Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Anything can be discussed, tempers may flare.
This forum has no connection with CERN, the LHC or my site.

Moderator: CharmQuark

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.
Shadowdraxx
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:03 am

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Shadowdraxx » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:50 pm

after re-chewing over this published document:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/080 ... 3381v2.pdf

There was indeed a (hypothetically speaking), chance that previous colliders could create mbh's depending on what i believe is the size of the extra dimensions and what amount of warping is involved.

Now this maths is beyond me, however rpenner was kind enough to work out some simpler maths for it, which made sense, now we didnt detect them, so they either:

A: dont exist
B: dont exist within the hypothetically speaking dimensions at previous energy levels.

so nowt to worry about, and if you can bare with it the document its excellent hats off to them for sitting down number crunching that one.

also if anything I've said is wrong, please point it out, I've been really busy and might have miss said something.

Beast
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:05 am

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Beast » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:50 pm

result LHC - ?

result Burning of water -
The whole plastic sphere with mirror metallic coating on the outside,
24mm in diameter, filled with distilled water was placed in the centre
of a pan 410mm in diameter and 320mm in height with the solution of
cement. At the beginning of the cement becoming solid there was formed
even pressure on water in the sphere by analogy with sonoluminescence.
As the result, during some hours the solution of concrete reached the
final hardness and got warmed up to 40*C in the centre of the sphere
surface and a bit less on the edge of the sphere surface. During 24
hours the concrete was gradually cooling down. Further, on the surface
of the concrete there was noticed a defect – an orifice of less than 1mm
beneath the bulging of 45mm in diameter and 4mm in height leading to the
sphere with water – which stopper the burning of the water in the centre
of the reserved space of the sphere.

Beast
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:05 am

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Beast » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:10 pm

LHC - abstract (mathematical) inertia.

Burning of water - objective reality.

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:24 pm

So the LHC can burn water? What the hell are you talking about? :confusion-scratchheadblue:
Last edited by Stephen on Sun Apr 04, 2010 12:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

Shadowdraxx
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:03 am

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Shadowdraxx » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:29 pm

Beast wrote:LHC - abstract (mathematical) inertia.

Burning of water - objective reality.

Stop filling threads full of jibberish, it makes it harder for people that want to read this stuff

User avatar
CharmQuark
Site Admin
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by CharmQuark » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:41 pm

Stephen wrote:So the LHC can burn water? What the hell are you talking about? :confusion-questionmarks: :confusion-scratchheadblue:
Beast has taking over Ivan thread :cry: wonkie :shock: :thumbdown:
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:46 pm

Ivan has some calculations and actual claims, unlike Beast.

User avatar
CharmQuark
Site Admin
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by CharmQuark » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:57 pm

Stephen wrote:Ivan has some calculations and actual claims, unlike Beast.
so true :thumbup:
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.

Shadowdraxx
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:03 am

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Shadowdraxx » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:59 pm

well Ivans claims are wild and so is his style, but he always stays on point, always ready to defend his beliefs in the name of what he feels is right, and you always generally get a human reply back, not just some load of non related jibberish.

User avatar
CharmQuark
Site Admin
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by CharmQuark » Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:00 pm

Shadowdraxx wrote:well Ivans claims are wild and so is his style, but he always stays on point, always ready to defend his beliefs in the name of what he feels is right, and you always generally get a human reply back, not just some load of non related jibberish.
so true.........where is he anyways? am i the only one that misses him not being around :?
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.

Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Stephen » Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:53 pm

Definitely not. Are we masochist for enjoying having him around?
Last edited by Stephen on Sun Apr 04, 2010 12:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
CharmQuark
Site Admin
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by CharmQuark » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:18 am

Stephen wrote:Definitely not. Are we masochist for enjoying having him around? :sleeping-asleep: :sleeping-sleeping:
am not sure what that makes us Stephen but it can't be bad :ugeek: :thumbup:
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.

User avatar
MagneticTrap
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:56 pm
Location: Ukraine Crimea Feodosia
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by MagneticTrap » Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:59 am

From my correspondence at Russian-language forum.
I wrote: Equation of magnetic hole will be achieved at LHC
pB=mc^2.
That means: potential energy (magnetic) = rest energy of proton.
There is no theory of magnetic hole in physics.
Somebody wrote:
Look here (Russian-language article) http://www.jetpletters.ac.ru/ps/1878/article_28613.pdf
Magnetic field was computed at collisions of aurum ions at RHIC experiments. Magnetic flux is quantable in a center of masses reference system, that is why qB = 2 pi k / L^2. According to this formula, (qB)^{1/2}= 348 MeV.
q – electric charge of a quark, L=1.44 fm.
Thanks.

Why here we can see 348 MeV (0.348GeV), but I said that dangerous collisions are collisions with energy 0.25 TeV (250 GeV) per proton, or 510 GeV per collision.

According to my conclusions the minimal dangerous magnetic hole must contain 510 bosons, which can be created at 510 GeV collision. One thirds, or 170 GeV, goes out in the form of radiation, and corresponds to the total binding energy of all bosons inside the hole, or about 1/3 of GeV per every boson.
The mass of every boson inside hole is about 2/3 GeV in energy units.
The number from article, 0.348 GeV corresponds to one quark with the charge 1/3 q. Proton is three-quark (three-polar) structure and for proton we will have the number, which is 3 times bigger, i.e. about 1 GeV.
In a critical magnetic field (10^16 T) proton decays at boson and positron. Boson is captured by hole, where his mass is about 2/3 GeV. The rest, 1/3 GeV, goes into kinetic energy of positron and at gamma photon(s).

Why we did not create a magnetic hole till now?
- Try to throw up 100 coins and to receive all 100 “ups” or all 100 “dawns”.
It is possible, but in order to see such picture, you must throw up these 100 coins approximately 2^100 times (or 1,27*10^30).
No one collider had made this number of collisions.

But the probability can be risen up greatly, if we would raise the energy of collisions.

Or, as they wrote in article: “If magnetic field is defined from qB ~ 1.5 GeV^2, then longitudinal component of a current is much stronger, comparatively to the transverse component, whereas at comparatively weak fields qB ~ 0.3 GeV^2 the enforcement is not observed.” I say that here there is a boundary value of magnetic field for transition of vacuum from antiferromagnetic state into ferromagnetic state.

Conclusion: There are already several little sprouts of magnetic holes theory, but the theory delays drastically comparatively to the experiment. The 20-th February CERN begins work with 3.5 TeV energies per proton. I give 50% that the Earth will be exploded in the nearest weeks.

Beast
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:05 am

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by Beast » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:06 am

> So the LHC can burn water? What the hell are you talking about?

In vacuum LHC there is oxygen.

User avatar
chriwi
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 1:19 pm
Location: Stuttgart Germany
Contact:

Re: Several biggest errors of particle physicists.

Post by chriwi » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:33 pm

@Beast:
In vacuum LHC there is oxygen.
What do you mean by this sentence, for my understanding it is meaningless. :think:
bye

chriwi

Post Reply