Neutron stars and white dwarfs are the main objects being used to demonstrate the safety of the LHC by physicists. The rest of your post just doesn't make sense, as CERN scientists were the first ones to bring up this argument.Kasuha wrote: I fail to see how survivability of neutron stars can affect safety of LHC.
Review of Long-Term Black Hole Risks
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.
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.
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
- DCWhitworth
- LHCPortal Guru
- Posts: 599
- Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 8:13 am
- Location: Norwich, UK
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
That means I'm outta here . . .Xymox wrote:I moved this to controversial topics as that is what it is...
DC
The LHC - One ring to rule them all !
The LHC - One ring to rule them all !
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
Xymox wrote:Wow my goodness...
We all need a group hug now dont we...
- CharmQuark
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
- Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
Did Chris say group hug!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stephen it's been a pleasure getting to know over the past few months you have come a long way even if you don't realise it Just think it's nearly my birthday although someone said it was the 31st wonkie that is imagine sleeping through my Birthday keep strong and you know where i am if you need me
Stephen it's been a pleasure getting to know over the past few months you have come a long way even if you don't realise it Just think it's nearly my birthday although someone said it was the 31st wonkie that is imagine sleeping through my Birthday keep strong and you know where i am if you need me
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
Fact #1: There is no proof the whale can exist at all.Stephen wrote:Neutron stars and white dwarfs are the main objects being used to demonstrate the safety of the LHC by physicists. The rest of your post just doesn't make sense, as CERN scientists were the first ones to bring up this argument.Kasuha wrote: I fail to see how survivability of neutron stars can affect safety of LHC.
Fact #2: There is no proof the whale can be created by particle collisions.
Fact #3: Nobody has ever observed the whale being created although particle collisions are going on in whole universe ever since Big Bang and we are watching whole universe through thousands eyes all the time.
Fact #4: Nobody has ever observed any effects the whale is supposed to have on celestial bodies.
The document you are referring to is basically just trying to explain why nobody has ever observed the whale, trying to make grounds for even hypothetical existence of the whale.
So it's like - it exists because we cannot see it.
If this makes sense to you and my posts don't .... enjoy your ride.
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
SAVE THE BABY WHALES !
There may be a 50 % probability that homeless baby whales might be created at the LHC.
This can not be tolerated !
In this event, i suggest that all profits from ticket sales go to purchasing better magnets.
(maths not important, this is serious).
There may be a 50 % probability that homeless baby whales might be created at the LHC.
This can not be tolerated !
In this event, i suggest that all profits from ticket sales go to purchasing better magnets.
(maths not important, this is serious).
- CharmQuark
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
- Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
this pleases mespencer wrote:SAVE THE BABY WHALES !
There may be a 50 % probability that homeless baby whales might be created at the LHC.
This can not be tolerated !
In this event, i suggest that all profits from ticket sales go to purchasing better magnets.
(maths not important, this is serious).
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
Can anyone clarify to me why this paper's conclusions about white dwarfs not being qualified to be used as safety arguments are not true? So far you guys attacked the author and repeated the old safety arguments, but haven't given an explanation as to why his specific claims are false.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying he's right or anything. I would just really appreciate it if someone could disprove his claims.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying he's right or anything. I would just really appreciate it if someone could disprove his claims.
- March_Hare
- Posts: 135
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:09 pm
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
re: Campaign to save the baby whales
Just install a large swimmingpool at the bottom of each experiment. Due to their mass they'll come into existence at near zero velocity so they'll drop right into it.
Just install a large swimmingpool at the bottom of each experiment. Due to their mass they'll come into existence at near zero velocity so they'll drop right into it.
Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws.
~Douglas Adams
~Douglas Adams
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
Whoa ! Damn !
This is GOOD... LHC creates whales !
But what if,,,, a whole lot of them got created ! Like one per collisions !!!! OMG...
10E12 whales per second...
Very bad... Whales could destroy the world... This is bad... we need to alert Ivan...
This is GOOD... LHC creates whales !
But what if,,,, a whole lot of them got created ! Like one per collisions !!!! OMG...
10E12 whales per second...
Very bad... Whales could destroy the world... This is bad... we need to alert Ivan...
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
We need to address Stephen's point... Im not smart enough...
But I like whales...
But I like whales...
- CharmQuark
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
- Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
Stephen was this not was being discussed in chat yesterday? Hope you are alright remember keep smiling we are all gonna be alrightStephen wrote:Can anyone clarify to me why this paper's conclusions about white dwarfs not being qualified to be used as safety arguments are not true? So far you guys attacked the author and repeated the old safety arguments, but haven't given an explanation as to why his specific claims are false.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying he's right or anything. I would just really appreciate it if someone could disprove his claims.
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
If whales could actually be created in the experiment, it would indeed be dangerous. Similar to the world being destroyed by nanotechnology.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0dYPnui3rM&feature=hd
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0dYPnui3rM&feature=hd
Last edited by Stephen on Thu Mar 25, 2010 9:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Review of Black Hole Risks
We discussed magnetic fields in neutron stars, and reached the conclusion that they should have trapped black holes regardless of that. However, the people who reached this conclusion acknowledged the fact that this educated assumption could very well be wrong. So while it makes me feel better, it would be even more great to find additional information on the subject and to address the issue of white dwarfs as well.CharmQuark wrote: Stephen was this not was being discussed in chat yesterday? Hope you are alright remember keep smiling we are all gonna be alright
It's definitely important to remind ourselves that we're going to be alive after the collisions 5 days from now, and not eaten by strangelets, magnetic holes, vacuum bubbles, chain reaction, black holes, something unknown, hungry whales etc. I love your new nickname, by the way.