French And CERN Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator) Unknown Planetary Risk To

French And CERN Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator)

Unknown Planetary Risk To Create BIG BANG

French Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator)

Old Dying Physicists want to go out with a BIG BANG

What are we talking about?

Many helpful Links and Video links at end of post.

http://lhcconcerns.com/

In May of 2008 the largest, most expensive scientific experiment, The Large

Hadron Collider will be completed. This mechanical behemoth located along

the French and Swiss border with a total estimated circumference of 17 miles

will be the most powerful particle accelerator in existence. The principal

behind a particle accelerator is that by speeding up the smallest elements

of matter and then colliding them together that they can be broken down

further into even smaller fundamental particles, just as Atoms were once

thought to be the smallest units, so then were Quarks(Up and Down),

Electrons, and Protons discovered.

The Large Hadron Collide is hoped to discover what is referred to as the

"Higgs Boson". Although a theoretical scalar particle theorized by Peter

Higgs in 1974, it is actually a member of the standard model, and it is

believed that the Higgs Boson is what gives matter "mass". To achieve the

observation of the Higgs Boson, the LHC will be smashing these Hadrons

(specifically Protons) together at speeds almost unimaginable to the average

person, at near c( .99999999 % the speed of light).

To quantify the types of collisions, it must be pointed out that two beams

will be set to collide with each other, each beam of protons contains

roughly 2,800 Protons with an energy of 7 TeV (1 Teraelectron Volt =

1.60217646 x 10-7 joules) so the combined energies will be 14 TeV. Although

such energies in collisions are certainly occurring every day in space, this

will be the first time that energies such as these will be observed on

Earth, however what is alarming to us are the myriad of other possibilities

that could arise.

Why haven't I heard about this before?

Honestly, this is a good question, I seem to come accross this response a

lot, it seems that in general most people have never heard of the LHC, or

even particle acclerators in general, I am aware that there has been a lot

more coverage of this in the UK then the America's (probably due to it's

geographical location), but also I suppose the main reason why it is not

covered that often in the states is because of a general lack of interest,

or the belief that the general public is probably incapable of understanding

something so complex. Still however there are several Documentaries and

other programs/magazines that have covered the LHC, so I'm not fully sure

why some people have not heard about this as from a financial perspective

it's the most expsenive (8.2 Billion Dollars) and most powerful scientific

Expirement of al time.

Why We're Concerned

To explain the concern thoroughly and accurately it has to be stated that

the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva is not the first particle accelerator in

history. In 1929 the Cyclotron, invented and developed by Ernest O.

Lawrence, was the first particle accelerator, and from that initial

invention over several decades we have come into a new breed of Larger and

More Powerful Particle Accelerators. Although we have had particle

accelerators in the past, The luminosity at which these operate has

increased dramatically, in fact it is true that prior to the construction of

the RHIC (Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider) such theories as MBH Production,

Strangelets, and several other theories were placed on the table as relevant

possibilities.

So, what's different this time?

This is the point that has to be emphasized, this time things are quite

different, a study was conducted after initial concerns for the RHIC were

explored, and to their conclusion the amount of energy necessary for these

scenarios was not sufficient. The Large Hadron Collider operates at a total

combined energy of 14TeV, which is a lot higher than the energies generated

by the RHIC, as such the possibility of Black Hole creation is a reality, in

fact on CERN's own web site they admit it could create Black Holes, here is

an excerpt from Safety at the LHC

"If the LHC can produce microscopic black holes, cosmic rays of much

higher energies would already have produced many more. Since the Earth is

still here, there is no reason to believe that collisions inside the LHC are

harmful. Black holes lose matter through the emission of energy via a

process discovered by Stephen Hawking. Any black hole that cannot attract

matter, such as those that might be produced at the LHC, will shrink,

evaporate and disappear. The smaller the black hole, the faster it vanishes.

If microscopic black holes were to be found at the LHC, they would exist

only for a fleeting moment. They would be so short-lived that the only way

they could be detected would be by detecting the products of their decay."

We'll cover the theoretical problem of this statement in the next section.

So, what's the problem?

In theory (according to Hawking Radiation) any Black Hole created would

evaporate in Femtoseconds, not having the chance to accrete any mass, and

being essentially harmless, although this is comforting in theory, It has

never been proven, and in fact has been questioned before. The problem is

that although most people in the physics community believe in Hawkings

Radiation, it has no basis in observation. In 2003 Adam D. Helfer Published

a paper concerning Hawking's Radiation coming to the conclusion that

Hawking's Radiation may in fact be incorrect, and that a Black Hole would

not lose mass in such a way. (For the full text of this document go here

Paper By Adam D. Helfer on Hawking Radiation.)

