Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ

Board index » Other topics » Controversial topics


Forum rules


Any controversial topic can be discussed. Freedom of expression is encouraged. The scientific validity of things posted in this forum may stray from reality quite wildly and the reader is advised to keep that in mind. Please refrain from bad language and DO NOT get overly abusive with other members. You MUST post in English. It is OK to have fiercely intense debate. This forum has no connection with CERN, the LHC or my site. The views here do not represent the forum's views or my views in any way. It is meant as a place to debate or discuss subjects that may create heated debate. Almost no moderation will occur in this forum at all.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1130 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 76  Next
Author Message
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Posts: 161
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Here is explanation of the most visible crude error, made in 2003 safety article.

1. Let the length of free path of a particle is equal to 1 meter, r = 1 m.
Let the radius of the object is equal to 1000 meters, R = 1000 m.
How many collisions will undergo the particle in order to exit the object?

Solution. R/r = 1000. N = (R/r)^2 = 1 000 000.

2. How many Earth’s protons will be ruined by dangerous particle, if R/r = 10^9?

A. CERN’s solution: N = (R/r)^2 = 10^18.
B. My solution: The Earth has its own gravity field. Consequently, the trajectory of a particle between collisions will not be straight line, but curved to the center of attraction. As a result the dangerous particle will constantly drift to the center of the Earth. As a result the dangerous particle will ruin about N/n Earth’s protons, where: N – the total number of Earth’s protons; n – the number of created dangerous particles.

Another crude error, made in the CERN’s safety documentation, is in equating of the consequences of protons collisions at LHC with collisions of cosmic particles with atmospheric ones.

To see the drastic difference between such consequences, let’s make two thought experiments.
There are two 10 kg bottles with neutrons.
Additional requirements, used in the model: 1. free neutrons do not decay; 2. proton do not capture neutron; 3. any nuclei, heavier than proton, can capture free neutron; 4. neutrons do not interact with the matter of bottle; 5. the density of neutrons in the bottle is the same as of water.

A. Let somebody put one slowly moving nucleus into the bottle. Neutrons will begin to be captured by the growing and dividing nuclei. In a couple of moments this laboratory will be exploded a town will look like Hiroshima after the nuclear attack.
B. If somebody will bombard the same bottle by nuclei, having the kinetic energy about several TeV, he will see that nuclei are ruined in collisions and formed a cloud of protons and neutrons.

A. Approximate way of reactions can look like this dividing chain:
He3+n -> He4;
He4+n -> He5;
He5+n -> He6 -> Li6+e;
Li6+n -> Li7;
Li7+n -> Li8 -> Be8+e;
Be8+n -> Be9;
Be9+n -> Be10;
...
U235+n -> X+Y+2n
X+n ->...; Y+n ->...
two branches;
...
four branches;
...
eight branches;
...
Collaptical explosion!

B. Nuclei with TeV kinetic energy will be ruined by high energy collisions with neutrons in the backward order in crude approximation.

Nuclear collapse is impossible because the repulsive electrostatic forces of protons. That is way, I named nuclei by “nuclear quasi-holes”.
Magnetic collapse has no limit. Magnetic hole will grow till there is the food, - the matter of planet or star.

The biggest error of CERN physicists is in the equating the consequences of A and B.
A. Collisions of protons at LHC;
B. Collisions of cosmic protons with atmospheric protons.

Similarity: Energies in A and B are sufficient in order to make microscopic magnetic holes.

Difference: Velocities of created holes relatively surrounding matter are drastically great.
A. Magnetic holes, made on LHC, can have very small velocities, such as slow nucleus entered into the neutron-bottle, and exploded the town.
B. According to conservation law of 4-momentum, cosmic holes have relativistic velocities, such as TeV nuclei, destructed in the neutron-bottle.

Result:
A. LHC’s holes will capture slowly moving particles and grow. The bigger hole becomes – the bigger its rate of growth.
B. Atmosphere particles move relatively holes with relativistic velocities and, correspondingly, they have TeV kinetic energy, relatively holes. As a result, magnetic holes will be ruined almost immediately. Such collisions lead to creation of showers of secondary particles. Physicists observe such showers.

In our upper model with two neutron-bottles we could see that bombardment of bottle by eV-nuclei can lead to Hiroshima-like explosion, but TeV-nuclei bombardment are safe. Correspondingly LHC-collisions can destroy the Earth; cosmic-atmospheric particle collisions occur constantly and safe.

Most of physicists are confident that heavy particles, created at LHC will decay.
That is a deadly error.

LHC can create a particle with the mass by 10 000 times greater than the mass of proton.

