You've heard the controversy. Particle physicists predict the world's new highest-energy atom smasher, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) near Geneva, Switzerland, might create tiny black holes, which they say would be a fantastic discovery. Some doomsayers fear those black holes might gobble up Earth--physicist say that's impossible--and have petitioned the United Nations to stop the $5.5 billion LHC. Curiously, though, nobody had ever shown that the prevailing theory of gravity, Einstein's theory of general relativity, actually predicts that a black hole can be made this way.MAYBE THEY SHOULDN'T TAKE A CHANCE.
Now a computer model shows conclusively for the first time that a particle collision really can make a black hole.
Choptuik and Frans Pretorius of Princeton University have simulated such collisions, including all the extremely complex mathematical details from general relativity. For simplicity and to make the simulations generic, they modeled the two particles as hypothetical objects known as boson stars, which are similar to models that describe stars as spheres of fluid.
Using hundreds of computers, Choptuik and Pretorius calculated the gravitational interactions between the colliding particles and found that a black hole does form if the two particles collide with a total energy of about one-third of the Planck energy, slightly lower than the energy predicted by hoop conjecture, as they report in a paper in press at Physical Review Letters.Does that mean the LHC will make black holes? Not necessarily, Choptuik says. The Planck energy is a quintillion times higher than the LHC's maximum.
So the only way the LHC might make black holes is if, instead of being three dimensional, space actually has more dimensions that are curled into little loops too small to be detected except in a high-energy particle collision.
Predicted by certain theories, those extra dimensions might effectively lower the Planck energy by a huge factor.
"I would be extremely surprised if there were a positive detection of black-hole formation at the accelerator," Choptuik says. Physicists say that such black hole would harmlessly decay into ordinary particles.
CERN SHOULD SHUT DOWN THE LHC.
THERE ARE OTHER DIMENSIONS, SO I THINK THEY SHOULD SHUT IT DOWN.
5 comments:
Article says: Predicted by certain theories, those extra dimensions might effectively lower the Planck energy by a huge factor.
I say: As far as I know, the theories referred to are variations of Sting Theory, which does not seem to be panning out very well.
Does Einstein's Physics predict other dimensions? I'm not clear on that.
FROM THE LINK U LAZEE BASTID:
You've heard the controversy.
Particle physicists predict the world's new highest-energy atom smasher, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) near Geneva, Switzerland, might create tiny black holes, which they say would be a fantastic discovery.
Some doomsayers fear those black holes might gobble up Earth--physicist say that's impossible--and have petitioned the United Nations to stop the $5.5 billion LHC.
Curiously, though, nobody had ever shown that the prevailing theory of gravity, Einstein's theory of general relativity, actually predicts that a black hole can be made this way.
Now a computer model shows conclusively for the first time that a particle collision really can make a black hole.
Yes, I read that. But, the link also says that much more energy, than was modeled in their computer model experiment, would be needed to create such a black hole, unless it was in a small dimension which was curled in on itself, as is predicted in String Theory - which I believe has been pretty much discredited by now.
As an explanation for why we are unable to detect any transmissions from technologically advanced races elsewhere in the galaxy, the possibility that LHC's are a doomsday machine must be taken seriously. The theoretical possibilities ought to be understood before treading in this direction. That or we ought to have a beach-head on another world.
Boys,boys,boys Black holes are connectors between galaxies to provide the energetic flows of the componentry that makes the super universes run.Our science department is definitely not "Your" science department. We generally dont speak as much as your theoretical boys,who wander and wander through life without even a tiny bit of logic to see the expressed activity of the system that provides the eco-system for each habitable sphere,versus the process spheres that provide our gsases from light frequency to other geometrical processes to provide the mechanics of the system.
The money that has been spent and the wacky conclusions that are dreamed up do not speak well to the ability of those boys who make up the bulk of the sscholarly components that have driven the society into such a stupor that any return to reality is not expected.
The myopic view from a telescope can only see just so much in our quadrant,and complete theories are built and "Peers" are chosen,and must be minded. Now dontcha just possibly think that that scenario is tantamount to mental illness? We do.
Seekers only have to ask the right set of people for better information,but that never happens as they are so emotionally pre-dispositioned to follow some old school tasker that theorized and then summoned his/her imaginary guru to reality that performs the religious ceremonial act of group think that sinks them all,but they enjoy every second of it and as long as one of the club has his/her funding,a quorum can be attained for any nonsense they can theorize.
So,the LHC foolish boys will not create a black hole or anything else useful ,except their paycheck.
But ,isnt that what you boys were promised,the perfect prescription to personal financial wellness when you joined the phi betta kappa club of "Educational Institutions" and so why do you boys kibbutz so much at each others outcomes when your very best process at providing commentary and conclusions have no scientific merit of any sort,and you are forced by choice to stay in the matrix that was provided for you by sequestering actual information when it comes to earth processes science and history.
Post a Comment