GET READY, GET A BREW, POPCORN HERE WE GO.....
1. If black holes are created and evaporate, will they continue experiment with them, even though they don't know all of their properties?
2. If stable black holes will be created, how long it will take for the LHC to stop the collisions, and how many of these black holes will be created in the meantime?
3. If stable black holes were created, will particle accelerators be banned globally?
Ok lets rewind for 10 mins, the 1 a second thing came from a generated number at random, ignoring the theories and assumed its true, so they only stated it could and remember its actually irrelevant how many are created as ill demonstrate below but first you have to understand this, to generate a Mbh at 14 TEV requires a lot of "what if's", to help below is a cut where the same question was asked, how probable are they in the first place (fast answer is, you have really more chance to will the lottery 4 times in a row, if u wanna talk % chance of this happening).
Ok So even if the extension of Quantum Field Theory known as Super symmetric String Theory is true -- that doesn't by itself
imply that the LHC can create black holes. You need String theory's assumption
of extra spacial dimension, plus the foundationless assumption
that at least some of these extra dimensions are much larger than the Planck Scale or some other way of tampering with the behaviour of gravity near the TeV scale.
Thanks to Rpenner for this above, but basically "foundationless assumption" think about that aka no one has written anything to explain a process of how that would happen. It’s like getting in on plane and assuming you can fly it, without learning.
Next added that ALL the papers published regarding Mbh production don’t even talk about the theory of creation they just assume once again that LHC = black hole, just for the sake of (safety) argument.
So given the above how many folk at Cern want to believe in this one of many possible maths equations to explain the missing link in our robust standard model, erm well like I say I’ve never seen any papers, and I watched the "LHC is safe" video which is a breakdown of the LSAG report, the room was full, Ellis (the speaker), asked that same question, who believes, and not one person in the room lifted their hand, because it would mean a lot is flawed with the standard model and its never shown to be incorrect so far.
ahh mega post alert, but i guess that’s the point to show it isn’t as simple as "1 per second".
So yeah moving on it comes to the Wagner/Ivan type folk, the anti LHC crew say OMG death, every working physicists says, erm stfu.
In some way the same theory that assumes X and Y also assumes hawking radiation.
There are a lot of published papers out there showing that if LHC = Black hole and black hole = stable, then black hole also = managed a perfect birth allowing to eat everything it can see on its path, and that black hole also = centre of earth, not flying away from the earth then also = doesn’t matter one bit.
In every mathematical paper all possible “pro” black hole scenario’s to give it the best start in life = no threat.
This is where the Anti LHC crew comes in, because they cut and paste some information (the scary bits), and their own “theories” that make the world blow up .
But don’t ask for the maths involved because you will NEVER get any answer (hello Ivan).
So back in the “real” world so to say, they would love this black hole idea, it would be awesome, and because of the above the LHC would continue and new papers showing how the world works would be written, the end, (for now say hello to a new collider to probe deeper).
They wouldn’t stop doing the experiment, not until the machine stops to present new information (the LHC suffers from diminishing returns so after the first couple of years it becomes harder for it to produce clear results, due to the damage by radiation).
And for the aspect of if more than one was created?, meaningless too because they all would have the same grow rate, after 4 billion years still only big enough to be seen in a microscope, but ofc the solar system is toast already, 1 or 40 million, still no threat to earth or the solar system in currently or future times of the lifecycle, this is according to all the papers written and reviewed to be solid.
We can go around and around with this for months, but simply put there is no worse case scenario realised in theory or practice that would mean shutdown due to Mbh.
So recap, the theory relies on another theory (both a maths equation to answer questions about the standard model, there are a lot other theories too), then relies on some unknown – unknown, which messes with gravity, and even after all that, the things have to die due to hawking radiation (otherwise theory is incorrect), and including all the other scenario theories, (no hawking rad) all the papers and guys in the field conclude, no Mbh issue for us to worry about.
And now I’m off to collapse in on myself due to the wall of text written