In fact since the LHC has been on the drawing board several studies and

theories which have gained a lot of support in the scientific community such

as "String Theory" and "Extra-Large Hidden Dimensions" have surfaced, which

do indeed place the threshold for Black Hole Creation much lower than

previously thought.

The main problem lies in believing in theory as fact, every argument for

safety made concerning Black Holes and thier creation immediately references

Hawking Radiation, however, if Hawking Radiation turns out to be incorrect

then the Black Hole would continue to accrete mass at an exponential rate.

Now Hold on, No one would willingly create a machine that would create Black

Holes on Purpose?

Of course not, I highly doubt the thousands of scientists involved wish to

usher in Oblivion any quicker than politicians, however the danger lies in

Theory being accepted as Fact, Adam D. Helfer Published a paper recently

which outlines a very strong possibility that Hawkings Radiation may in fact

not exist, which would actually fit in better with the Laws of

Thermodynamics, at which Our current explanation and understanding of the

nature of Black Holes has always been somewhat at Odds.

Alright, so if a Black Hole created doesn't evaporate, what next?

Here is another place that CERN's safety assessment is incapable of

addressing, although these extremely high energy collisions each Proton beam

is in fact coming from opposite directions, Over 2 thousand Protons in each

beam will pretty much collide roughly in the middle, although no collision

would create a particle exactly dead center, or "still", in a relative sense

any MBH or fundamental particle created in such a manner (even with both

beams at a speed of .99999999 c) would be in a relative sense, at Rest, or

to elaborate the term at rest we mean lower than the necessary escape

velocity to escape the Earth's own gravitational pull.

At that point two hypothetical scenarios exist. It would either maintain a

rather low orbit within our planet itself, slowly accreting mass at an

exponential rate, or it's possible it may "gravitate" to the direct center

of the planet in which case would accrete mass very quickly

Wait a second, I've also heard of other dangers like "Strange Matter",

"Bubble Nucleation", and "Magnetic Monopoles", why the focus on Black Holes?

It is true that these scenarios are also possible, however the problem with

representing them accurately is the true danger can never be quantified as

None of these have been observed, however that does not mean the risk is

zero. The very fact that this experiment is called an experiment is the

prove a hypothesis, if the results were truly known then this would not be

occurring in the first place.

The Large Hadron Collider is going to be forcing Protons together in a very

unnatural way, not only forcing them into groups of roughly 3,000 protons

for the collisions, but exposing them to temperatures colder than space as

well (1.9 K or -271 C). These types of collisions in a sense are unnatural

because collisions at those speeds and temperature would never happen,

meaning at the point of activation, no one will truly know these results

until they occur, in a matter of Femtoseconds we would be placing the entire

world in potential Danger. I've seen many websites calculate

possiblity/problem or a percentage of risk, however without many of these

theories as proof, there is no accurate way to calcuate them, So although

the risk potential is unknown, the risk can never be calculated at zero.

Although the credence given Strange Matter production, and it's subsequent

catalytic behavior by the scientific community is not always mutual. Certain

types of Strange Matter could be formed that would catalytically convert all

matter that it touches into strange matter as well, although this is not as

likely as creating a Black Hole, it's worth mentioning because it is a

possibility.

I want to learn more, where can I go?

The internet is a good place, it brought you here, didn't it? Of course you

could always visit the links on the site, and take part in our discussion on

the forum, I would recommend familiarizing yourself with all the issues, and

a basic understanding of Black Holes won't hurt either, of course I can

always recommend reading A Brief History of Time or the Universe in a

Nutshell there is always Google, for as many people as there are concerned,

there are people who believe the danger is zero, it's important for you, to

properly evaluate the facts and come to your own conclusion, of course we

would like your support, however, the goal of this web site is information,

discussion, action, and rationale, we are real people after all, and so are

you.

Thinking outside the box can't hurt either, I encourage you to Talk to a

Professor at a local college, write a Letter to CERN, do whatever you need

to do to inform yourself and make an informed decision, any contribution you

make, even discussing with one other single person in the world, has the

possibility to make all the difference.

Links..

Large Hadron Collider

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

CERN

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CERN

LHC Concerns

http://lhcconcerns.com/

National Geograhic - The God Particle

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/03/god-particle/achenbach-text

BBC News - Lab Fireball May Have Been Black Hole

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4357613.stm

An Open Letter To Stephen Hawking

http://lhcconcerns.com/LHCConcerns/Forums/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=72

Black Holes On Demand (George Street Journal)

http://www.brown.edu/Administration/George_Street_Journal/vol26/26GSJ10a.html

CBC News - LHC

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/science/lhc.html

New York Times - LHC Dangerous?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/15/science/15cern.html?ex=1336881600&en=7c25f6782d7029e7&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

LHC Legal Defense Fund

http://www.lhcdefense.org/

MySpace STOP CERN Website

http://www.myspace.com/stopcern

LHC Risk Evaluation Forum

http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org/

YouTube music Video Of The Atom Smasher (LHC) Black Hole Generator

French Build Doomsday Machine

http://www.misunderstooduniverse.com/France_Builds_Doomsday_Machine.htm

U-Tube Videos

Documentery

Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [1 of 3]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fJ6PMfnz2E&feature=related

Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [2 of 3]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQNPpeVvZ9w&feature=related

Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [3 of 3]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XbKZwXK-3c&feature=related

The Large Hadron Collider: The End Of The Universe?

On Thu, 01 May 2008 10:12:01 +0000, Doomsday Machine wrote:

> speeds almost unimaginable to the average

> person, at near c ( .99999999 % the speed of light)

<mildly>

I can imagine 2c.

So there.

--

tinmimus99@hotmail.com

smeeter 11 or maybe 12

mp 10

mhm 29x13

_Somebody_ help me! I'm _missing_!

< Van der Graaf, "Pioneers over _c_"

"Doomsday Machine" <seelinks@article.com> wrote in message

news:RHgSj.234857$pM4.42972@pd7urf1no...

> French And CERN Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator)

> Unknown Planetary Risk To Create BIG BANG

>

> French Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator)

> Old Dying Physicists want to go out with a BIG BANG

>

> What are we talking about?

>

> Many helpful Links and Video links at end of post.

>

> http://lhcconcerns.com/

>

> In May of 2008 the largest, most expensive scientific experiment, The

> Large

> Hadron Collider will be completed. This mechanical behemoth located along

> the French and Swiss border with a total estimated circumference of 17

> miles

> will be the most powerful particle accelerator in existence. The principal

> behind a particle accelerator is that by speeding up the smallest elements

> of matter and then colliding them together that they can be broken down

> further into even smaller fundamental particles, just as Atoms were once

> thought to be the smallest units, so then were Quarks(Up and Down),

> Electrons, and Protons discovered.

>

> The Large Hadron Collide is hoped to discover what is referred to as the

> "Higgs Boson". Although a theoretical scalar particle theorized by Peter

> Higgs in 1974, it is actually a member of the standard model, and it is

> believed that the Higgs Boson is what gives matter "mass". To achieve the

> observation of the Higgs Boson, the LHC will be smashing these Hadrons

> (specifically Protons) together at speeds almost unimaginable to the

> average

> person, at near c( .99999999 % the speed of light).

>

> To quantify the types of collisions, it must be pointed out that two beams

> will be set to collide with each other, each beam of protons contains

> roughly 2,800 Protons with an energy of 7 TeV (1 Teraelectron Volt =

> 1.60217646 x 10-7 joules) so the combined energies will be 14 TeV.

> Although

> such energies in collisions are certainly occurring every day in space,

> this

> will be the first time that energies such as these will be observed on

> Earth, however what is alarming to us are the myriad of other

> possibilities

> that could arise.

>

> Why haven't I heard about this before?

>

> Honestly, this is a good question, I seem to come accross this response a

> lot, it seems that in general most people have never heard of the LHC, or

> even particle acclerators in general, I am aware that there has been a lot

> more coverage of this in the UK then the America's (probably due to it's

> geographical location), but also I suppose the main reason why it is not

> covered that often in the states is because of a general lack of interest,

> or the belief that the general public is probably incapable of

> understanding

> something so complex. Still however there are several Documentaries and

> other programs/magazines that have covered the LHC, so I'm not fully sure

> why some people have not heard about this as from a financial perspective

> it's the most expsenive (8.2 Billion Dollars) and most powerful scientific

> Expirement of al time.

>

> Why We're Concerned

>

> To explain the concern thoroughly and accurately it has to be stated that

> the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva is not the first particle accelerator

> in

> history. In 1929 the Cyclotron, invented and developed by Ernest O.

