Originally posted by ucalien
I can tell you have reservations about the LHC. Many people do. It is common to fear the unknown, or that which we do not understand. And to justify
those fears, and make rational that which is irrational to us. We must make the object of our concern something we CAN understand in our mind.
Unfortunately that often takes a mythical dimension, rather than a scientific one.
For some inexplicable reason, even in this enlightened day and age, folks still trust a good presentation of mumbo jumbo over a solid scientific
It's just not .... logical.
I do not mean to offend, but the yarn you have spun with bits from here, and pieces placed there ... begs a retort.
Did you ever hear the story of the four blind monks and the elephant? (Replace monks and the elephant with whoever, the story is told in all walks of
life) Having never encountered an elephant, the only way they could discover what this monstrosity could be, was to split up and each take a section
and describe what they felt with their hands. Can you imagine what when through the head of the monk who got the trunk end? By the end of their
exploration what they collectively described in no way resembled an elephant as we know it.
And, that is precisely how you have described the LHC and it's date with doomsday .Based on descriptions, first and second hand.
Well, I suppose we should get this over with ...
If you present a valid scientific argument, there will be little to argue.
First, The photo of the opening above? The photo was taken during construction and is just an enclosed part of the tunnel now. The four intersections
where the particles will collide are streamlined to a much smaller diameter so as to assure there IS a collision of particles. And, they are more
governed than expressed in the video, because it is a "controlled" experiment. Common sense. (To use the phrase you repeat many times ... mostly
where common sense isn't really an applicable term)
I can't even believe you used the ole "superimpose the evil God's statue on the coil" trick. owwww .. Ahhhhhh. And the crowd goes hush, thinking
it is some revelation and indication that something is very wrong here ... Oh, it does give our imagination something to relate to. The word is
First done by William Henry
. A religious zealot searching for 'Freedoms Gate' or a star
gate. He was the first to offer the notion (After seeing a photo image from Cern of the coil) that the LHC resembled the glyph of the machine-like
device that took the Mayan rulers to 'the other side' to be with their Gods.
That was 2007, I believe.
Shiva. No mystery there. The statued figure was given to CERN by the Indian Department of Energy. There’s a plaque next to it telling how some Hindu
ideas about matter relate to modern day particle physics.
It is not near the collider, but outside the CERN building.
Your two Scientists; Prof Irina Aref'eva and Dr Igor Volovich had published in Physics Review Focus (An APS review based Journal) and were disproved.
Then, Published the same theory virtually unchanged in New Scientist (were David Icke and many others were quick to quote from).
New Scientist. - The Physics publication that does not review it's authors. If you're in college and use that as a source your paper receives an
immediate failing grade. Peer review is an integral part of the scientific method which allows others to try and disprove your theory.
Here's a link to Joanne Nova
. A science writer of some fame and
And, finally. Sourcing theses guys: Science Guardian/New AIDS Review/Damned
If they had E=mc2
as the theory of the day I would seriously have to wonder if Einstein was right.
Guardians of science, they are not.
Science, real science, is actually spoken in one language - Math.
And, it needs no guardian. .... for it is the ultimate truth.
Either it equals, or it doesn't.
But it does need lot of batteries for your calculator.
'course .. if we blow up or get sucked in, you'll have the last laugh when you say I told you so.
But, it's not bloody likely.