A beginners guide to the LHC and possible doomsday scenarios...

I decided to write this because I've noticed a lot of people are grossly misinformed about how the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) works, and what it will be doing. I'm not an expert on physics...but I know enough to explain in laymen's terms what will be going on, and the possible doomsday scenarios people talk about. Time to get out my old physics books. I'll start by explaining some simple particle physics.

There are 3 categories of particles - leptons, quarks and bosons (force carrying particles). Quarks and leptons (fermions) are grouped in pairs and there are six of each. Leptons, such as the electron have an associated, low mass, charge-less neutrino. All twelve of these fermions also have an anti-particle that annihilate on collision with the associated anti-particle. Force carriers or bosons transmit the forces of nature. The photon transmits the electromagnetic force, the gluon transmits the strong nuclear force between quarks, intermediate vector bosons transmit the weak force and gravitons haven't been found yet but are believed to carry the force of gravity. Leptons exists individually but are not affected by gravity or the nuclear strong force. Hadrons (a subatomic particle that experience the nuclear strong force) are comprised of three quarks and can form protons and neutrons. The electron and it's corresponding neutrino, and the up and down quarks form most of the matter in our universe as the others exist only in high energy situations and decay rapidly into a more stable form. Neutrons act in keeping the nucleus of atoms more stable by keeping the protons spaced out. Neutrinos (part of the lepton category, is not a neutron - which is a hadron) are so stable that they hardly interact with other matter and all, and pass right through most of it, making it extremely hard to detect. Physicist believe there are six quarks - up (u), down (d), charm (c), strange (s), top (t), and bottom (b) and their antiquarks - antiup, antidown, anticharm, antistrange, antibottom, and antitop. Antiquarks are labelled with a letter with a bar over it. Each meson consists of one quark and one antiquark. A meson cannot be made of two quarks or two antiquarks. Examples of mesons are the pion and the kaon. Here we have a table listing the particles I've just talked about:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/312b1ce714b8.gif[/atsimg]

And here we have a simple diagram of the carbon atom:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/866b2c5969f3.gif[/atsimg]
As you can see, the atom is made up of 3 different particles (those particles are made up of smaller particles, except the electron, as you should now know). The amount of protons determines what type of element we have, and the atomic number of that element. We get isotopes of an element by changing the number of neutrons. You should understand by now, what a hadron is. The LHC will be used to collide protons, which are hadrons, hence the name, Large Hadron Collider. Now think about a nuclear bomb, why do you think it's called that? We know Uranium is an unstable element, especially the isotopes of Uranium (Uranium-235, Uranium-233 i.e. yellow cake) they use in nuclear bombs, meaning the atoms randomly decay (making Uranium radioactive). When this happens, we get a release of energy and particles, the binding forces that held that atom together get broken, hence the release of energy, known as nuclear binding energy. The mass of a nucleus is always less than the sum of the individual masses of the protons and neutrons which constitute it (known as mass defect). The difference is a measure of the nuclear binding energy which holds the nucleus together. This binding energy can be calculated from the Einstein relationship:

Nuclear binding energy = Δmc2
i.e. NBE = Change in (Mass multiplied by the Speed of light squared)

The smaller you go, the stronger the particles are bound together. The enormity of the nuclear binding energy can perhaps be better appreciated by comparing it to the binding energy of an electron in an atom, which can be knocked right off the atom if hit by a photon (the photoelectric effect), or on an even larger scale by examining the binding energy of chemical bonds. You should already understand the difference in power when comparing chemical bombs with nuclear bombs.

Mass defect = (Theoretical calculated mass) - (measured mass of nucleus)
i.e. (sum of masses of protons and neutrons) - (measured mass of nucleus)

I'm not going to bother with equations, as I will just lose people, and it's not really that relevant, the point is, binding energy is the key to the power of a nuclear bomb. When the Uranium-235 decays, particles shoot off everywhere, and if you have a mass of Uranium clumped together, if your lucky, a neutron will collide with another U-235 nucleus before it travels through all the U-235, making that nucleus highly unstable, and cause it to split instantly, thus releasing more binding energy. When the mass of Uranium is large enough, you increase the chances of this happening to such a degree where you can cause a chain reaction. The neutron has to travel through more U-235, increasing the chances of a collision with another U235 nucleus. The mass required to cause a chain reaction is called the “critical mass”. So...you have a whole clump of U-235, one atom randomly decays and starts the chain reaction, almost instantly, all the nuclei split and release their binding energy, now you have a nuclear bomb. Picture a sphere of U-235 cut in half, and when placed together they form the critical mass, when the bomb hits, one half slides down and comes into contact with the other half...simple eh?