> Lawrence, was the first particle accelerator, and from that initial

> invention over several decades we have come into a new breed of Larger and

> More Powerful Particle Accelerators. Although we have had particle

> accelerators in the past, The luminosity at which these operate has

> increased dramatically, in fact it is true that prior to the construction

> of

> the RHIC (Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider) such theories as MBH

> Production,

> Strangelets, and several other theories were placed on the table as

> relevant

> possibilities.

>

> So, what's different this time?

>

> This is the point that has to be emphasized, this time things are quite

> different, a study was conducted after initial concerns for the RHIC were

> explored, and to their conclusion the amount of energy necessary for these

> scenarios was not sufficient. The Large Hadron Collider operates at a

> total

> combined energy of 14TeV, which is a lot higher than the energies

> generated

> by the RHIC, as such the possibility of Black Hole creation is a reality,

> in

> fact on CERN's own web site they admit it could create Black Holes, here

> is

> an excerpt from Safety at the LHC

>

> "If the LHC can produce microscopic black holes, cosmic rays of much

> higher energies would already have produced many more. Since the Earth is

> still here, there is no reason to believe that collisions inside the LHC

> are

> harmful. Black holes lose matter through the emission of energy via a

> process discovered by Stephen Hawking. Any black hole that cannot attract

> matter, such as those that might be produced at the LHC, will shrink,

> evaporate and disappear. The smaller the black hole, the faster it

> vanishes.

> If microscopic black holes were to be found at the LHC, they would exist

> only for a fleeting moment. They would be so short-lived that the only way

> they could be detected would be by detecting the products of their decay."

> We'll cover the theoretical problem of this statement in the next section.

>

> So, what's the problem?

>

> In theory (according to Hawking Radiation) any Black Hole created would

> evaporate in Femtoseconds, not having the chance to accrete any mass, and

> being essentially harmless, although this is comforting in theory, It has

> never been proven, and in fact has been questioned before. The problem is

> that although most people in the physics community believe in Hawkings

> Radiation, it has no basis in observation. In 2003 Adam D. Helfer

> Published

> a paper concerning Hawking's Radiation coming to the conclusion that

> Hawking's Radiation may in fact be incorrect, and that a Black Hole would

> not lose mass in such a way. (For the full text of this document go here

> Paper By Adam D. Helfer on Hawking Radiation.)

>

> In fact since the LHC has been on the drawing board several studies and

> theories which have gained a lot of support in the scientific community

> such

> as "String Theory" and "Extra-Large Hidden Dimensions" have surfaced,

> which

> do indeed place the threshold for Black Hole Creation much lower than

> previously thought.

>

> The main problem lies in believing in theory as fact, every argument for

> safety made concerning Black Holes and thier creation immediately

> references

> Hawking Radiation, however, if Hawking Radiation turns out to be incorrect

> then the Black Hole would continue to accrete mass at an exponential rate.

>

> Now Hold on, No one would willingly create a machine that would create

> Black

> Holes on Purpose?

>

> Of course not, I highly doubt the thousands of scientists involved wish to

> usher in Oblivion any quicker than politicians, however the danger lies in

> Theory being accepted as Fact, Adam D. Helfer Published a paper recently

> which outlines a very strong possibility that Hawkings Radiation may in

> fact

> not exist, which would actually fit in better with the Laws of

> Thermodynamics, at which Our current explanation and understanding of the

> nature of Black Holes has always been somewhat at Odds.

>

> Alright, so if a Black Hole created doesn't evaporate, what next?

>

> Here is another place that CERN's safety assessment is incapable of

> addressing, although these extremely high energy collisions each Proton

> beam

> is in fact coming from opposite directions, Over 2 thousand Protons in

> each

> beam will pretty much collide roughly in the middle, although no collision

> would create a particle exactly dead center, or "still", in a relative

> sense

> any MBH or fundamental particle created in such a manner (even with both

> beams at a speed of .99999999 c) would be in a relative sense, at Rest, or

> to elaborate the term at rest we mean lower than the necessary escape

> velocity to escape the Earth's own gravitational pull.

>

> At that point two hypothetical scenarios exist. It would either maintain a

> rather low orbit within our planet itself, slowly accreting mass at an

> exponential rate, or it's possible it may "gravitate" to the direct center

> of the planet in which case would accrete mass very quickly

>

> Wait a second, I've also heard of other dangers like "Strange Matter",

> "Bubble Nucleation", and "Magnetic Monopoles", why the focus on Black

> Holes?

