The Large Hadron Collider (Critics Fear This Could Destroy the Earth)

[jonnycat]

I see what you're saying, and I won't pretend that I know what particle colliders really do, but isn't a nuke just a bigger version of a stick of Dyn-O-Mite.

I know their processess for detonating and exploding are way off base from each other, but they net a similar result on different scales. So if this one is really no different than the smaller ones that exist already, why is it so huge?

[BigBalledOX]

Originally Posted by MagicHallucinations

But they're not trying to re-create the Big Bang. They are trying to re-create the moment after.

Thats when CPS breaks in on George as he lights up a cigarette and Hannah Montana starts to wake up after the roofies wear off right?

[MagicHallucinations]

Originally Posted by BigBalledOX

Thats when CPS breaks in on George as he lights up a cigarette and Hannah Montana starts to wake up after the roofies wear off right?

[MOMO]

With the particle accelerator this big, you will get more particles from the resulting collision. You see, bigger the accelerator, faster they can accelerate the hydrogen atom... near speed of light... which will yield more particles than they did with other colliders.

[MagicHallucinations]

I found it...finally....

Under standard theories, such an energy to produce a micro black hole is orders of magnitude greater than that which can be produced on Earth in particle accelerators such as the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) (maximum about 1.15 × 106 GeV), or detected in cosmic ray collisions in our atmosphere. It is estimated[citation needed] that to collide two aggregates of fermions to within a distance of a Planck length with the currently achievable magnetic field strength would require a ring accelerator about 1000 light years in diameter to keep the aggregates on track. Even if it were possible, any collision product would be immensely unstable, and almost immediately disintegrate

In the future, the possibility of black hole (BH) production at the highest energy accelerators may arise, if certain predictions of superstring theory are accurate.[5][6] These concerns have been particularly acute recently in connection with the LHC, which will begin operation in 2008. If they are produced, it is thought that black holes would evaporate extremely quickly via Bekenstein-Hawking radiation. However, the existence of the Bekenstein-Hawking radiation is controversial.[7] It is also thought that an analogy between colliders and cosmic rays demonstrates collider safety. If colliders can produce black holes, cosmic rays (and particularly ultra-high-energy cosmic rays, UHECRs) should have been producing them for eons, and they have yet to harm us.[8] However, to conserve energy and momentum, any BHs created in a collision between an UHECR and local matter would itself necessarily be produced moving at relativistic speed with respect to the Earth, and should therefore immediately escape into space, as its accretion and growth rate should be very slow. BHs produced in colliders (with components of equal mass) would have some chance of having a velocity less than Earth escape velocity, 11.2 km per sec, and would be liable to capture and subsequent growth. The time scale for them to grow enough to be dangerous is likely to be very long (millions of years), but somewhat controversial.

[Aries]

The current largest PA, which I believe is at Fermilab right next to me, can produce particles for barely a nanosecond before they collapse into themselves.. If anything is created by this new larger PA, they too will also be destroyed within nanoseconds, which is why scientists aren't afraid of any Armageddon-causing black holes(which is only a 1 in 50 million chance of producing) or strangelets.. The scientists who designed and built it aren't worried, but the ignorant who have had nothing to do with the machine are freaking out.

[MagicHallucinations]

Originally Posted by Aries

The current largest PA, which I believe is at Fermilab right next to me, can produce particles for barely a nanosecond before they collapse into themselves.. If anything is created by this new larger PA, they too will also be destroyed within nanoseconds, which is why scientists aren't afraid of any Armageddon-causing black holes(which is only a 1 in 50 million chance of producing) or strangelets.. The scientists who designed and built it aren't worried, but the ignorant who have had nothing to do with the machine are freaking out.

bingo.....

[lildevil20006]

I love how one of the big wigs is quoted as saying that the chance of a "global disaster" was only 1 in 50 million...
which just happens to be about the same as the odds of winning the lottery...and someone wins the lottery every time

I don't wanna be eated by a black hole

Is it weird that i'm actually very slightly terrified by them activating this in one month?

[lildevil20006]

Originally Posted by jonnycat

Just a particle collider? It's at least one of the largest machines ever produced. If they can build tiny little bombs (in contrast) that can level a city, possibly people who are not employed as Particle Physicists, could jump to the conclusion that trying to re-create the Big Bang on a smaller scale could cause a problem here or there.

I'm just saying

For the record!
The Titanic was once the largest moving object in the world...




...just saying

[Aries]

Originally Posted by lildevil20006

I love how one of the big wigs is quoted as saying that the chance of a "global disaster" was only 1 in 50 million...
which just happens to be about the same as the odds of winning the lottery...and someone wins the lottery every time

I don't wanna be eated by a black hole

Is it weird that i'm actually very slightly terrified by them activating this in one month?

The 1 in 50million describes the chance for a black hole to form that is so incredibly small, that it would eat itself instantly. The chances of a black hole that would propagate into something that would sustain itself considerably higher.. Almost negligible.