Ever heard of a hadron bomb? Neither have I...and I don't want to...remember what I said about the binding energy getting greater as you go smaller? So, now instead of splitting nuclei (as you do in a nuclear fission bomb), your splitting hadrons, the things a nucleus is made out of, and the binding energy is much greater. I'm not sure at all...but I'd guess one of those suckers could take out our solar system...and what is the LHC attempting to do? Smash hadrons apart by colliding two of them (protons) into each other. But no need to worry...it's only two...and there would be trillions (or more) of atoms in a clump of U-235. But...what if they start a chain reaction? The pipes they will be sending the particles through should be a vacuum...but the pipe IS matter...so...they blow Geneva to Hell...or cause a chain reaction so violent it transmutes the entire Earth and us along with it? I don't think hadrons decay all that often naturally...if at all...correct me if I'm wrong....and that rubbish Steven Hawking told you about such reactions happening in our atmosphere naturally all the time is crap...sneaky word play to stop everyone worrying...we have nuclear reactions happening...true...but I doubt reactions on the hadronic level occur in our atmosphere all the time...now, what if the energy released isn't all that much, but it's so intense and densified (confined to a small area) it tears a hole in space and creates a black hole? All this to see what comes out...to find the “God” particle...give me a break...we all know everything is just vibrating energy in the end.

All should leave Geneva,
Saturn turns from gold to iron,
The contrary raypoz will exterminate all,
Before the coming the sky will show signs.

Migrés, migrés de Geneue trestous,
Saturne d'or en fer se changera,
Le contre raypoz exteriminera tous,
Auvant l'aruent le ciel signes fera.

Nostradamus clearly stated something would destroy Geneva...Saturn will turn from gold to iron? That implies transmutation of elements to me. Contrary raypoz? The positive rays? Protons...positive particles?

EDIT: Also...they have not smashed two protons together yet...they gave the public some story about how it has already been tested...but that wasn't the actual thing...they just ran one proton into a block of lead or something along those lines...also...I don't want it to look like I'm against it...I'm not really...after all...it's just perfectly harmless science right? Oh...and if you want to know how it actually works...if you don't already...it's simple...the protons have positive charge...meaning they can control the path and propel them using massive super-cooled, superconducting electromagnets..they send them whizzing in opposite directions around the inside of this massive pipe (27 kilometres (17 mi) in circumference) until they get near the speed of light...then collide them into each other...

[edit on 24/10/09 by CHA0S]

That was a really cool/interesting read thx

I personally think the LHC has something to do with timetravel....

"All this to see what comes out...to find the “God” particle...give me a break"(CHA0S)

lol, not to mention the cost "The direct total LHC project cost is £2.6bn",

and the 111 nations involved...again 'just to find the God particle'...ok..

reply to post by slinkey10


Hey, thanks. I knew a lot of people here would enjoy it. There are lots of interesting little facts throughout it. I really did expect more response though. Thanks for the reply.

Thanks for the time in explaining. Now I get this just a tad better.

reply to post by psycho13


No problem. I'm glad it taught you a thing or two, that was my goal! I'm thinking of writing another thread on the weird aspects of quantum mechanics...that's the stuff that really interests me...it's quite mind blowing actually...

[edit on 26/10/09 by CHA0S]

reply to post by CHA0S


I can't believe more people haven't responded to this thread.. I must say it has helped a lot in my understanding of LHC, and I thank you very much for taking the time to write this up (especially in a way that I could understand it). Star and flag for you my friend. Keep up the good work.

reply to post by Broox


Yes...I was extremely surprised myself at the lack of response to this thread...I've seen a lot of threads about things a lot less important than this, and topics that shouldn't even be on ATS, get more response than this...oh well...

reply to post by CHA0S


I agree.. there have been a lot of threads as of late that I feel are useless, yet they have 15 pages of response..

When things get popular, they start to go downhill, and I think that is what is happening with ATS. Oh well, maybe there will be some interest in this thread later.. I can only hope. I wish I had something to add, but this is all very new to be so I rather sit back and learn from others here. Thanks again for the time and effort you put into this post.



Mod Note: Please stay on Topic – Review This Link.

[edit on Tue Oct 27 2009 by Jbird]

OP


1.How do they identify these singular "neutrons" before they start propelling them? How do they know what they are made of eg sure they not composites of many other members of the "zoo" ....a whole jungle.?


2. Given that they propell them via massive magnetic fields how do they eliminate the effect that massive (by definition) Electromagnetic field with electric energy has on the said "particles" or the resulting momentary "sub particles"

3.How can they see or observe such without using light (presumably electrically generated "real photons?") and then distinguish them from the imagined "virtual photons?"


4. How can a hypthesised "particle" the Higgs Boson... be said to give another particle its "mass" when a REAL particle is already defined as having mass?

5.Do you realise most of these particle zoo crittas you refer to in OP....are imagined!!!!.... NOT REAL....there is no zoo yet to inspect them!...NEVER WILL BE!

The whole thing bothers me, it did the last time they tried to turn it on, and will this time also.

Why? because it's all theory, and a lot of Scientists involved with the project, have gone on record saying, it's perfectly safe, nothing can possibly happen or go wrong, how can they possibly say that when it's all THEORY? they cant, they can say in theory nothing will happen, they have said that before.

Remember Chenobyl? Windscale? 3 Mile island? yeah I know they are different right? but nothing could happen to them either, Remember? Drugs, chemicals, and a ton of other incredible things, all created by a Scientist somewhere, yet they where all safe, until something went wrong, then we had excuses.

If this goes wrong, maybe there wont be anyone left to make any excuses, and no I am not a Doomsayer, I just believe looking for the cause of the Big Bang, and what happened just after it happened.

Well DUH, we had an even Bigger Bang.

It needs to be left well alone, we know nothing at all, we think we do, laws of Physics and all that, but remember this, Einstein, possibly the Greatest Scientist who ever lived, yet we still refer to all his work as his Theories, tells me a lot that does.

I found this to be very interesting...an interactive layout of the LHC...www.nature.com...

reply to post by Has2b

Originally posted by Has2b
1.How do they identify these singular "neutrons" before they start propelling them? How do they know what they are made of eg sure they not composites of many other members of the "zoo" ....a whole jungle.?

Firstly...I think you mean proton...not neutron. The Hydrogen atom is extremely basic, no neutrons, just one proton with one electron. The electron can be stripped off by using very high temperatures or merely by shining light on it, or exposing it to another form of electromagnetic radiation having an even shorter wavelength.

2. Given that they propell them via massive magnetic fields how do they eliminate the effect that massive (by definition) Electromagnetic field with electric energy has on the said "particles" or the resulting momentary "sub particles"

The field imposes a force on the particles, similar to the way magnets repel...it's of no concern really...as long as the resulting particles hit the sensor...

3.How can they see or observe such without using light (presumably electrically generated "real photons?") and then distinguish them from the imagined "virtual photons?"

Particles can exist as a point charge or a wave...this explains why the electrons are only allowed to exist in certain orbits, corresponding to the size of the nucleus...the "wave-electron" will cancel it's self out or interfere with it's self if it exists in an orbit where the start of the wave doesn't come back around to exactly where it started.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/31860dfbe266.gif[/atsimg]
Because of the particle-wave duality we are able to determine the different orbits (energy levels) of the electron and how much energy is lost or gained in transition between these energy levels. The excess energy is emitted as electromagnetic radiation. So, now we can determine what intensity and frequency of light will be emitted from elements because we are able to determine the energy levels. This is how we are able to tell what the sun is made out of, we analyze the spectrum of and frequency of electromagnetic radiation being emitted (Spectroscopy). Photon is the name given to the discrete packet of energy that carries the electromagnetic force (don't confuse it with the proton). Electrons may also drop 2 or 3 energy levels and release a photon with frequency proportional to the difference in energy levels. If a photon strikes an electron it will jump up a level, if the photon has an energy greater than or equal to the energy difference of the next level and the current level. If the photon has enough energy, it will knock the electron right off the atom (the photo-electric effect). So, because of the fact that these waves are standing waves, unable to cancel themselves out, they don't...they just don't exist in these forbidden energy levels. The lowest energy level (n=1) corresponds to one wavelength for the electron, level two (n=2) corresponds to two wavelengths and so on. So in short...they know the hydrogen atom contains one proton (by measuring the wavelength of the electron orbiting the atom, which is measured by seeing how much energy a photon needs to knock it out of it's current orbit)...it's now a simple task of stripping the electrons from it.

