It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do any physicists have LHC doubts?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   
I have often wondered if any science PhD’s or working physicists have been against the LHC or have cited genuine and scientific based concerns [no pun] about its operation.

I would be interested in links and opinons, but not black holes.




posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   
I think with the known LHC and the hidden version THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE PLAYING WITH BEHIND CLOSED DOORS...
1 still like its access abilities though



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
And they have made their feelings known in a public way?



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Stephen Hawking bet £50 (I don't know if it was to a specific person, or just an open bet) that the LHC would not find the Higgs Boson


“I think it will be much more exciting if we don’t find the Higgs. That will show something is wrong, and we need to think again. I have a bet of $100 that we won’t find the Higgs.”


Stephen Hawking's £50 bet on the world, the universe and the God particle



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
Now that is interesting. I wonder if SH was having a subtle [ish] dig at it?



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
The current model of quantum mechanics is incorrect. The current model predicts that when you do not observe something it is a wave but when you observe it, it becomes a particle. Dumb dumb dumb dumb. The old method of measuring the double slit experiment actually affected the outcome to make it appear that particles act like a wave while not being observed.

Scientists found a new way of measuring photons without affecting them too much and they found that photons are a particle that rides on a wave, at all times. It does not matter if you look at it or not it is still they way it is.

Photons are particles and waves at the same time. This is the direction that we need to head in. They WILL NOT find the Higs because it does not exist. The very wave I am talking about is the mass of that particle warping space around it, just like the Earth does but on a smaller scale.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by mandroids
I have often wondered if any science PhD’s or working physicists have been against the LHC or have cited genuine and scientific based concerns [no pun] about its operation.

I would be interested in links and opinons, but not black holes.


There is:

www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Ancient76
 

He's not a scientist.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 


No, u are!



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ancient76
reply to post by john_bmth
 


No, u are!


Sorry... what?



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by BIGPoJo
The current model of quantum mechanics is incorrect.

...



Here is the basis of my claims in this thread. Please read and educate yourselves before you get roped into the 1930s model of quantum mechanics.

physicsworld.com...



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
The current model of quantum mechanics is incorrect

So what does that suggest and how would LHC help or hinder this?



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by mandroids
 


This means that we have poured countless amounts of dollars into this thing looking for the Higs and will never find it. Don't get me wrong there have been several discoveries that have been made because of the LHC but we may be nearing the time to turn the thing off and just review the ridiculous amount of data they have collected.

This also means that we should invest more in meta-materials that take advantage of this wave/particle duality. We should also think about finding out how to tap into dark energy, which makes up 75% or so of the observable universe.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 02:47 PM
link   
I'm no Physicist, but I have my doubts.

All those giant magnets pushing particles around at warp speed. It's probably this thing that causing all the earthquakes, it's ripping us apart people!


st.



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by BIGPoJo
The current model of quantum mechanics is incorrect. The current model predicts that when you do not observe something it is a wave but when you observe it, it becomes a particle.


From what I got form my phys. lessons, the standard QM model says that the observer affects the outcome of the experiment just by the act of observing, but BOTH "modes" come hand in hand, a photon is both a particle and a wave. What changes is our perception of the particle/wave system.
Which is what you said later in your post.
So, actually, you DO agree with the current model!



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by mandroids
I have often wondered if any science PhD’s or working physicists have been against the LHC or have cited genuine and scientific based concerns [no pun] about its operation.

I would be interested in links and opinons, but not black holes.

mandroids:
Hi!
You have to remember that while the LHC seems really massive and powerful to us, puny humans, our planet is constantly bombarded by much more powerful particles (like cosmic rays).
It is true that there are a lot of things that we ignore about the results, but we know that what we do in small scale with the LHC is done daily in a much more massive way in our upper atmosphere.
So, don't worry, it's actually awesome.


Drakus



posted on Sep, 16 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by drakus
 


The current model implies that being conscious of the path of the particle changes the outcome, it does not. Measuring it changes the outcome because you have to obfuscate on of the slits with a detector, which makes it a one slit experiment. The new method of measurement measures the photons on the way to the slit without obfuscating the path too much.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join