LHC - Could it be put on "hold" due to lawsuit?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
<p>Well, it was bound to happen.&nbsp; It has.&nbsp; Someone has filed a lawsuit requesting a safety review for the LHC which is due to begin answering extremely important questions by blasting particles to bits later this year.</p><p><em>DOOMSDAY FEARS SPARK LAWSUIT</em></p><p><em>...Last Friday, Wagner and another critic of the LHC's safety measures, Luis Sancho, filed a lawsuit in Hawaii's U.S. District Court. The suit&nbsp;calls on the U.S. Department of Energy, Fermilab, the National Science Foundation and CERN to&nbsp;ease up on their LHC preparations for several months while the collider's safety was reassessed.</em></p> <p><em>"We're going to need a minimum of four months to review whatever they're putting out," Wagner told me on Monday. The suit seeks a temporary restraining order that would put the LHC on hold, pending the release and review of an updated CERN safety assessment. It also calls on the U.S. government to do a full environmental review addressing the LHC project, including the debate over the doomsday scenario...."</em></p><p>http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/27/823924.aspx&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>So, are we going to see this escalate into a serious delay for the LHC?&nbsp; After all, this isn't a Cease and Desist type of suit - It's a request for a safety review. (fyi I haven't read the actual suit.)&nbsp; It's possible that such a request could be granted given the allegations, admittedly far-fetched, and the responsibilty the Court may feel for public safety. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>
 
S

Saiph

Guest
<p>I rememeber when Fermilab set up a neutrino experiment&nbsp; that fired a beam of neutrinos nearly 300 miles (well, further) to a neutrino detector buried somewhere in..minnesota?.&nbsp; A nearby university had student protests against them transmitting dangerous radiation through thier school.&nbsp; It took a while to assure state officials that neutrinos weren't dangerous, that billions pass through people every day, and that the particular beam Fermilab was creating passed about a mile below the actual school and city in question.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>As for the LHC...I'm pretty sure that a lot of these safety concerns were already addressed during the planing phase.&nbsp; These people are probably going to get more copies of safety reports than they though existed.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
B

baulten

Guest
These kind of things make me sick.&nbsp; Paranoia and ignorance prevent mankind from progressing.&nbsp; *sigh* I hope this doesn't effect anything, in fact, as Saiph said, they'll probably get a massive stack of safety reports that have already been written up.
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Well, it was bound to happen.&nbsp; It has.&nbsp; Someone has filed a lawsuit requesting a safety review for the LHC which is due to begin answering extremely important questions by blasting particles to bits later this year.DOOMSDAY FEARS SPARK LAWSUIT...Last Friday, Wagner and another critic of the LHC's safety measures, Luis Sancho, filed a lawsuit in Hawaii's U.S. District Court. The suit&nbsp;calls on the U.S. Department of Energy, Fermilab, the National Science Foundation and CERN to&nbsp;ease up on their LHC preparations for several months while the collider's safety was reassessed. "We're going to need a minimum of four months to review whatever they're putting out," Wagner told me on Monday. The suit seeks a temporary restraining order that would put the LHC on hold, pending the release and review of an updated CERN safety assessment. It also calls on the U.S. government to do a full environmental review addressing the LHC project, including the debate over the doomsday scenario...."http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/27/823924.aspxSo, are we going to see this escalate into a serious delay for the LHC?&nbsp; After all, this isn't a Cease and Desist type of suit - It's a request for a safety review. (fyi I haven't read the actual suit.)&nbsp; It's possible that such a request could be granted given the allegations, admittedly far-fetched, and the responsibilty the Court may feel for public safety. &nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by a_lost_packet_</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The LHC is in Switzerland.&nbsp; How does filing a restraining order in Hawaii, affect the jurisdiction of Switzerland?&nbsp; Or, am I missing something here?</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
B

billslugg

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;The LHC is in Switzerland.&nbsp; How does filing a restraining order in Hawaii, affect the jurisdiction of Switzerland?&nbsp; Or, am I missing something here? <br /> Posted by kyle_baron</DIV></p><p>Nothing here but the rantings of a publicity hound. I just pray the judge is not a Clinton appointee. It would prevent US entities from continuing their preparations. The doomsday scenario makes great copy but it is demonstrably false. Every day particles with an energy 100 million times larger than what the LHC can make hit the upper atmosphere.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Nothing here but the rantings of a publicity hound. I just pray the judge is not a Clinton appointee. It would prevent US entities from continuing their preparations. The doomsday scenario makes great copy but it is demonstrably false. Every day particles with an energy 100 million times larger than what the LHC can make hit the upper atmosphere.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by billslugg</DIV></p><p>I agree... just another joker looking for the spotlight.&nbsp; This will not go anywhere or have any impact.&nbsp; They might get their day in court, but I'm sure TPTB at CERN have covered every angle average Joe Dipstick can throw at them.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
 