To imagine this, compare the masses of a human and of a railway train.

Imagine what will happen, if biologists would make a creature with the mass of railway train, but having the human size. What will happen to you if this creature would seat at the roof of your house, exactly over you? Any roof will be broken and you would be smashed into a thin film and pushed deep into the ground.

Now imagine a proton, as soap bubble, and a liquid drop of the same size.
What will happen to protons, if the bubble has a field, attracting protons?
Protons would be ruined and their remnants would condense onto the drop.

Particle physicists think that proton consists from three point-like quarks (u, u, d). In fact, proton can be composed from some continuous substance, rotating with relativistic velocity. This rotating substance creates three mixed electro-magneto-weak poles (u, u, d). In a strong magnetic field this three-pole construction can be ruined, and the two-pole construction can be created. This process is accompanied by ejection of positron.

There are two independent math proves that this reconstruction can be performed at energies about 0,25 TeV per colliding particle, if the magnetic moment of resulting two-pole particle is the same as the magnetic moment of proton. If its value is different, then the needed energy would also be different.

We know two types of explosions: chemical and nuclear. Astronomers see the third type of explosions – collaptical. At nuclear explosion only a few thousand’s parts of explosive rest energy is realized in the form of radiation and kinetic energy of fragments. At some stellar collaptical explosions about a half of rest energy of the star is released in the form of radiation and kinetic energy of the rejected stellar shell. What type of collaptical explosions do astronomers observe: gravitational into black hole or magnetic into magnetic hole?
Is it possible to switch the magnetic collapse at collider?
My answers: The observed collapses are magnetic ones. Magnetic collapse can be switched on by powerful colliders.

LHC will be switched on in the mead-November; the first collisions are waited in a few weeks later. Do we survive or do we start into outer space?

The Earth after the magnetic collapse will transform into a small region of exited superconducting vacuum. This region’s diameter is about 10 meters. The thickness is about 2.5 meters. The strength of magnetic field in this region is about 10^16 teslas. Because of the strong magnetic interaction, this small magnetic hole will move on spiral trajectory to the Sun. As a result, the Sun will explode and astronomy amateurs from neighbor stellar systems (alien free thinkers) will observe novae or supernovae phenomenon. Alien stephen hawkings will say: “The world will not come to an end when the LHC turns on. The LHC is absolutely safe. ... Collisions releasing greater energy occur millions of times a day in the earth's atmosphere and nothing terrible happens”

The next crude error of CERN physicists is hidden in the formula of magnetic* catalyses of proton decay

M + p = M + e+.

More correct formula must contain the number n:

M{n} + p = M{n+1} + e^+.

This number shows the number of x-bosons in magnetic hole. These bosons have the equal quantum numbers. Magnetic hole works as laser. The word “laser” originated as an acronym for Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. Laser creates the same photons, which are bosons with zero mass energy. Because of zero mass, photons fly away from laser with the speed of light. Magnetic trap creates x-bosons, which have non-zero rest mass. These bosons do not fly away but becomes the constituent part of magnetic hole. The bigger is the number n – the bigger is the rate of magnetic collapse of ordinary matter into magnetic hole.

* Physicist usually say: “monopole catalyses of proton decay”, I say that magnetic hole is magnetic dipole and M in my upper formulas denotes magnetic dipole.

I give the following probabilities:
A. 10% - magnetic collapse will start at 0.45 TeV;
B. 50% - magnetic collapse will start at 3.5 TeV, if A did not happen;
C. 70% - magnetic collapse will start at 7 TeV, if B did not happen.
30% I leave to my mistake.

Why is such confidence?

Compare Newtonian black hole and magnetic hole:
GMm / r = mc^2 / 2;
pB = mc^2.

It was obtained two independent proofs that the equality pB = mc^2 is reachable at the energies of modern colliders, http://darkenergy.narod.ru/magtren.html
There are many arguments in favor the fact that magnetic holes exist, and astronomers see them, but call them on the error as black holes, http://darkenergy.narod.ru/argen.html
It was found several crude errors and criminal lies in the assessment documents about the safety of LHC, http://darkenergy.narod.ru/tezeng.html

The rate of MH’s growth is not known exactly. Magnetic Hole can destroy the Earth in the period from 1000 seconds to 1000 days. If the second is correct, then you will wish to bomb the LHC yourself. But then it would not save you already, because magnetic holes would already grow inside the Earth.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 970
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
Well in the next few years we will either prove you really have no idea what your talking about OR we will be consumed by a black hole..

My prediction is 100% that you have no idea what your talking about. IMHO of course.

They make medication for these kinds of illnesses. Have you researched this or just the end of the world brought about by the LHC ?