>

> It is true that these scenarios are also possible, however the problem

> with

> representing them accurately is the true danger can never be quantified as

> None of these have been observed, however that does not mean the risk is

> zero. The very fact that this experiment is called an experiment is the

> prove a hypothesis, if the results were truly known then this would not be

> occurring in the first place.

>

> The Large Hadron Collider is going to be forcing Protons together in a

> very

> unnatural way, not only forcing them into groups of roughly 3,000 protons

> for the collisions, but exposing them to temperatures colder than space as

> well (1.9 K or -271 C). These types of collisions in a sense are unnatural

> because collisions at those speeds and temperature would never happen,

> meaning at the point of activation, no one will truly know these results

> until they occur, in a matter of Femtoseconds we would be placing the

> entire

> world in potential Danger. I've seen many websites calculate

> possiblity/problem or a percentage of risk, however without many of these

> theories as proof, there is no accurate way to calcuate them, So although

> the risk potential is unknown, the risk can never be calculated at zero.

>

> Although the credence given Strange Matter production, and it's subsequent

> catalytic behavior by the scientific community is not always mutual.

> Certain

> types of Strange Matter could be formed that would catalytically convert

> all

> matter that it touches into strange matter as well, although this is not

> as

> likely as creating a Black Hole, it's worth mentioning because it is a

> possibility.

>

> I want to learn more, where can I go?

>

> The internet is a good place, it brought you here, didn't it? Of course

> you

> could always visit the links on the site, and take part in our discussion

> on

> the forum, I would recommend familiarizing yourself with all the issues,

> and

> a basic understanding of Black Holes won't hurt either, of course I can

> always recommend reading A Brief History of Time or the Universe in a

> Nutshell there is always Google, for as many people as there are

> concerned,

> there are people who believe the danger is zero, it's important for you,

> to

> properly evaluate the facts and come to your own conclusion, of course we

> would like your support, however, the goal of this web site is

> information,

> discussion, action, and rationale, we are real people after all, and so

> are

> you.

>

> Thinking outside the box can't hurt either, I encourage you to Talk to a

> Professor at a local college, write a Letter to CERN, do whatever you need

> to do to inform yourself and make an informed decision, any contribution

> you

> make, even discussing with one other single person in the world, has the

> possibility to make all the difference.

>

> Links..

>

> Large Hadron Collider

>

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

>

> CERN

>

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CERN

>

> LHC Concerns

>

> http://lhcconcerns.com/

>

> National Geograhic - The God Particle

>

> http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/03/god-particle/achenbach-text

>

> BBC News - Lab Fireball May Have Been Black Hole

>

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4357613.stm

>

> An Open Letter To Stephen Hawking

>

> http://lhcconcerns.com/LHCConcerns/Forums/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=72

>

> Black Holes On Demand (George Street Journal)

>

> http://www.brown.edu/Administration/George_Street_Journal/vol26/26GSJ10a.html

>

> CBC News - LHC

>

> http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/science/lhc.html

>

> New York Times - LHC Dangerous?

>

> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/15/science/15cern.html?ex=1336881600&en=7c25f6782d7029e7&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

>

> LHC Legal Defense Fund

>

> http://www.lhcdefense.org/

>

> MySpace STOP CERN Website

>

> http://www.myspace.com/stopcern

>

> LHC Risk Evaluation Forum

>

> http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org/

>

> YouTube music Video Of The Atom Smasher (LHC) Black Hole Generator

>

>

>

> French Build Doomsday Machine

>

> http://www.misunderstooduniverse.com/France_Builds_Doomsday_Machine.htm

>

> U-Tube Videos

>

> Documentery

>

> Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [1 of 3]

>

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fJ6PMfnz2E&feature=related

>

> Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [2 of 3]

>

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQNPpeVvZ9w&feature=related

>

> Large Hadron Collider - The Search For The Higgs [3 of 3]

>

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XbKZwXK-3c&feature=related

>

> The Large Hadron Collider: The End Of The Universe?

>

>

>

>

>

I will read this when I have about ten years with nothing to do.

Thanks,

Doomsday Machine <seelinks@article.com> wrote:

>French And CERN Build Massive Particle Accelerator (Black Hole Generator)

>Unknown Planetary Risk To Create BIG BANG

Idiot.

--

Ray Fischer

rfischer@sonic.net