Scientists Not So Sure 'Doomsday Machine' Won't Destroy World

If they do create something, it won't be black hole only something that acts like black hole for a very short time period.

If it were to try and become larger black hole simulacrum, it would evaporate into Hawkings Rays before it could expand.

If you don't believe me ask Hawkings.

[edit on 27-1-2009 by googolplex]

[edit on 27-1-2009 by googolplex]

Originally posted by wisefoolishness
reply to post by jdub297

 

Ehem..

They don't believe it could happen. There's a greater chance of nothing happening, but still the possibility of something bad happening.

Well wise there's also the possibility that in less than an hour we'll all be dead from gamma radiation from a nearby star exploding. Would you like to move underground just in case?

The ridiculous fearmongering about the LHC needs to end. So does the misuse of terms from physics like phase transition...

[edit on 27-1-2009 by optimus primal]

I don't know much about science, or this subject, though I do have a question.

Do the benefits outweigh the risks?

And as far as the risks certain scientists take, there's another question.

Why do most scientists play god when they do so much to refute the idea?

I've posted my dislike of the LHC on nearly every thread on here but it's not the black hole thing that worrys me honestly there are just to many unknowns to jump into this thing.

Some things to bear in mind

All the particles in our atmosphere that collide are coming from the sun and never collide head on it's just not the same thing the particles will alway retain their speed in space.

We may have already created a black hole or something very similar at RHIC so big unknowns definitely happen with colliders.

The chances of something happening we could never predict are high whether its something good or bad flip a coin I guess.

To me there is no way it isn't a risk I don't care what Hawking or others physicists say they are fallible and wrong at times just like everyone else.

As a species we learn through our mistakes but in this case we can't afford one the biggest worry for me is even if the LHC doesn't get us the next one may.

Originally posted by orderedchaos
I don't know much about science, or this subject, though I do have a question.

Do the benefits outweigh the risks?

And as far as the risks certain scientists take, there's another question.

Why do most scientists play god when they do so much to refute the idea?

Humans have always been this way, taking things apart and not always being able to put it back together the same as it was.

But in this case it will return to normal state after being broke apart.

It's just like when they smashed the atom it went back to gether just not the exact same way, but then they learn there were smaller parts if they could figure away to take those apart.

This is unlocking the secrets of creation.

reply to post by orderedchaos


chaos, you've fallen for the trap set by all the naysayers throughout history.

It seems you are pre-convinced that all people who study science are atheists. This is a fallacy, but is much-used by knuckle-draggers who wish to maintain their tenuous hold on the minds of their 'sheeple'.

Back to the LHC debate....when fox 'news' gets hold of a few nutjobs who decide to pipe up and be 'chiicken little for a day' it garners ratings, which is what the evil overlord Rupert Murdoch wants, since it spurs ad revenue.

OK, OK....I know, TV, all TV rely on ad revenue. It's just that there is a difference between solid, respectable journalism, and tabloid headline grabbing nonsense.

Example.....in a room full of ten thousand experts who all agree on a subject, but you root out three nuts in the room who disagree....then you have a perfect understanding of how fox 'news' operates, and how other well-known tabloids operate.

(EDIT here)....Lie first, get headlines and attention, then realize that your lack of journalistic integrity will be easily forgotten soon, since something else will clamor for the latest new headlines.



[edit on 1/27/0909 by weedwhacker]

Let's think back to when traveling at the speed of sound was a great unknown. It was something that couldn't be done.

***************************************************************
One of the great unknowns of the time was the so-called "sound barrier." Planes like the British Meteor jets that approached the speed of sound (760MPH at sea level, 660 MPH at 40,000 feet) had encountered severe buffeting of the controls. At that time, no one knew for sure whether an airplane could exceed "Mach 1," the speed of sound. A British pilot, Geoffrey de Havilland, had died trying. The U.S. Army was determined to find out first.
***************************************************************

I know, this involved one mans life not a whole planet right? I'm sure there were people who believed wholeheartedly that toying with these phenomenal speeds would induce some sort of planet devouring vortex and would end life as we know it. You can't tell me that had people been privy to such experiments going on they would have come out of the wood work and tried to halt everything. Good thing Fox News wasn't around at the time. Anyway, we know how it went:

***************************************************************
The X-1 had gone through "the sonic wall" without so much as a bump. As the speed topped out at Mach 1.05, Yeager had the sensation of shooting straight through the top of the sky. The sky turned a deep purple and all at once the stars and the moon came out - the sun shone at the same time. ... He was simply looking out into space. ... He was master of the sky. His was a king's solitude, unique and inviolate, above the dome of the world. It would take him seven minutes to glide back down and land at Muroc. He spent the time doing victory rolls and wing-over-wing aerobatics while Roger Lake and the High Sierras spun around below.
***************************************************************

Now thanks to keeping the naysayers at bay we have some seriously fast aircraft out there to keep us all safe. Not to mention the technological breakthroughs that occured as a result of pushing the envelope. In keeping with the atmosphere of ATS I must insert this tidbit:

***************************************************************
After the flight, the Army clamped tight security on the whole thing, and Yeager couldn't tell anyone. He celebrated with just a few other pilots at Pancho's. He flew a dozen more transonic flights in the X-1, but still under tight wraps. His accomplishment wasn't announced to the public until mid-1948.
***************************************************************

How do we know a gigantic scientific breakthrough hasn't already happened at the LHC? Is the shut down of the facility due to a breakdown or are they still trying to comprehend what they have uncovered? I for one believe this theory. Sorry for not having a fancier looking post. I'll figure this thing out soon enough.

Ok now seriously, i know this has been covered earlier in the thread but i'm throwing my views out anyway, regardless of repeating the same things that others have.

1. The article doesn't state that the black hole will destroy the earth it merely says that the mini black holes will hang around for slightly longer than thought. They won't be destroying the earth.

2. For all the people saying that it isn't worth it, that we won't be discovering anything miraculous. You have absolutely no understanding of physics. I'm sorry but you can't possibly understand physics and the consequences of this experiments results if you say it isn't worth it. If we find the higgs boson then we are seriously getting close to discovering what gravity and mass truly are.

If we don't find the higgs boson then we basically have to completely and utterly rewrite entire sections of physics. We're talking full blown noble prize type rewriting of physics. Personally i hope they don't find the higgs boson, it will make life far more interesting

I find this whole thing absolutely exhilarating, the very idea that we will understand things that we have never understood before. The amount of questions that may be thrown up because of this experiment. I'll happily risk my life for that, it may sound silly to some but that's how i feel.


I would rather human kind live a life of fantastic discovery which could lead to death than live a long safe existence and letting the great questions go unanswered.

It's worth it, the risk is absolutely insignificant.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by ImaginaryReality1984]

I would rather human kind live a life of fantastic discovery which could lead to death than live a long safe existence and letting the great questions go unanswered.

It's worth it, the risk is absolutely insignificant.


If you prefer knowledge over everything life has to offer I feel sorry for you but the fact there is a risk no matter how small makes the whole thing sheer madness to me.

Would you rather taste food or know it's chemical makeup me I prefer the taste.

Nobody has the right to gamble with every species on this planet and possibly the only life in existence

Chances are it's safe but the risk is completely unacceptable.

Originally posted by Teknikal
If you prefer knowledge over everything life has to offer I feel sorry for you but the fact there is a risk no matter how small makes the whole thing sheer madness to me.

You missed the point i'm afraid. I wasn't just atlking about knowledge i was talking about everything. Life is exciting and brilliant and knowledge is a part of it. I would rather human kind has an exciting time than a safe one. Furthermore science is the vehicle that takes us forward and will hopefully one day propel us to the stars. If you don't think that's worth finding out then i feel sorry for you

Originally posted by Teknikal
Would you rather taste food or know it's chemical makeup me I prefer the taste.

Both.

Originally posted by Teknikal
Nobody has the right to gamble with every species on this planet and possibly the only life in existence

Chances are it's safe but the risk is completely unacceptable.

If we had taken that attitude only 300 years ago then we woudln't be anywhere near where we are today. Life expectancies would be shorter, technology wouldn't give us the miracles it does and we most certainly would not have landed on the moon.

You go live your boring safe existence, wallowing in ignorance. I'll take knowledge and the exciting idea that we will one day be able to colonise other planets, securing our species and learning more and more about our incredible universe.

I guess you just don't have the same love of discovery that has taken human kind to the point it is now.

Who cares if we get sucked in by a black hole! Flick the damned switch and find out!

If we're all destroyed, then the atheists won't care - they know they're wormbait, while all of the zealots can start explaining themselves to their maker.

Do it! Earth needs a cleansing!

I'm under no Illusions that the LHC will go ahead no matter what but to suggest particle experiments are necessary to advancement is ignorant.

The fact is there are ways of doing this that don't need particle colliders granted they may take much longer and rely on luck for results but they are not risking the earth.

reply to post by Teknikal


Tek...I have an Irish heritage.....but still, the 'risks' proposed by a few detractors of the LHC are, indeed, minimal...even less than minimal, virtually (pun intended) non-existant.

Let's try this again....in the 1940s, before the first Atomic Bomb tests, certain fringe scientists predicted that the Earth's atmosphere would be 'ignited' due to a 'chain reaction'.

Let's put this into perspective...if ten thoussnd scientists agree there is no danger, but three chime in with concerns....then, investigate those three individual's credentials and credibility.

Of course, "If it Bleeds, it Leads"....motto of tabloid (once known as 'yellow journalism') in times past.

The VERY TITLE of this thread tends to prove my point....!!!

(of course, the collider in Illinois, the one in Urbana, which has been operating for decades, doesn't get much mention...)

Has anyone bothered to read any of Sir Stephen Hawkings' books???

Even IF a micro-singularity COULD be created, it would only last for nano-seconds!

Think about it....just how SMALL is a proton??? Ot is so small that you simply cannot conceive, because you live in a macro World.

Do you know what a neutrino is? IT is smaller than a proton.....and we are surrounded by them...in one second 10 Billion neutrinos can cross through your thumbnail. AND, most of those neutrinos will never encounter a proton. BECAUSE, in the very, very, very small world of physics, most of what WE perceive as solid is, actually, mostly empty space.

SO....EVEN if two particles collide in the LHC, as designed.....the result will be so small as to be barely noticable, to Human eyes. THAT is why machines will do the monitoring.

Originally posted by Teknikal
I'm under no Illusions that the LHC will go ahead no matter what but to suggest particle experiments are necessary to advancement is ignorant.

Sorry no gotta stop you here. They are necessary when we are talking about discovering the true roots of gravity and mass. If you don't want to accept that it's up to you however it is a fact. Do you think they built it at such a cost when there were other ways to find it out? Nonsense. Next time you or someone you know gets an MRI please tell me that particle experiments aren't necessary to advancement.

Originally posted by Teknikal
The fact is there are ways of doing this that don't need particle colliders granted they may take much longer and rely on luck for results but they are not risking the earth.

Please tell me of these ways because i have never heard of them. Also luck doesn't belong in science. Lots of discoveries have been accidents, but that's the point, they are accidents. We can't rely on luck to deliver us the tools to secure the future of our species.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
SO....EVEN if two particles collide in the LHC, as designed.....the result will be so small as to be barely noticable, to Human eyes. THAT is why machines will do the monitoring.

Have you seen the sheer size of the detectors? It's amazing to think a particle measured in planck lengths needs a detector bigger than a bus huh

I understand we want technology and to advance as a species everyone wants to live in a sci-fi world and it would be great if we could get of this rock and colonise other places one day we hopefully will as long as we live that long of course.

Yes these things are very very small but try hurling a few protons into a block of weapons grade uranium and what happens surely nothing right because protons are so small ?

I agree with the risk being tiny but with so many unknowns shouldn't we really be playing this one safe I think most physicists themselves will be expecting a few suprises.

I like technology and advancement as much as anyone else but its better to look before you leap.

edit: The other way is obviously observing them in nature which would be much more reliable than forcing the issue after all according to CERN this is happening constantly in the atmosphere right ? Shouldn't be too hard to fly a few particle dectectors traps up there and wait sure it would take a while and rely on luck but eventually. I know they already do something similar underground already.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Teknikal]

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


Yes welll.....THAT is the point!!!!

In order to isolate and contain a particle of interest, requires an evacuated environment, and a succession of electro-magnets, and sensor equipment, to handle the job.

In the LHC, as in the collider in Illinois, the principle remains the same....it is just the velocities, and hence the energy potential that matter,

Cern hopes to provide higher energies than possible in Illinois.

Still.....no 'black-holes' that will 'consume' the Earth are going to be formed.

BAD Science seems to have infected the populace!!!

Originally posted by Teknikal
I agree with the risk being tiny but with so many unknowns shouldn't we really be playing this one safe I think most physicists themselves will be expecting a few suprises.

I like technology and advancement as much as anyone else but its better to look before you leap.

That is the same thinking that would have stopped so many experiments. Nuclear fission as power was seen as impossible and highly dangerous. Without it our world would now be wallowing in energy shortages, even utilizing nuclear fission we sometimes have trouble supplying electricity everywhere.

Then there is the moon landing, people were sure we were going to kill those astronauts, a small percentage of people but there were some.

What about nanotechnology? Wasn't that going to destroy the entire world? It hasn't though, it's led to many amazing advances and we've only scratched the surface. Go and look up the current animal trials of nano gold particles being used to deliver targeted medications for cancers.

Geneticly engineered crops have long been the subject of ridicule. Now granted we have to be careful here, i don't agree with the crops programmed to produce dead seed. However without genetic engineering we wouldn't be able to feed a half of the people we do now every day.

Risks are there in everything, they always have been and always will be. However these risks are truly insignificant. When the overwhelming majority of scientists have thoroughly researched, planned and experimented and still come up with the same idea, we have to take their opinion as correct. To do otherwise isn't science. If there really was a real risk the scientists would not go ahead with it.

Originally posted by weedwhacker

BAD Science seems to have infected the populace!!!

In fairness it is not the fault of the average person to think of CERN as highly dangerous. Most people do not read science journals or other peer reviewed research. They get their science from the occasional headline and sensational stories in tabloid papers. It is the fault of the media that the public is so ill informed about science as they portray scientists either as bespectacled, grey haired old men labouring over a microscope, or the insane nutty kind that rub their hands in glee as they stare at the globe in their office and wonder about ways to destroy it.

Ok maybe not that severe but the point is that the media grossly misrepresents science by treating it the same way it treats celebrity culture. It goes for the most outlandish story for entertainment purposes.

It makes me laugh.

Why bother studying physics when you are told to throw the book out the window every ten years.

This is the exact thing they will say after it runs perfect.

Either that or throw the world down a black hole.......I mean out the window

I would also state that this is them starting there media fear mongering to get everyone interested in this experiment yet again and you are all falling for it.



[edit on 28-1-2009 by XXXN3O]