LHC fears: Valid or Silly?

[tharpdevenport]

We all know future Stargate spin-offs will all center around:

A newly disovered chevron, an Super MEga Death Gate (with the gate becoming bigger and bigger in each spin off), and some weird alien race threatening not any of the countless aliens in hte universe but Earth.

 

[John O.]

We all know future Stargate spin-offs will all center around:

A newly disovered chevron, an Super MEga Death Gate (with the gate becoming bigger and bigger in each spin off), and some weird alien race threatening not any of the countless aliens in hte universe but Earth.

From what I've heard this is no longer the case. I mean the Ninth Chevron part. It's a ship-based show.

 

[TheMasterOfOrion]

Hackers 'find black hole in atom smasher computers'


http://www.physorg.com/news140527552.html

 

[Brian]

We all know future Stargate spin-offs will all center around:

A newly disovered chevron, an Super MEga Death Gate (with the gate becoming bigger and bigger in each spin off), and some weird alien race threatening not any of the countless aliens in hte universe but Earth.

From what I've heard this is no longer the case. I mean the Ninth Chevron part. It's a ship-based show.

The ninth chevron gets them to the ship, doesn't it?

 

[FordSVT]

The LHC is nothing more than a tool for humans to create events that nature does billions of times every day and analyze the data. We could forgo the accelerator and simply put the massive detectors in space or on the moon or something, but it would cost more money and be more complex.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

Looks like the so-called end of the world may have to be put on hold a bit:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7626256.stm

I think this is wise to halt until things get fixed. I mean, if something goes wrong, who knows what horrors might be unleashed...?

 

[Sean Aaron]

If we knew how to create artificial singularities, I don't think we'd still be using fossil fuels to heat people's homes.

Nothing to see here, please move along...

 

[scotthm]

If we knew how to create artificial singularities, I don't think we'd still be using fossil fuels to heat people's homes.

We know how to fuse and split atoms too, but there are still a lot of fossil fuel power plants in operation. Why would knowing how to create artificial singularities change that?

---------------

 

[Sean Aaron]

If we knew how to create artificial singularities, I don't think we'd still be using fossil fuels to heat people's homes.

We know how to fuse and split atoms too, but there are still a lot of fossil fuel power plants in operation. Why would knowing how to create artificial singularities change that?

---------------

I think there's an order of magnitude difference between creating artificial singularities and fusing and splitting atoms; the former only having been done successfully in the manufacture of weapons.

I'm not a physicist, but it seems to me it's not something you kind of happen upon by accident.

 

[Jadzia]

Hackers 'find black hole in atom smasher computers'


http://www.physorg.com/news140527552.html

And will they ever catch those responsible?

Well they might be able to determine their location down to street level, but at the sacrifice of knowing their momentum with the same precision.

And anyways, there is non-zero probability that they are within the prison walls, which is punishment enough in my book.

 

[FordSVT]

If we knew how to create artificial singularities, I don't think we'd still be using fossil fuels to heat people's homes.

We know how to fuse and split atoms too, but there are still a lot of fossil fuel power plants in operation. Why would knowing how to create artificial singularities change that?

---------------

I think there's an order of magnitude difference between creating artificial singularities and fusing and splitting atoms; the former only having been done successfully in the manufacture of weapons.

I'm not a physicist, but it seems to me it's not something you kind of happen upon by accident.

I guess not. I'm not even sure what you were trying to say here.

The kind of artificial singularity they are talking about theoretically creating with the LHC would only last a fraction of a second before evaporating, it's not anything even remotely usable for power generation. Even if we could create a stable singularity (that wouldn't begin sucking up everything around it), we're not Romulans, I'm not exactly sure how we'd get vast amounts of "free" energy from it.

We've created both fission and fusion inside labs, no need to "manufacture" nuclear weapons, whatever that was supposed to mean. Did you mean blowing up fusion weapons? Did you confuse former with latter? I'm sorry, you really aren't being very clear with your thoughts today.

 

[Jadzia]

If you look at the mass of a proton, and calculate the radius of it's event horizon, should it become a black hole in the collision, see just how tiny it is? As small as an atom is to us, it's that small again. (or something like that, I forget my calculations now)

And think of how weak its gravity is? Matter would have to be pretty cold to be less than the escape velocity of the black hole. Nothing on earth, except maybe super cooled liquid helium, would be that cold. It wouldn't swallow anything warmer.

And any charge it soaks up would be massively stronger than the gravitational pull, that charge would still dominate the dynamics.

Only through events like electron capture would this tiny charged black hole event hope to gain mass.

As for black hole evaporation, well I don't know if that happens or not. It's a contested theory, and I'm not really convinced by it.

Suffice to say that if we did create a black hole in the lhc, it would take a long while before it was able to consume the whole earth.

 

[TheMasterOfOrion]

New Mishap – Helium Leak Shuts Down LHC for Two Months

http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_New_Mishap_Helium_Leak_Shuts_Down_LHC_for_Two_Months_24769.html

 

[trekkiedane]

^Yup.

http://press.web.cern.ch/Press/PressReleases/Releases2008/PR09.08E.html

 

[Sean Aaron]

I guess not. I'm not even sure what you were trying to say here.

That there's no danger of accidentally creating a stable artificial singularity that would threaten the existence of the Earth.

 

[FordSVT]

^Then you should have said that instead of whatever that was supposed to be.

 

[Gepard]

Only through events like electron capture would this tiny charged black hole event hope to gain mass.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this black hole be too small to even swallow an electron in the first place? I don't see how it's even large enough to gain mass and expand its event horizon in the first place...

 

[Jadzia]

Only through events like electron capture would this tiny charged black hole event hope to gain mass.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this black hole be too small to even swallow an electron in the first place? I don't see how it's even large enough to gain mass and expand its event horizon in the first place...

Well it is much smaller than the wavelength of an electron so the electron wouldn't see the black hole, no.

But this is a relativistic phenomenon, so who knows what happens to wavelengths? And if the electron is not fundamental and has components which are that tiny, it could consume electrons from the inside out, perhaps?

 

[Sean Aaron]

^Then you should have said that instead of whatever that was supposed to be.

I'll be sure to vette my future posts with you in advance. Please make a note of it when I forward them to you.

 

[FordSVT]

^Then you should have said that instead of whatever that was supposed to be.

I'll be sure to vette my future posts with you in advance. Please make a note of it when I forward them to you.

No need for that, simply forming a sentence that has something to do with what you're actually trying to say will be enough.