How Does CERN Do It?

i've read over alot of topics and replies and what not on ats, not most noteable but most puzzling are the people around here stating the CERN is a candidate for scape goat blame surounding the recent earth quakes, sky sightings and what not

one such theory i'm fimiliar with is that in the act of using the new CERN machine, a particle collision could theoretically create an infinitely small black hole that could gravitate slowly into the center of the earth, growing eventually until it ate the earth, the rest of our solar system, etc etc

i understand that during the 'gravitating into the earth' phase and the 'growing' part it could be undetectable for years, but meanwhile it could be starting strange brew on earth like earth quakes and everything else CERN can get blamed for on ats

but other than that, i think alot of people are just sketched out by CERN, because other than that explanation are there really any other ways that CERN could somehow be connected to recent natural disasters taking place?

i see alot of threads with replies designed for CERNs dismantel but i'd like to use this one as the full metal jacket to talk about HOW CERN does it!


cern wiki

cern home page

There is a lot in your description of the black hole evolution that doesn't fit into what we know about the physics of black holes, to begin with. I don't recall the radius of a black hole with one Earth mass, but I think it's something of the order of one inch. There is no way it can absorb the Solar system etc.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
There is a lot in your description of the black hole evolution that doesn't fit into what we know about the physics of black holes, to begin with. I don't recall the radius of a black hole with one Earth mass, but I think it's something of the order of one inch. There is no way it can absorb the Solar system etc.

There is a contradiction or superposition about evolution that seems to be a common disease among people. They seem to consider that a black hole evolves, yet they haven't proven that a black hole has matter.

In the other thread about evolution delusion-ism, people argue that evolution is nothing about creationism. While evolution is nothing about creationism, science seems to have a theory that light doesn't return from black holes.

Then there is this theory of singularities, that really doesn't make sense to be a theory, yet obviously can't ignore it as an instance of thought. I hope that makes sense, or we proven wrong makes right.

There seems this exception about evolution being nothing about creationism. That exception is that they don't tell you about deletion-ism or destruction-ism or destroy-ism, as they don't want that to be the opposite or prove quantum physics suddenly wrong with a sinfinite load of metaphysics.

[Note: I made up a bad word: sinfinite, if you have any clue... ha ha... beat the word filter... "I'm still alive."... make sure there is cake with your wine in sine time and that's in sane.]

reply to post by buddhasystem


this is the thread i remember reading about how a black hole can stay within the earths gravity four years before being noticed

here is a link to a john titor oriented thread concerning black holes and CERN

here is a post about a news article saying people protesting the CERN collider because making black holes is dangerous


i don't know anything 'about' black holes as far as 'evolving' dynamics

reply to post by indigothefish


When it comes to earthern gravities, there seems to be a big confusion about the direction of down.

This is easily solved by the position within a viewpoint where a proposition is held true that nothing exists beyond the solar system. Problem solved.

Until some stupidity tries to force us to choose between love and hate about a certain act they thought was a scientific toy. The act itself obviously isn't off-topic to this discussion (and on other threads). Problem resolved.

If it was a micro black hole, it'd take at least 5 years before we'd get earthquakes.

www.lhcdefense.org...

reply to post by dzonatas


"Evolution" just means change. It does not indicate evolutionary-theory evolution in this context. Blackholes pretty much definitely are going to change throughout their "lives", as in grow larger and emit radiation.

reply to post by Solasis


Now you have mixed science with evolution. Review my thread about conspiracy against metaphysics to understand change versus no change.

Devolve is the opposite of evolve yet they both would be a 'change' (so says you) yet change and no change would be opposites and devolve doesn't mean no change.

Unless you want prove devolve means no change, there is a common disease that might prove it for you.

Review the other thread on evolution delusion where blackholes are not 'massive' in the sense of theory of evolution. Then maybe you might understand how it is possible for a blackhole to never change.

[ Movie whispers: "I thought I could change Him." ]

[edit on 1-3-2010 by dzonatas]

reply to post by dzonatas


Alright, so I misspoke. Evolution Indicates change. Devolution indicates change in the other direction.

Actually, no, I didn't mis-speak! Left indicates direction, but Right is the opposite of Left, and Right does not indicate no-direction!

reply to post by Solasis


Quantum mechanics uses words to describe opposites, sameness, and differences.

These are the kind of words I used earlier and not mere random analogies.

One thing to consider about cern is that you have something that may be able to produce gravitation waves thus a small field inside the earth field. May create competition, conflicting wave fields, could facilitate crust shift.

A sort of Tesla vibration over time.