P

pmn1

Guest
<p>Part of an article in the Enomonist&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><span style="font-size:10pt">Femtosecond lasers can also be used to interact with other materials and generate particle beams for experiments, says Karl Krushelnick, of the University of Michigan. This could shrink the size and cost of building giant accelerators, which produce sub-atomic particles. Dr Krushelnick thinks laser-powered particle generators could fit into the basements of universities, if not on laboratory benches. That could mean the enormous Large Hadron Collider, now nearing completion inside a 27km tunnel in Geneva at a cost of some $5 billion, is the last of its kind.</span></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
B

billslugg

Guest
<p>I don't see how a table top can replicate the beam intensity and energy of the LHC. When you figure the number of particles, and the average energy, it is like a freight train. You might get the single particle energy in a table top but no way could you get the flux (number per second) as the LHC. Intensity is a whole nother matter. If you can focus them to a tiny cross section, you have the intensity thing licked.The LHC has 1) Large number of particles 2) High speeds 3) Small cross sectional area.&nbsp;</p><p>I don't see how a tabletop can provide an advantage in any of those areas. Please correct me.&nbsp;</p><p>Bill Slugg</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>
 
S

Saiph

Guest
<p>you're right that flux is the key issue, but you don't necessarily need a massive shower of particles to get what you need.&nbsp; If youc an accurately track the few you make...the cost per test ratio of operating a much smaller device could win out.&nbsp; Throw in the ability to have more testing rigs...and you don't have the resource bottle neck a single big accelerator produces.</p><p>&nbsp;And the actual power output of the femtosecond lasers out there...WOW! even if it is only for a...femtosecond. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;The LHC is in Switzerland.&nbsp; How does filing a restraining order in Hawaii, affect the jurisdiction of Switzerland?&nbsp; Or, am I missing something here? <br /> Posted by kyle_baron</DIV></p><p>There are many US agencies involved with the LHC.&nbsp; In the US, it could be ordered that they stop their contributions and a formal appeal made to CERN to halt development until it is reviewed.&nbsp; If that was refused (which would be highly doubtful) then it could go interational courts (Word Court/UN.)</p><p>I doubt that it will get that far.&nbsp; Most likely, the appeal will be answered as Saiph suggested: By mounds and mounds and tons and gajillions of pieces of paper all detailing research pertinent to the case which shows such a threat does not exist. Once presented with the evidence, I don't think any judge/panel would elevate the suit.&nbsp; However, I do believe they'd hear it.&nbsp; They'd have to, considering the circumstances. IMO</p><p>I'm not an attorney so someone better able to answer this may have significant corrections regarding the process.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>
 
D

Deputy_Van_Halen

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>These kind of things make me sick.&nbsp; Paranoia and ignorance prevent mankind from progressing.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by baulten</DIV></p><p>Yes, I absolutely need my flyng car RIGHT NOW!&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><span style="color:#ff0000" class="Apple-style-span"><span style="font-weight:bold" class="Apple-style-span"><span style="font-size:medium" class="Apple-style-span">Deputy Van Halen</span></span></span><font color="#0000ff"><span style="font-size:x-small" class="Apple-style-span"><span style="color:#ff0000" class="Apple-style-span"><span style="font-weight:bold" class="Apple-style-span"> * Imaginoverlord</span></span></span></font></p><p><span style="color:#ff0000" class="Apple-style-span"><span style="font-weight:bold" class="Apple-style-span">Product Manager </span></span></p><p>Comics @ Newsarama </p><p>Want the 99% comics-only NAR? Bookmark this page.</p><p><span style="font-size:x-small" class="Apple-style-span">My opinions are my own and not Imaginova's.</span></p> </div>
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>There are many US agencies involved with the LHC.&nbsp; In the US, it could be ordered that they stop their contributions and a formal appeal made to CERN to halt development until it is reviewed.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /> Posted by a_lost_packet_</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>I think that, unless those companies are violating any environmental or safety policies within the jurisdiction of the U.S. during production and shipping, there is nothing that can be done.&nbsp; Even at this point in the game, I assume all the courts could do is levy a fine.&nbsp; I can't imagine they could force Fermilab to recall their magnets, much less, force CERN to return them. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
 
O

oker59

Guest
<p>I seem to recall that particle accellerators couldn't reach GUT energies unless they were light years in size.&nbsp; Let's recall that GUT energies is when all three nuclear forces as defined by the Heisengurg relations are unified .&nbsp; . .at super high energies.</p><p>&nbsp;Now, let's assume the LHC can reach GUT energies .&nbsp; . . the unification energies between the three nuclear forces and Gravitation are even more astronomically high.</p><p>The point is that quantum gravity is the holy grail of physicists today because at the birth of the universe and in regions called black holes, quantum mechanics(the three fundamental nuclear forces that no realistic particle accellerator can reach anytime soon) and General Relativity(gravity) need to combine somewhere; but as I've pointed out, LHC and such type of particle accellerators won't reach GUT energies anytime soon!</p><p>&nbsp;Lasers might reach GUT energies&nbsp; . . .with a lot more development needed to put in them!</p>
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I seem to recall that particle accellerators couldn't reach GUT energies unless they were light years in size.&nbsp; Let's recall that GUT energies is when all three nuclear forces as defined by the Heisengurg relations are unified .&nbsp; . .at super high energies.&nbsp;Now, let's assume the LHC can reach GUT energies .&nbsp; . . the unification energies between the three nuclear forces and Gravitation are even more astronomically high.<br /> Posted by oker59</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Just an FYI... </p><p>The 4 fundemental forces are electromagnetism, strong nuclear, weak nuclear and gravitational.</p><p>The GUT is an attempt to combine the electroweak force (electromagnetism and weak nuclear) with the strong nuclear force.&nbsp; Beyond that is the "theory of everything" or what ever name you wish to apply to it.</p><p>Hiesenberg is in no way associated with the GUT.&nbsp; He is one of the originals in the early days of quantum mechanics.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
 
O

oker59

Guest
<p>The three fundamental nuclear forces are defined by Heisenberg's uncertainty relation; don't know what your've read, but you need to read more!</p><p>&nbsp;I'm affraid I have to go and find some food right now; if nobody comes to answer this one by the time I feel like explaining, then maybe I'll explain it!</p>
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The three fundamental nuclear forces are defined by Heisenberg's uncertainty relation; don't know what your've read, but you need to read more!&nbsp;I'm affraid I have to go and find some food right now; if nobody comes to answer this one by the time I feel like explaining, then maybe I'll explain it! <br /> Posted by oker59</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm not above making mistakes and love to learn from them.&nbsp; I look forward to your explanation, though this debate might be better suited for a new thread.</p><p>In the mean time, I'll keep on reading <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-smile.gif" border="0" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;I think that, unless those companies are violating any environmental or safety policies within the jurisdiction of the U.S. during production and shipping, there is nothing that can be done.&nbsp; Even at this point in the game, I assume all the courts could do is levy a fine.&nbsp; I can't imagine they could force Fermilab to recall their magnets, much less, force CERN to return them. <br /> Posted by derekmcd</DIV></p><p>This is something that could, if it got that far, be elevated to a National Security issue.&nbsp; Once that ball dropped, they could walk into their offices in the US, arrest everyone, impound everything, recall certain types of shipments and demand employees halt their efforts abroad or face imprisonment upon their return to the US and/or be extradited back.&nbsp; However, they couldn't force Cern to do anything without going through proper channels.</p><p>Of course, that's a bit extreme.&nbsp; I wouldn't expect anything like that at all.&nbsp; But, as far as what "can" be done, however improbable, those types of things "could" happen.&nbsp; Most likely, the Court will throw out the case due to a lack of merit after they have reviewed it.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>
 
A

AlexMonshaw

Guest
What i still fail to understand is <em>how</em> a particle accelerator could make a black hole. As far as i know, which probably isnt much, to make a black hole you need a super concentrated mass, not high amounts of energy. Granted most of this lawsuit is just hype over a small possibility blown out of proportion as usual, but it made me think and now im curious... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> It's so hot! Milk was a bad choice... </div>
 
