containing a proton beam.

Could someone explain please how exactly it works? Is a particle inside the tunnel held by the magnets so it stays in the centre of the 'tube' and doesn't come in contact with the walls?

If so, then if a black hole is created how can it get out of control if it is held safely by the superconducting magnets?

Excuse my ignorance.

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 08:50 AM

Originally posted by dramafreak
The collider tunnel contains two pipes enclosed within superconducting magnets cooled by liquid helium, each pipe containing a proton beam.

Could someone explain please how exactly it works? Is a particle inside the tunnel held by the magnets so it stays in the centre of the 'tube' and doesn't come in contact with the walls?

If so, then if a black hole is created how can it get out of control if it is held safely by the superconducting magnets?

Excuse my ignorance.

You are not ignorant at all. The question is very appropriate. If we assume that using magnetic repulsion and attraction you can create a sort of invisible magnetic tube within the collider, the particle trapped in this tube will never be able to slide or float towards the physical 'wall' or surface of the collider's tube.

Of course, that is assuming that the 'particle' in question does not change it's magnetic character through its 'lifetime' (i.e. it's stable) if it should change (become more or less positive or negatively charged) over time the magnetic tube would have to be adjusted accordingly to keep it 'centered'.

Of course, scientists are 'confident' that they can control the particle, once created. The only minor concerns being, if they are wrong, if something fails in the system, if they are not aware of the actual changes that might happen to a particle, if the particle isn't actually stable as they predict..., then we all die. Oh well.

[edit on 3-4-2008 by Maxmars]

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 09:18 AM
Those pesky scientists - now why when they say they are confident of something, it doesn't exactly make me sleep easier at night?

Define irony - scientists seeking what created the earth end up destroying it!

I read somewhere that this thing cost in the region of 4billion Euros and will take up to 10 years to disseminate the information gleaned. What is the point of such cost when they could just come on ATS and learn everything there is to know about the universe, and not even for a subscription fee?


posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 09:18 AM
reply to post by RabbitChaser

I just started a thread on that subject. I can only search so much I guess but I should have known someone would mention it.

Anyway, IMO a large majority of scientists would not only risk their own lives to prove theory but I'm sure they have no problem risking all of our lives and the planet as well.

Remember, theory is just another term meaning "educated guess".

posted on Apr, 3 2008 @ 12:39 PM
Oh for heavens sake, throughout history people have done this, worried abotu thigns with odds so small the numbers are incredible. Did you know they worried aboutthe atom bomb? They thought it might cause a chain reaction with the hydrogen in the atmosphere.

The fact is that yes, it's possible, but the odds of it being even probable are so very small that it's worth the risk to find out more about our amazing universe. It's like banning nanotech research or genetic engineering. In the end there are risks but they can be minimised, and if we don't take these risks, as humans always have done, then our race will become static. We'll be stuck here on this dust ball until something comes along to wipe us out. The men and women who took risks with their lives and the lives of others are why we can sit here, typing at computers, with high speed internet in an age where viewing video online has become the norm and space shuttle missions are often hardly news worthy.

Turn it on and start smashing those atoms i say.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in