4. How can a hypthesised "particle" the Higgs Boson... be said to give another particle its "mass" when a REAL particle is already defined as having mass?

Don't quite understand your question...but you need some more knowledge on particle physics before even attempting to discuss this...

5.Do you realise most of these particle zoo crittas you refer to in OP....are imagined!!!!.... NOT REAL....there is no zoo yet to inspect them!...NEVER WILL BE!

All these particles have been confirmed through rigorous studies and experiments...you obviously know nothing of this topic...the quarks are pretty much the only ones they have to make guesses about...and that's why they want to smash open protons to examine the quarks...which utilizes a whole different process of examination...which I can't be bothered getting into right now...but it provides a detailed analysis of their mass, charge, spin etc...

[edit on 27/10/09 by CHA0S]

Originally posted by CHA0S

I'm not an expert on physics...

...And yet you to try to debunk what experts say is safe.. The best we can think of since we're dealing with quantum scales is there will always be a chance that unpredictable things can happen, which is very difficult to prove unless that's your job..

I doubt there's a conspiracy going on to wipe out all humanity... Greedy people in the top echelons of society has got us pretty much brainwashed and they love us. God-like aliens harvest our genetic material and we are their favorite toys.

If anything, frightening events here and there only helps to have them tighten their control on us but I doubt, extinction of all humanity is one of their plans.

reply to post by ahnggk

...And yet you to try to debunk what experts say is safe...

Dude...it's never been done before...the "experts" can't say it's safe anymore than I can say it's dangerous...I'm just trying to explaining what's going on and how it works...

I doubt there's a conspiracy going on to wipe out all humanity...

Hmmm...I don't remember saying that...in fact I said I wasn't even against it...I don't think there is a conspiracy to wipe us out either...but that doesn't mean it can't...

EDIT: If there is any conspiracy here, it's how the scientists down play how risky this experiment actually is..."everything is fine folks...nothing could possibly go wrong...trust us...we're experts..."...when really they have no freaking idea...something most certiantly could go wrong when dealing with particles of such small scale...

[edit on 27/10/09 by CHA0S]

Nice explanation of VERY complex matters. I can hardly grasp it, but get the ghist of it, so I am not too surprised about the -black hole-end of the universe- hoohah.. propagated by the totally uninformed.

Most scientists are fairly honest in saying:"we do not exactly know what happens" 'S about the same when scientists tested the first atom-bomb. They had an educated guess, but nothing was absolutely sure until they pushed the button...

What keeps me occupied, is pondering the following: What if theHiggs-Boson doesn't exist?......now there's a real problem for theoretical Physics.

It would be "Flogiston"all over again

And about the lack of interest? Try changing the Header to "Why the Hadron Collider will possibly NOT annihilate the universe" 2 important, attention-grabbing words: "Annihilate" and "Universe" ! works for most posts on ATS...

Ah... so the scientists claim, "It happens in nature when cosmic rays hit protons in the higher atmosphere.." The difference in that and the LHC is that in the LHC the beam will be focused and in a tight super magnetic field. The process will be multiplied millions of times per minute. The smaller you get the more energy will be released at collision. So what is the result.

1. A super massive Hadron chain reaction that either rips away most of the atmosphere or ignites it altogether.

2. The creation of a million micro black holes that instantly combine to form a large one thus ending the earth's existence.

3. Strange matter creating a static bubble (not good news).

4. A time eddy the sends all of us back in a time loop to the start of the experiment that repeats itself over and over to infinity. A very frustrating event to be in, though not likely.

5. Not likely, but the discovery of a portal between mutiverse dimensions allowing one to pass into the other.

6. The first time machine claimed by John Titor.


I think option 1 or 2 is most likely.

