Large Hadron Collider's 1st collisions recorded

I want to know what they observed when they collided the proton beams as of today? Is there a link about any of the observed affects?? I am dying to know how it looked a pic would be awesome as well.

[edit on 1-12-2009 by ldyserenity]

Have they discovered any anti-gravity (dark energy) particles yet?

reply to post by mjtwelve

Two particles moving in opposite directions at 7 TeV. The collision is at 14 TeV.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mjtwelve

 

Two particles moving in opposite directions at 7 TeV. The collision is at 14 TeV.

Phage!!

I was wondering how you got to 14 TeV myself. Makes sense when you put it like that though . Damn your indefiable logic!

For the people asking what the results were, there's no point, as it was only a very low energy collision at 4-500 Billion eV. The one in the USA is working at way higher levels at the moment.

I haven't had a good look around the site yet, but I'm sure you will be able to see the results of a 1 TeV collision here:

Fermilab

It'll be early 2010 when the LHC really starts to get interesting. The lessons we can learn from these experiments could be Earth shattering! (Pun intended)

Then again, they may find nothing more than what we already know, which would be a serious waste of $19 billion. But what a way to blow it!!

Originally posted by KpxMarMoTT
I find it less then possible that any type of energy release would cause dimension shifts or convergences. If anything would happen, I'd theorise that the energy released would travel either forward or backwards in time.

Don't ask me why, Im not a scientist, and im not knowledgeable, but to me it makes sense.

Ohh and reading this post again makes me think about something....

If a balloon was filled up with water and pressure applied equally to every single point of its sides, then chances are that it would contain itself rather then explode, since the pressure is being applied equally on every side.

I would apply that to the theory that an apreture would be create between dimensions, that would be self contained and would be in ancred in space time.

So as our planet would move then so would its location. But then again feel free to contradict my explanation

[edit on 1-12-2009 by KpxMarMoTT]

You make a good point, but since we are human and make
mistakes, like if I try to squeeze a balloon on all sides, the
pressure won't be equal on every side or if my squeezing
does happen to be close enough in pressure, you might get
an effect figuratively the same as what happens when suns go
supernova - A giant mess!. In a supernova, the outer shells
of heavier elements collapse downwards towards an already
pressurized or even expanding inner shell and then a rebound
effect happens were a convergence of multiple walls of energy
collide and then are rebounded outwards at more violent and
unpredictable shapes, densities and energy levels...ergo...an
exploding sun OR the inner shells collapse and compress even
more, forming artificial black holes that would accrete matter
at an ever-expanding rate!

Apply the LHC experiments to sub-pico-scales and we get a similar
issue where the balls of quarks get compressed or hit by other
matter of the same density to either shatter into a quark-gluon
plasma or rebound at a combined energy density and possibly
causing a runaway chain reaction of subsequent conversion
into unstable configurations of sub-atomic elements or
even cause the de-stabilizing of the configuration of basic
quarks into the unstable winking in & out of virtual particles
from N-dimensional space (i.e. upper array dimensions) similar
in consistency to crushed ice...lots of chunks of wet, smeary
unstable matter and a foamy liquid of in-between space that will
make us all blink out into a meaningless non-existence.

To make an analogy regarding what we call multi-dimensional
space, think of our individual lives as a small box containing
one second of our 3D life. Group and pack a series of time-slice
boxes (each containing one second of our lives) into a larger box,
and then pack that box into a shipping container and then
group those shipping containers into loads that are put onto
a container ship. That container ship is then grouped into
a flotilla of multiple container ships which happens to
float on a virtual ocean which happens to reside one an
ocean-bearing planet which is grouped togther as a solar
system of multiple planets which is then grouped together
to form a galaxy of stars and solar systems.

This above explanation describes the following mathematical
and computer science construct of a multi-dimensional array:

Array[ 1 to 3 ] axes of cubic space grouped together as a
linear array of time slices which is then attached to a branch
of another linear array of other human lives attached to an array
of our universal existence attached to an array of other universes.

To get to ANY POINT within ANY BRANCH of the larger array,
one just has to move up to a higher array branch and slide over
to another X,Y,Z,T,N,I coordinate of another branch of any axis
on the multi-dimensional array. This is how I expect that
instantaneous travel Faster-than-Light within our universe could
be accomplished by sliding between array branches and inserting
ourselves into another cube or sub-branch of 3D slices
of time & space.

And continuing the shipping box & container analogy, when you
stuff too much junk into an individual box OR start to punch it's
walls in a active and violent manner, you damage the box itself
which can then leak or rip apart thus spilling it's contents into
other nearby boxes AND allowing other damaged boxes to leak
the contents of their 3D cubic universe into ours.

The LHC is allowing us to punch out the walls of our own universe
which might let in the contents of other universes into ours
which may have different rules or contain noxious substances
incompatible with our 3D box universe.

In my opinion, the LHC is a wayward kid playing with a
stiff cardboard box floating in an icy river. Punch the walls of
the box hard enough and the cold mushy ice water leaks in thus
drowning or freezing the current occupant of said cardboard box
when it breaks apart from the wayward punches.

I hope this analogy makes sense to you all.

Any Comments?



[edit on 2009/12/1 by StargateSG7]

[edit on 2009/12/1 by StargateSG7]

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mjtwelve

 

Two particles moving in opposite directions at 7 TeV. The collision is at 14 TeV.

Irrelevant , mate . As of yet 3TeV has not been reached .

reply to post by mjtwelve

Not the point. Follow the thread.

I was just following your smart arse reply

News break from LHC, where I happen to be right now:

a) the goal is not to "destroy" the proton. The goal is to get enough energy in the collision of constituent quarks, to produce other particles

b) LHC has circulated the beams with center of mass energy of 1.18 TeV, which is larger than the previous world record at FNAL

c) all you ignorant end-of-the-world-black-hole-stranglet-end-of-the-world-stargate-hellraiser-daemons-from-outer-space crowd, shut up.

I'll keep you informed. I'm at the LHC now. Peace.



[edit on 1-12-2009 by buddhasystem]

Originally posted by buddhasystem
News break from LHC, where I happen to be right now:

a) the goal is not to "destroy" the proton. The goal is to get enough energy in the collision of constituent quarks, to produce other particles

b) LHC has circulated the beams with center of mass energy of 1.18 TeV, which is larger than the previous world record at FNAL

c) all you ignorant end-of-the-world-black-hole-stranglet-end-of-the-world-stargate-hellraiser-daemons-from-outer-space crowd, shut up.

I'll keep you informed. I'm at the LHC now. Peace.




[edit on 1-12-2009 by buddhasystem]

Thanks for the update .


[edit on 1-12-2009 by mjtwelve]

reply to post by buddhasystem

If the quarks are not the product of breaking up the proton, is there any easy way to describe where the quarks come from or how they are produced? Is it something like a matter of m=e/c^2?

Originally posted by StargateSG7
You make a good point, but since we are human and make
mistakes, like if I try to squeeze a balloon on all sides, the
pressure won't be equal on every side

That's truly an illuminating statement. Of course, you wouldn't guess that the pressure inside the balloon is equal throughout the volume. You can't do that sort of thinking.

or if my squeezing does happen to be close enough in pressure, you might get an effect figuratively the same as what happens when suns go
supernova - A giant mess!.

Oh really!? What exactly have you been squeezing?

Apply the LHC experiments to sub-pico-scales and we get a similar
issue where the balls of quarks

a) what are sub-pico-scales?
b) quarks don't have balls. I've been dealing with quarks for the most of my life and we haven't detected balls that quarks may possess. Relax.
c)

get compressed or hit by other
matter of the same density to either shatter into a quark-gluon
plasma

I spent a few years looking for it, and that quark-gluon plasma does not exist. Get it? Even if it did, how would it contribute to that silliness of your argument?

or rebound at a combined energy density and possibly
causing a runaway chain reaction of subsequent conversion
into unstable configurations of sub-atomic elements

Blah blah blah ignorance is your destiny, I'm afraid.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

If the quarks are not the product of breaking up the proton, is there any easy way to describe where the quarks come from or how they are produced? Is it something like a matter of m=e/c^2?

When faced by a superior intellect , you use an infraction instead of your normal " I know everything " reply .

Very interesting .

reply to post by mjtwelve

When I encounter someone who know more about a subject on which I am unclear I ask questions.

It's called "learning".

So many clever and knowlegeable people posting to this thread, makes me feel like a sardine on a plate of caviar.

I will say though, no matter the benefits to mankind that are instigated by the work done by the LHC, if you think there is no hidden agenda your eyes are glazed over by your passion for science.

Time travel, weapon of some kind or even a dimensional door to or from somewhere. My science says any or all of the above may be part of the hidden agenda.

respects

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by mjtwelve

 

When I encounter someone who know more about a subject on which I am unclear I ask questions.

It's called "learning".

I'll overlook the grammatical error in your reply , because it's so nice to see you humbled .

[edit on 1-12-2009 by mjtwelve]

Originally posted by StargateSG7
Just recently the LHC reached over that magical threshold of one tera
electron volts or one TRILLION electron volts which sounds like a lot but
is the equivalent energy output of a mosquito...which doesn't sound
so bad does it?

One slight problem that the physicists forgot to mention is that they
fired a heck of a lot of energy in a space that's a hell of a lot smaller
than a mosquito!

They also forgot to mention the term "Energy Density" where
if one extrapolates one tera electron volts in a 3D area the size
of say a helium or gold nuclei and scale up to say the size of a mosquito,
the total energy output would be in the area of 10 or 20 Atto electron volts
or basically the gravitational distortion capability of a super giant sun
collapsing in on itself forming a neutron star.

In short they're REALLY playing with fire! OK how about this
Quark Gluon Plasmas, Negatively Charged Stranglets,
expanding Accretion Disks of artificial black holes...this is territory
where the physicists forget about the term TOTAL ENERGY OUTPUT
per cubic millimetre --- matter gets pretty dense when a bunch of gold
or helium nuclei are smashed together and like a ringing bell that's been
tapped a little too hard it may crack and fall apart as the "Harmonics" of near
instantaneous mass densification causes new forms of matter to
be created as the old matter "fractures" and falls apart.

I gave you a star for the most well written piece of science-fiction(much emphasis on fiction) I have read on this website so far.


Oh, and "densification" isn't a word. The word you're looking for is "compression".

[edit on 1-12-2009 by projectvxn]

reply to post by mjtwelve

Don't get too excited about it.

reply to post by projectvxn


I have to make a differentiation between Compression of Matter
and Densification of Energy which technically are NOT equivalent
even though E=MC^2 states that it is. (i.e. Mass = Energy and
Energy = Mass)

By Energy Density, I mean a given amount of kinetic or radiative
energy which could be measured in electron volts, or joules, or
even calories per cubic unit of volume.

By Compression of Matter, I would mean the amount of matter
(i.e. moles...or...mass equivalence) within a cubic volume.
The more matter in that given space, the less "Free Space"
there would be between the elements or their constituent parts.

The term weight has no relevance because it's considered
a relationship of gravitational attraction between another
mass so grams per cubic cm would not be a valid description
at these sub-pico-level scales.

And Pico-level scale is a description of an SI unit of
small distance in the following order and diminishing scale:

Nanometre (Billionthof a metre)
Picometre (Trillionth of a metre)
Femtometre (Quadrillionth of a metre)
Attometre (Quintillionth of a metre)
Zeptometre (Sextillionth of a metre)
Yoktometre (Septillionth of a metre).

These distance scales are SO SMALL they're are basically
inconceivable and meaningless to our 3D real-world environment.

When I use the term "Instantaneous Energy Densification"
I mean it to be the amount of inherent attraction or
repulsion between consituent parts of an atomic scale mass
(i.e. the Strong and Weak Nuclear forces between Protons,
Neutrons and Electrons) which could manifest itself
as kinetic energy (i.e. spin) or radiative energy as
heat (infrared) or emitted nuclei as what happens in
a fusion or fission event or as photons (light).

If the basic boundaries/walls between the attractive and repulsive
forces are broken (i.e. Coulomb's law) or the Strong Force as
noted within discussions of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD),
then either a breakdown of the "quanta" into even more constituent
parts such as the oft-discussed "Virtual Particles" that wink
in & out of existence to form QUARKS as postulated within
Superstring Theory or Membrane Theory is manifested...OR...you
get a massive release of radiative/emissive energy such as in
a nuclear explosion.

What I am trying to postulate and/or make an educated guess
about is that smashing hydrogen, helium or even heavier elements
such as Gold nuclei at each other at high velocity and FOCUSED
upon such a small area...a runaway reaction may result.

You MIGHT get a pulverized nucleus that turns into a soup of
quarks with strange properties (i.e. strangelets) or you get a
hugely emissive reaction has nuclei bouncing off the core of
the reaction and rebound outwards at a high level of energy
which will then interact with our molecular scale environment
(i.e. with the physical walls of the LHC or it's electromagnetic
shielding) which could also cause runaway chain reaction
effects similar in nature to fission.

Originally posted by captiva
So many clever and knowlegeable people posting to this thread, makes me feel like a sardine on a plate of caviar.

I will say though, no matter the benefits to mankind that are instigated by the work done by the LHC, if you think there is no hidden agenda your eyes are glazed over by your passion for science.

Time travel, weapon of some kind or even a dimensional door to or from somewhere. My science says any or all of the above may be part of the hidden agenda.

respects

Exactly, I would say boys with their toys, but I think some of the guys working on this are a bit worried themselves the more they go down this track.

Like typical idiots who do stupid things because they can, they are going to end up creating a lot of new trouble for us again, and once more it will probably be up to some of our hidden ET friends to help get us out of it.