D

derekmcd

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>What i still fail to understand is how a particle accelerator could make a black hole. As far as i know, which probably isnt much, to make a black hole you need a super concentrated mass, not high amounts of energy. Granted most of this lawsuit is just hype over a small possibility blown out of proportion as usual, but it made me think and now im curious... <br /> Posted by AlexMonshaw</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>In theory, black holes can exist at any size.&nbsp; It's really a combination of both mass/energy and density.&nbsp; At CERN, they will take a beam of protons traveling in opposite directions and make them collide.&nbsp; What happens when 2 protons 'collide' with the enormous energies involved is that they will occupy a space with sufficient amounts of mass/energy that will equal or exceed the schwarzschild radius and collapse into a black hole.</p><p>You can take any amount of matter and squeeze into a sufficiently small space and it will collapse under its own gravity.&nbsp; This is the schwarzschild radius.&nbsp; This radius for the earth is 9mm.</p><p>It remains to be seen if the LHC can actually produce them.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
 
S

schmack

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Well, it was bound to happen.&nbsp; It has.&nbsp; Someone has filed a lawsuit requesting a safety review for the LHC which is due to begin answering extremely important questions by blasting particles to bits later this year.DOOMSDAY FEARS SPARK LAWSUIT...Last Friday, Wagner and another critic of the LHC's safety measures, Luis Sancho, filed a lawsuit in Hawaii's U.S. District Court. The suit&nbsp;calls on the U.S. Department of Energy, Fermilab, the National Science Foundation and CERN to&nbsp;ease up on their LHC preparations for several months while the collider's safety was reassessed. "We're going to need a minimum of four months to review whatever they're putting out," Wagner told me on Monday. The suit seeks a temporary restraining order that would put the LHC on hold, pending the release and review of an updated CERN safety assessment. It also calls on the U.S. government to do a full environmental review addressing the LHC project, including the debate over the doomsday scenario...."http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/27/823924.aspxSo, are we going to see this escalate into a serious delay for the LHC?&nbsp; After all, this isn't a Cease and Desist type of suit - It's a request for a safety review. (fyi I haven't read the actual suit.)&nbsp; It's possible that such a request could be granted given the allegations, admittedly far-fetched, and the responsibilty the Court may feel for public safety. &nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by a_lost_packet_</DIV></p><p>While you guys&nbsp;seem to be&nbsp;against any kind of re-visiting of the safety issues involved with the LHC, i'm quite glad that someone is asking the question on the laymans behalf. I've seen a documentary on the LHC and i must admit it sparked a few safety questions in my mind aswell. </p><p>&nbsp;I'm sure i remember reading somewhere when i was a young fella that the scientists involved with the first atomic explosion DID NOT KNOW whether or not the atomic chain reaction that started in the initial explosion would continue on to vaporize the entire world / galaxy / universe!</p><p>(DID NOT KNOW could simply mean that they were 99% certain instead of 100% though, so i didn't hold too much credence to the article. And besides, it didn't happen)</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4" color="#ff0000"><font size="2">Assumption is the mother of all stuff ups</font> </font></p><p><font size="4" color="#ff0000">Gimme some Schmack Schmack!</font></p> </div>
 
