Mini Black Holes

Discussion of the end of the world brought about by ultra high energy colliders.
Stephen
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:09 pm

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Stephen » Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:16 pm

If any of these things happens, we're doomed. They base their safety reports on these 'threats' not being possible. :sleeping-asleep:

oyar
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:28 am

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by oyar » Mon Oct 04, 2010 9:50 am

We need at least to take into friendly hands the future of planet.

IMHO, just from the general thinking, all experiments with the energies more then 0.5-1 TeV should bу omitted. First of all, let us consider the Energy scale eV – MeV – TeV. So in the log. scale of the energies are expressed in the intervals:.
1 – can be connected with fire (1 level of dangerous)
6 – can be connected with atomic bomb (2 level of dangerous)
and 12 in the turn can be connected with 3 level of dangerous.

Thus, 6/1 = 12/6 so as we can suppose that TeV energy engines can belong to MeV energies bombs as MeV energies bombs to usual fire.

Further, we don't know real plans with TeV engines. The creation of such machines can be attributed with «cold war» (1980-1984). USSR was destroyed, so as we had received only USA TeV engines in 1983.

You can say that «all right» with a planet from 1983 till 2010. There is not the case.
At the moment there no direct explanation of «Earth black holes» in Guatemala, China, Ukraine, Russia et al.

http://blog.zhizn.ru/users/1552199/post130680008
«I can to say you, that was not a reason: it is no guilt of geology and it is not caused by the earthquake. That is all, that we know now, and we will be forced to get down inward», - an engineer-geophysicist from the National agency of management in the extraordinary situations Devyd Monterroso reported.

Of course, you can say that there are only several cases of such event. But if we could see in the future, instead of «10 black holes» during 1983-2010, we will see 100 «holes» during 2010-2025, then 10000 "holes" in 2025-2034 and finally 100000000 in 2034-2037.

The earth can go into the central region of the planet. So, we need to have additional variants to escape. Otherwise, if you want to do TeV experiments, you need to give people chances to go from the Earth. If there are not the case, you need to ask all people community for conducting such experiments.

seenjhon
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 3:43 pm

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by seenjhon » Tue Dec 14, 2010 3:55 pm

Great information. thanks.

User avatar
Tau
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: Heemskerk, Netherlands

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Tau » Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:24 pm

oyar wrote:At the moment there no direct explanation of «Earth black holes» in Guatemala, China, Ukraine, Russia et al.
Oh yes there is:
http://www.inspectapedia.com/vision/sinkholes.htm
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/se ... le_/554362
http://www.travelpod.com/travel-photo/t ... /tpod.html
etc etc...
- Tau

User avatar
LarryS
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:46 pm
Location: Seymour, CT, USA

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by LarryS » Tue Jan 04, 2011 3:08 pm

Tau,

Nice to see that you are back posting; however, I must warn you that Scientific Facts will only confuse "them."

User avatar
CharmQuark
Site Admin
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by CharmQuark » Tue Jan 04, 2011 6:17 pm

LarryS wrote:Tau,

Nice to see that you are back posting; however, I must warn you that Scientific Facts will only confuse "them."
No kidding :crazy:
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.

User avatar
Tau
LHCPortal Guru
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:16 pm
Location: Heemskerk, Netherlands

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Tau » Fri Jan 07, 2011 10:00 am

LarryS wrote:Tau,

Nice to see that you are back posting; however, I must warn you that Scientific Facts will only confuse "them."
Agreed.
However, I *still* am allergic to nonsense, and sometimes I fail to hide it. :-)
Last edited by Tau on Wed Jan 12, 2011 1:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Tau

User avatar
CharmQuark
Site Admin
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:22 am
Location: Berwick-Upon-Tweed (UK)

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by CharmQuark » Fri Jan 07, 2011 6:56 pm

Happy New Year Tau ;)
Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted with large ones either by Albert Einstein.

User avatar
chelle
Posts: 741
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:32 am
Location: XL - BXL - B

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by chelle » Tue Jan 11, 2011 3:23 pm

LarryS wrote:I must warn you that Scientific Facts will only confuse "them."
Larry, the only thing that confuses me is that suit you are wearing.

Aside of that I think that Mini Black Holes aren't the thing to look out for, transmission of ultra high energy vibrations through the Aether is.
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich

User avatar
LarryS
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:46 pm
Location: Seymour, CT, USA

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by LarryS » Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:15 pm

It is a proper outfit for a 1650 Italian Particle Physicist ... you see DC and I have been about for a long time ... back when accelerators were much smaller and lodestone based.

User avatar
chelle
Posts: 741
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:32 am
Location: XL - BXL - B

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by chelle » Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:36 pm

LarryS wrote:It is a proper outfit for a 1650 Italian Particle Physicist ... you see DC and I have been about for a long time ... back when accelerators were much smaller and lodestone based.
I got it :)

btw have you seen what old school particle physicists have done to their testing facility? I can imagine what the modernist at the LHC will do to il Mondo with mega-mega forces :p

Image
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich

Shadi9
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Shadi9 » Thu Jan 12, 2012 6:59 am

Regarding the two articles about Physicists destroying the world with mini black holes.

My undestanding is that a black hole is where there is a large enough amount of mass in a small enough space it can create so much gravity (warpage of space) that even light is bent around back towards the center and cannot escape.

The amount of mass needed is a couple of times the mass of the sun. ( I don't know the amount) We do not have that amount of mass on earth, much less the requisite amount of energy to create that much mass. No matter how small, if there is not enough mass for the needed gravity then the object cannot be a black hole. So it seems to me that a mini black hole is not possible.
I have not seen this aspect mentioned in the discussions. Is this correct? If not, can someone provide a simple explanation of why not.

PS, I went to the letters to the editor section and found no method of submitting a post.

Kasuha
Posts: 570
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Kasuha » Fri Jan 13, 2012 6:23 am

In nowaday's universe, it takes a mass of a rather large star to form a black hole by the mass falling on itself once it has cooled enough. But smaller black holes can theoretically form if you find a way how to compress their mass under the necessary limit. And there comes the controversy as some say you can achieve that by colliding particles and some say you can't.

User avatar
chelle
Posts: 741
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 11:32 am
Location: XL - BXL - B

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by chelle » Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:46 pm

Kasuha wrote:In nowaday's universe, it takes a mass of a rather large star to form a black hole by the mass falling on itself once it has cooled enough. But smaller black holes can theoretically form if you find a way how to compress their mass under the necessary limit. And there comes the controversy as some say you can achieve that by colliding particles and some say you can't.
What I find weird is that there's a logic controversy about creating Black Holes, but there is none about Hawking Radiation. How can one be sure about black hole evaporation postulated by theory, when one has to build a machine and scope the whole spectrum to prove the 'theoretical' Higgs. Even more strangely is the fact that some people are saying that: "not finding the Higgs would be more interesting". And yet this radiation is taken for granted in the LHC Safety Study (see below).

Being skeptical about Mini Black Holes but not about the Radiation, is not serious science imho.
Drawing from research performed to assess the safety of the RHIC collisions, the LHC Safety Study Group, a group of independent scientists, performed a safety analysis of the LHC, and released their findings in the 2003 report Study of Potentially Dangerous Events During Heavy-Ion Collisions at the LHC. The report concluded that there is "no basis for any conceivable threat". Several of its arguments were based on the predicted evaporation of hypothetical micro black holes by Hawking radiation and on the theoretical predictions of the Standard Model with regard to the outcome of events to be studied in the LHC. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_of_ ... n_Collider
Dance, even if you have nowhere to do it but your own living room.
Wear Sunscreen by Baz Luhrmann - Mary Schmich

Kasuha
Posts: 570
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:22 pm

Re: Mini Black Holes

Post by Kasuha » Sat Jan 14, 2012 9:44 am

What I find weird is how can you say something that's so clearly not true and try to start a dispute over it.

Post Reply