[edit on 28-10-2009 by Fromabove]

Originally posted by Fromabove
Ah... so the scientists claim, "It happens in nature when cosmic rays hit protons in the higher atmosphere.." The difference in that and the LHC is that in the LHC the beam will be focused and in a tight super magnetic field. The process will be multiplied millions of times per minute. The smaller you get the more energy will be released at collision. So what is the result.

This is utter nonsense. Individual collisions are individual collisions. Magnetic field does not have any bearing on the characteristics of each individual reaction. Likewise, the proton beam is irrelevant to the fundamental physics involved. Cross section of hypothesized black hole production is so small that no amount of beam focus will result in any possibility of coalescence.

Stop hysteria already, please.

Re: hadron bomb -- nonsense likewise. Fragmenting hadrons does not result in energy release.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Fromabove
Ah... so the scientists claim, "It happens in nature when cosmic rays hit protons in the higher atmosphere.." The difference in that and the LHC is that in the LHC the beam will be focused and in a tight super magnetic field. The process will be multiplied millions of times per minute. The smaller you get the more energy will be released at collision. So what is the result.

This is utter nonsense.

Yes...it's not really what I was trying to say...scientists do say that higher energy reactions happen in our atmosphere all the time...which is true...considering the fact they'll only be using two protons...but the reactions in our atmosphere are still only nuclear reactions...hadronic reactions are a whole different ball game...

Re: hadron bomb -- nonsense likewise. Fragmenting hadrons does not result in energy release.

Uhhh....I would beg to differ...the estimated release of energy according to scientists will be fairly huge (due to the binding energy + kinetic energy)...similar to how a nucleus is held together by binding energy...hadrons are also held together by binding energy...but it's a lot harder to pull those suckers apart...hence the LHC is needed to achieve this...but as I said...the energy released won't be the problem...the problem will occur if these exotic particles released start a chain reaction...then instead of having only two protons in the equation...you have an effect happening like that in a nuclear bomb - that is, trillions of hadrons releasing their binding energy. These particles are so small and important to the formation of matter...there's no telling what else they might do...

[edit on 28/10/09 by CHA0S]

First Post

Correct me if I am wrong, but to my understanding Hadrons cannot be used for a bomb. The bond between to quarks acts differently than a normal particle. As the quarks separate, the force holding them together remains constant, therefore requiring an infinite amount of energy to do so. See "Color Confinement"

en.wikipedia.org...

On the matter of creating a black hole that would swallow the earth, a black hole with the mass of 288 metric tons would evaporate in about ~1 second from Hawking Radiation. So the worry of billions of tiny blackholes merging to create a large one, seems impossible, as there mass would not be large enough to sustain itself.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by ProjectedLogic
First Post

Correct me if I am wrong, but to my understanding Hadrons cannot be used for a bomb. The bond between to quarks acts differently than a normal particle. As the quarks separate, the force holding them together remains constant, therefore requiring an infinite amount of energy to do so. See "Color Confinement"

Oh...very, very true...I had forgotten all about that...although the bond between them does break at a certain distance...at which point the energy isn't actually released, but goes back into producing two more quarks...so you end up with two more quarks then you started with...matter truly is energy....but you sorta blew my theory out of the water didn't you... But now I don't understand how they expect to detect these quarks if they stay stuck together by "super elastic" bonds...wouldn't it be pretty much impossible to break a photon apart? It would just snap back into place would it not?

EDIT: Hmmm...I read the wiki article in the first link you gave, and they explain it like so:

When two quarks become separated, as happens in particle accelerator collisions, at some point it is more energetically favorable for a new quark/anti-quark pair to spontaneously appear out of the vacuum, than to allow the quarks to separate further. As a result of this, when quarks are produced in particle accelerators, instead of seeing the individual quarks in detectors, scientists see "jets" of many color-neutral particles (mesons and baryons), clustered together. This process is called hadronization, fragmentation or string breaking, and is one of the least understood processes in particle physics.

EDIT: To say welcome to ATS!

[edit on 28/10/09 by CHA0S]

reply to post by CHA0S


I've retracted my insinuation; profuse apologies Chaos...Sorry

[edit on 28-10-2009 by PrisonerOfSociety]