Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: The Uncreator Jun 29 2008, 02:06 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080628/ap_on_re_eu/doomsday_collider


Definitely look promising, We might be able to discover new dimensions with this, Which would be good for String Theorist, and prove that Dark Matter exists, and find new particles and all that good stuff. I figure science and tech geeks might like this

PS

Did I mention that some people think It will destroy Earth?

Some people believe that it might cause micro black holes, Or any other of a various of "cataclysmic events". There something like 1 and 50 million chance it will happen

Posted by: Andrew6 Jun 29 2008, 02:14 PM

Thanks for the article ! i've been following the development of that for years! There are a lot of high risk associated with that kind of experiment though if your interested read into the possibility of generating black holes, stranglets and all that fun stuff

Posted by: The Uncreator Jun 29 2008, 02:34 PM

Yeah, I've read up on some of them. But we have a few of them already and have been operating for a few years without problem. Although this is 7 times more powerful and larger (I think compared to the next biggest), I doubt anything would happen. I'm sure if they even thought that this could destroy earth, They wouldn't proceed.

And about Strangelets, I've always wondered what these mystery particles would do, I know one (Which I believe has a more specific name) is supposed to give matter its mass.

Posted by: Nemanja Filipovic Jun 29 2008, 02:54 PM

Who knows whats next....warp speed.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Jun 30 2008, 12:03 PM

Supersymmetric particles and Higgs Bosons - they would be the biggest finds!

I'm not a believer in String Theory - I think it is turning out to be a dead end due to its lack of background independance and lately its increasing reliance on the weak Anthropic Principle - time to let some fresh ideas get funded!

As for mini black holes - someone just proved they won't be a problem ... that will be comforting when Earth and the whole Solar System is swallowed by a new black hole!

Posted by: Andrew6 Jun 30 2008, 12:07 PM

Yeah that would be a slight downside to the LHC, a black hole destroying us all that is

Posted by: The Uncreator Jun 30 2008, 05:38 PM

And string theory needs a minimum of 10 dimensions to actually be proven, So far we're still at 3

Posted by: FrankW Jul 1 2008, 11:31 PM

Did you know that two physicists from CERN, where the super collider resides, invented the worldwide web?

Posted by: Ivan Milenkovic Jul 2 2008, 09:14 AM

Cool I can't wait. Thank god for the people who helped to build the CERN particle accelerator.

Posted by: fkalich Jul 2 2008, 10:02 AM

Actually 4.

The mathematics using time as #4 have been empirically tested to be correct. you yield correct results using time as 4th dimension, so that is that.

5 though 10 are still as you say no proven (no testing has been able to validate the theory). Actually I believe we need 11, not 10. 10 leaves you with a variety of string theory models, 11 unites them.

Posted by: SinoMan Jul 2 2008, 12:27 PM

Exactly what fkalich said. With 10 dimensions you've got 5 different string theories.

With 11 dimensions, we have a single M-theory which seems to explain origin of the universe.

Posted by: DeepRoots Jul 2 2008, 12:31 PM

Did you check the odds of winning the lottery?

I'm worried...

Posted by: SinoMan Jul 2 2008, 01:02 PM

1 is 50 million is very possible actually. Even less probable events have already happened...

Not that I'm worried though

Posted by: fkalich Jul 2 2008, 01:22 PM

When the first Atomic Bomb was being developed, the scientists are got scared because there was a theoretical probability of setting off a chain reaction in the atmosphere. They determined that it was not possible, after some calculations, and went ahead.

When the first explosion was made a trinity, one of the Scientists thought it was engulfing the Atmosphere "even though he knew that was impossible".


My question is, if he knew that was impossible, why the fear at the time, by one of the leading scientists involved.

Seems like you guys have a lot more faith than I have in these guys and organizations not being willing to take risks unacceptable to to mass of humanity, to further funding and their careers.

My understanding is that they are doing nothing that has not been demonstrated occurr naturally without the doomsday effect. If so, I consider it safe. Then they are doing nothing that does not occur around us anyway. I understand that is the case. Hopefully.

If not, I don't consider it safe, no matter what they say. That community will do anything to keep funding. And if you think they would not risk extinction of the planet to some extent for career advancement, you are naive.

If these experiments do not occur naturally around us, they are playing with fire, doing something that man has never done, and that does not occur in nature. You will never find bigger egos than in that community, but they don't know the unknown, I don't care how many calculations they slam at you. If it does not occur in nature, it has got to be dangerous. They are not gods. Scientific knowledge is always limited, and incorrect to an extent, that is always the case, history has shown that. But history has also shown that scientists think they have all the answers.

Again, I understand that such collisions do occur all the time, naturally. Hopefully they are not hiding something.

Posted by: tonymiro Jul 2 2008, 02:36 PM

And Bob Oppenheimer said, 'I have become Death, destroyer of worlds' (quoting from the Bhagavad Gita) when he witnessed the destructive power of the A bomb. I think he later also went on to say that he wished he had never been involved in the A bomb project but, rather like Pandora's Box, too late.

As a side issue, the philosopher Edith Wyschogrod (Spirit in Ashes) makes the comment that perhaps THE discerning feature of the 20th C was our ability to kill on a massive scale at inter-continental distance in absentia.

Back on topic - years ago I used to work down the road from Daresbury Cyclotron - serendipitously my work was on electron beam guns and atom ablation so I got to go to Daresbury a few times - very interesting place.

Cheers,
Tony

Posted by: USAMAN Jul 2 2008, 02:45 PM

Amazing Engineering.
This thing is one massive undertaking.
Its so cool to see stuff like this being done.

Posted by: SinoMan Jul 2 2008, 02:56 PM

No matter how long I've been reading your opinions for, you still keep surprising the hell out of me.

Posted by: jdriver Jul 7 2008, 04:12 AM

Sir Tim Berners-Lee is generally credited with inventing the web. He did it while using a Next box. As you may know, Apple bought Next and it became OSX.

Berners-Lee was knighted as a result, hence the "Sir."

Posted by: Andrew6 Jul 7 2008, 04:18 AM

But who was Mr. Berners-Lee working for ? CERN of course the project was called enquire I believe or something along those lines.

So really you are both right !

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Jul 7 2008, 01:15 PM

Well, to be precise, with M-theory you get a mathematical construct that if primed with the correct input variables could in theory explain our particular universe. Problem is, it also explains 10 to the power of 500 other universes and makes absolutely no prediction why any one in particular should be preferred over any other, or indeed why we have the one that we do. In fact, M-theory is so complicated, that we currently only have rough approximations to its real equations based on peterbation theory.

Further more, M-theory makes no predictions about where space-time comes from - it assumes it exists and builds upon it, it therefore is not background independant - this means that even if it does work out, there is another level behind it to explain where space-time actually comes from.

M-theory lacks predictive power at the moment, so for me it fails as a valid theory of everything. I am further concerned that in an attempt to keep it valid, its proponents have invoked the Weak anthropic principle and said that "Since a universe with these properties is conducive to life, it should be no surprise that we are alive and living in it" - whilst seductive, this is no basis for a predictive theory.

M-theory may turn out to be a valid model of the universe, especially if we can get hold of its precise structure - there may be some twist just around the corner that makes it all make sense, however, I think that the lack of predictive power and the invocation of the anthropic principle may be signs of a theory in trouble.

Posted by: SinoMan Jul 9 2008, 03:05 PM

Anthropic principle forever!