Lets discuss your life. I am interested in finding out what you personal life is like ?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:43 pm 
Offline
LHCPortal Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:13 am
Posts: 557
Location: Norwich, UK
MagneticTrap wrote:

I give the following probabilities:
A. 10% - magnetic collapse will start at 0.45 TeV;
B. 50% - magnetic collapse will start at 3.5 TeV, if A did not happen;
C. 70% - magnetic collapse will start at 7 TeV, if B did not happen.
30% I leave to my mistake.



10% chance over what period ?

Given that the TevaTron has reached figures well in excess of 0.45 TeV and nothing seems to have happened I guess practical physics says you are wrong.

_________________
DC

The LHC - One ring to rule them all !


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:01 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 970
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
One of the biggest problems in the world today are people who are self proclaimed experts. No formal training at all in the field. No actual experience in the field. They just research things that match what they want to believe and then quote it as "proof" no matter how obscure it may be. They also 2+2=6

Then you have the "End of the world". There is always a segment of the population that truly believes some event/thing will end the world. They think about this to obsession.

When you combine the 2 you get a Tin Foil Hatter obsessed about the LHC ending the world. THE WORLD WILL END TODAY,,, oh wait it didn't end,,, let me come up with a new reason,,,, there NOW it will end... Oh wait that didn't work,,, ok THIS is the proof ! Oh wait... And they just go on forever. NEVER LEARNING FROM THEIR MISTAKES or doing any self assessment of their beliefs.

They also tend to like the attention that being the "ONLY ONE WHO KNOWS THE TRUTH" that preaching the end of the world brings.

If you add the whole anti-science stance of some conservative religions then you get truly cult level obsession with stopping the LHC..

Never mind that same person would allow a PET scan if it might save them from a medical condition.

This segment of the population has discussed the end of the world for hundreds of years AT LEAST.. It never happens of course. Just the same old broken record...

The real danger from them is that they can scare other less knowledgeable people. Its a serious problem that I take seriously.

Lets discuss this. How much time each day do you think about / discuss / research the end of the world ? Do you consider majority expert opinions or research just what you want to believe no matter how obscure ?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Posts: 161
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Quote:
Given that the TevaTron has reached figures well in excess of 0.45 TeV and nothing seems to have happened I guess practical physics says you are wrong.



Tevatron: proton-antiproton.
LHC: proton-proton.
Tevatron: B=0.
LHC: B=2B_1.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:32 am 
Offline
LHCPortal Guru

Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:03 am
Posts: 184
Please please please dont engage this "debate" i can link several forums where it starts identical to this semi random figues with no baseline maths involved, leading to tevatron and on and on and erm yeah, but the fact is all it does is go round in circles for 6 months until either:

A: Ivan is banned

B: Thread is locked

IVAN mate serious give it up already many many many people have asked you time and time again to write a paper with the MATHS of this home made theory, and submit it to a journal, dont continue to link the same stuff and promote your "Magnetic trap of the devil" site, it just gets people who are interested in real discussion angry and unwilling to listen.

and what ever you do, dont do what u did on the forum below....

Quote:
The probability that you will be killed by CERN in the period of the next day is about 2-3%.
The probability that you will be killed by CERN till December 25 is about 30%.

Say about these probabilities to your President.


http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=26582&st=0

However Ivan, its worth noting (for good reasons) that although you are scaring REAL people with this stuff, the thread which was created has been (very patiently) answered and broken down for us laymans to understand, for this those guys are due big respects to helping out calm down some scared people, and to anyone else out there it is wanting to learn for themselves and get involved, its well worth a good read, u feel the fear melting away the more you read it.

Peace out to all (yup inc u ivan).


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:39 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 970
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
Wow and I thought I was being intense.. That forum really covered it..

I am sorry... I have sorta lost it on self proclaimed experts saying the world is going to end..

As long as the posting stays down in this forum, they can post all they want. Its cage rules down here. Bare knuckle. Lets have some fun...

I encourage it... I also encourage anyone to release any pent up energy and language they may feel a need to express on these subjects. I think many of us are really tired of this fear mongering and delusional behavior scaring people.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:45 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 970
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=121


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Posts: 161
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Quote:
Please please please dont engage this "debate" i can link several forums where it starts identical to this semi random figues with no baseline maths involved,..


1. That is you, who give no math. I my first post I wrote some math about deadly crude errors in documents about humanity safety from LHC. Do you agree or disagree with my math in the first post upper.

2. In my page http://darkenergy.narod.ru/magtren.html there are two math proves of reality of MAGNETIC holes. In my page http://darkenergy.narod.ru/argen.html you can find dozen of additional arguments that magnetic holes are much more real and more dangerous than black (gravitational) holes.