A

a_lost_packet_

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>While you guys&nbsp;seem to be&nbsp;against any kind of re-visiting of the safety issues involved with the LHC, i'm quite glad that someone is asking the question on the laymans behalf. I've seen a documentary on the LHC and i must admit it sparked a few safety questions in my mind aswell. &nbsp;I'm sure i remember reading somewhere when i was a young fella that the scientists involved with the first atomic explosion DID NOT KNOW whether or not the atomic chain reaction that started in the initial explosion would continue on to vaporize the entire world / galaxy / universe!(DID NOT KNOW could simply mean that they were 99% certain instead of 100% though, so i didn't hold too much credence to the article. And besides, it didn't happen) <br /> Posted by schmack</DIV></p><p>I'm not against any revisiting of the safety issues involved with the LHC as long as it is conducted appropriately.&nbsp; Simply because someone doesn't like the answers they are getting isn't enough of a reason.&nbsp; For instance... </p><p><em>"But, it's a black hole you might create! Aren't they dangerous?"</em> </p><p>"Yes, they are.&nbsp; But, the ones that may be created are so infitessimally small that they do not pose a danger and, according to theory, would only exist for a very, very short moment in which there is not enough time for them to gather enough mass for them to be dangerous. In fact, we know of no mechanism in which they could sustain themselves."</p><p><em>"But, it's a black hole!"</em></p><p>"Technically, yes. At least as far as it counts.."</p><p><em>"But, it's a black hole you might create! Aren't they are dangerous!"&nbsp;</em></p><p>(ad nauseum)</p><p>I think it is prudent to make sure that the research surrounding the experimental use of the LHC is solid. I believe that has been done.&nbsp; I also believe it is necessary for the advancement of science to communicate fully what is taking place and assuage the fears of the masses by offering as much information as possible and making that intelligible to all.&nbsp; I believe that needs to be improved.&nbsp; However, someone continually complaining about the same thing, over and over, simply because they don't like the answers offered doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.&nbsp; I think that is what we're witnessing here.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>
 
P

pmn1

Guest
The environmentalists lobby do know what&rsquo;s going to hit it, and claim the concert will cause earthquakes, tidal waves, hurricanes, irreparable damage to the atmosphere and all the usual things that environmentalist allay go on about. <p class="MsoNormal"> A representative of Disaster Area met with the environmentalists at lunchtime, and had them all shot, so nothing now lies in the way of&hellip;.</p> <br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
S

Smersh

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>While you guys&nbsp;seem to be&nbsp;against any kind of re-visiting of the safety issues involved with the LHC, i'm quite glad that someone is asking the question on the laymans behalf. I've seen a documentary on the LHC and i must admit it sparked a few safety questions in my mind aswell. &nbsp;I'm sure i remember reading somewhere when i was a young fella that the scientists involved with the first atomic explosion DID NOT KNOW whether or not the atomic chain reaction that started in the initial explosion would continue on to vaporize the entire world / galaxy / universe!(DID NOT KNOW could simply mean that they were 99% certain instead of 100% though, so i didn't hold too much credence to the article. And besides, it didn't happen) <br /> Posted by schmack</DIV></p><p>Have to agree with you Schmack. Although I'm fascinated by the LHC and the planned experiment to observe the Higgs bosun particle, the possible dangers, outlined by some physicists, do worry me, [although, like yourself, I'm a layman in this matter.]</p><p>Has anyone seen this website? http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org/index.htm&nbsp;</p><p>The possible black hole danger is mentioned of course:</p><p><strong><font color="#008000">Several string theorists have published papers predicting (if their theories are true) that the LHC will produce mini black holes. In the worst case, a mini black hole could swallow Earth.&nbsp; </font></strong></p><p>Also though,&nbsp; strangelets:&nbsp;</p><p><strong><font color="#008000">Strangelets, another potential collider product, might catalyze conversion of normal matter into more strangelets, turning Earth into a small ball of strangelets.&nbsp; </font></strong></p><p>I'd just like to add though, that CERN have posted an article on their website, to allay people's fears about safety:</p><p>http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/Safety-en.html&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <h1 style="margin:0pt;font-size:12px">----------------------------------------------------- </h1><p><font color="#800000"><em>Lady Nancy Astor: "Winston, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea."<br />Churchill: "Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it."</em></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Website / forums </strong></font></p> </div>
 
N

neuvik

Guest
<p>Why do advances in science always have to battle tooth and nail to get things done?&nbsp;&nbsp; As if its not hard enough already in the analytical approach, now they have to deal with attorneys.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;This behavior is going to ruin America, its so prevalent in business;&nbsp; its no longer who is right, it iss who has the most money to keep returning to the appeals courts. &nbsp;&nbsp; Its just like the new City Multi refrigeration system from Mitsubishi, US manufacturers can't compete so rather than adapt they file suit, and a multitude of other meaningless process that is just childish.</p><p>&nbsp;Did't NPR have some a while back that the United States Graduated around 50,000 engineers, and 500,000 lawyers.&nbsp;&nbsp; While China graduated 500,000 engineers.</p><p>&nbsp;Guess we will sue the world into submission. </p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">I don't think I'm alone when I say, "I hope more planets fall under the ruthless domination of Earth!"</font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff">SDC Boards: Power by PLuck - Ph**king Luck</font></p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts