LHC portal

views are not the same as "go bomb cern" tbh

And having him around like a little forum pet isnt exactly fair either.

My only concern for all of this is the emotional blackmail that im seeing, if someone that needs some knowledge on the lhc and has come to this forum/site, then stuff like this is going to clearly have a negative effect on them, it does with me having to answer to stuff. To me this is a real concern...

yeah i think thats the point no matter what u ask what u show, Ivan's stance never changes period.

that's why every other thread on forums have either:

1: died
2: locked
3: banned Ivan

sad but I dont see an end to this other than agree that we all disagree

Would you like to explain this to me. Haven't we done collisions at 1,960 GeV for the past nine years. Then why would you need a 100 GeV upper limit when the LHC comes online? NOOOOOOOOOOOO dont do it, this is where the threads always reset, to save Ivan the bother here is the reply he WILL post: 1...

Read, for example, a new article of Prof. Eric Johnson “The Black Hole Case: The Injunction Against the End of the World” http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.5480 I've read this and re-read it and I know Prof Johnsons logic is flawed. However he does also have a point that the LSAG report was not impartial, ...

Ahh i see this thread has gone like every other one.

And some of those comments are really shameful Ivan, the ones on CNN and such, going on about bombing places, violence is never an answer.

it flies off into the cosmos?

I don't know but the existence of the universe in its current state must mean that nothing bad happens

just to add some more into the mix have a read of this that Mr Wagner posted recently:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0912/0912.5480.pdf

Any input from anyone on the thoughts about this legal take on LHC saftey?

No 3 is a question without answer, well anything other than the fact ivan "knows" I've never ever ever seen the mathimatical equations that can even remotely describe this theory so, to me, if feels like this example (read not fact)... I can say with 100% confidance that a magnetic hole does not exi...

Electricity cost + calibration and testing = Warm LHC and no Beam, until they are ready to go for the pyhsics run of 2010.

well im still baffled why anyone would want to intentionally kill themselves and their family x the amount of ppl working in the LHC that DONT work for Cern...

but then what do I know..

I've heard its around 100 TeV + tho I've also noted in some papers stuff upto 1 million TeV EDIT that "OH MY GOD" cosmic ray that hit us in 1991 was ten millions times higher in energy than the SSC that would have had an energy of 20TeV. So pretty nuts some of the natural stuff. http://www.fourmilab...

:scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-shocked: :scared-sho...

As taken from one of the Articles: "The spin-ice monopoles have very different origins from those predicted by Dirac's work on quantum electrodynamics and therefore their discovery is unlikely to help physicists develop grand unified theories of particle physics or string theories. But because the m...

that word is something of a wrong context mate, its true that like other colliders it recreates matter that existed the split moments after the big bang, but its not actually a big bang. Thats more a media term, sounds more catchy "big bang machine" rather than Large Hadron Collider, still sometimes...