Quote:
IVAN mate serious give it up already many many many people have asked you time and time again to write a paper with the MATHS of this home made theory, and submit it to a journal…


That is impossible on two reasons:

1. I am an independent researcher and do not belong to any institute.
2. Most editors of journals are dependent from contemporary scientific religion – Big Bang. In my cosmology H=73,34 km/(s*Mpc), which is the frequency of Universe 4-d rotation. Here is my picture of such rotation: Image


Quote:
The probability that you will be killed by CERN in the period of the next day is about 2-3%.
The probability that you will be killed by CERN till December 25 is about 30%.

Say about these probabilities to your President.


Yes, that is true. In a couple of years the Solar system will look like remnants of SN 1987A. Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:49 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 970
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
A-ahahahaha.....

OK so we will be able to prove your theory. if we are here in 2 years your completely wrong, is that correct ? So 7TeV collisions will disprove you is that correct ?

I WILL REVISIT THIS POST IN 2 YEARS or at 7TeV collisions... TRUST ME I WILL....

Wow that is great.... I will love having you post... You even have pretty pictures !

So what independent review has your work had ? ANY Independent review ?
Любой независимый обзор?

You just do it for the attention ?
Просто делать это за внимание ?

I enjoy Discern, he is a good person. I can tell.

You are the type of person I do not like. I can tell..


Просто делать это за внимание


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 4:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Posts: 161
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Quote:
OK so we will be able to prove your theory. if we are here in 2 years your completely wrong, is that correct ? So 7TeV collisions will disprove you is that correct ?


No, not completely. I give 30% that we will survive at 7 TeV collisions. I give 95 % that we will survive at 0.45 TeV collisions.

Quote:
So what independent review has your work had ?


It is very great to discuss it all here.

In BB theory Universe was born about 13 billions years ago.
In my model Universe make one 4-d rotation per 13.34 billions years.

In BB theory stars shine because of nuclear reactions occurring inside them.
In my model stars shine because of space consumption.

In BB theory black holes undergo Hawking evaporation.
In my model stars shine according to corrected Hawking formula. Hawking had lost the square root from Dirac big number.

In BB theory black holes are possible.
In my model gravitational collapse is very rapid and it is accompanied by gamma-burst and disappearance of gravity hole's funnel. Gravitational collapse is the second phase. The first phase is magnetic collapse. At the time of magnetic collapse 1/3 of objects mc^2 transforms into radiation and into kinetic energy of thrown out object’s shell. Gravity collapse begins under sufficient mass of magnetic hole and it finishes by ejection of 2/3 of mc^2 in the form of gamma-rays.

In standard model proton CONSISTS from 3 quarks.
In my model proton HAS three mixed poles (electro-magneto-weak).

In standard model they look for Higgs boson as an exited state of Higgs field.
In my model at these energies they will create a microscopic region of exited vacuum. This region will grow by capturing and transforming the ordinary matter into...


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:06 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 970
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
Again.......


what independent review has your work had ?

How do we go about proving your theories ? What tests do we need to do ?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Posts: 161
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Quote:
what independent review has your work had ?


It had no any review. It was published in my web-site and on some forums, where I was sometime immediately banned by bigbangers.

Quote:
How do we go about proving your theories ?


Begin from this thread. Read my first post, think, make your own conclusion.

Quote:
What tests do we need to do ?


Inhabitance of SN 1987A had already make such tests.

Image


Last edited by MagneticTrap on Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:26 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 970
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
Wow your web site is,, ummm,,,, interesting...

Quote:
Send police to CERN and arrest Rolf Heuer and all his bigbangers. He is deadly dangerous for all humanity. He can kill you today with great probability.


Quote:
Those are you, who already deadly scared many citizens of the whole Earth. They, probably, feel themselves as doomed to death. We do not know exactly the day when you will shoot us, and we do not know will we survive.


Your a drama queen huh ?

Its all about attention..

I am very interested in your personal life. There is some pretty strong dysfunction here. What happened. Is the LHC the first thing you have predicted would end the world ? What other stuff are you interested in ?


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:30 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:55 pm
Posts: 970
Location: Phoenix, Az USA
Quote:
Begin from this thread. Read my first post, think, make your own conclusion.


NO. no no...

Your theories need to be proven and checked. BB theory has a HUGE advantage over you. Its been checked and rechecked and tested...

Your has NO TEST and NO CHECKS... You just made it up yourself !. No one who has seen it can verify any part of it.

Sorry you loose...


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1130 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 76  Next

Board index » Other topics » Controversial topics


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: