...and the world wasn't sucked by artificial black holes, neither filled with exotic matter. Suck it, conservative bitches.
By late October, high energy collisions should be taking place, and then we'll just have to wait until Higgs boson stops being shy and shows up for us. :P
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2008/09/10/scicern810.xml
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE]"There is quite a lot of competition.," says Prof Jonathan Butterworth, spokesman for the UK collaboration on the Atlas detector[/QUOTE]
and his lovely wife Mrs. Butterworth.
and his lovely wife Mrs. Butterworth.
Nothing bad has happened yet because the high energy collisions are the ones that could fuck the planet. I read up on the details today and find it very concerning that all the reassurance about black holes and strangelets not being able to stabilize hinge on the existence of a type of degrading radiation proposed by Stephen Hawking, but which has never been proven to even exist!
So, even if a black hole a millimeter in diameter stabilizes, say goodbye to the fucking atmosphere within a few months - there ain't no collapsing the thing once it's there, and you can't pop a cork in one either. Think 'hole in a space capsule' folks.
If a stranglet stabilizes, then you're looking at the incineration of the entire planet via runaway nuclear fusion reaction in a very short time.
I'm no conservative, but holy fuck! If there's even a one-in-a-million chance we could cause our own extinction with this machine, why are they doing this?
So, even if a black hole a millimeter in diameter stabilizes, say goodbye to the fucking atmosphere within a few months - there ain't no collapsing the thing once it's there, and you can't pop a cork in one either. Think 'hole in a space capsule' folks.
If a stranglet stabilizes, then you're looking at the incineration of the entire planet via runaway nuclear fusion reaction in a very short time.
I'm no conservative, but holy fuck! If there's even a one-in-a-million chance we could cause our own extinction with this machine, why are they doing this?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]kagezan1313 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]and you can't pop a cork in one either.
[/QUOTE]
See Brian's new book "Pop!" for details on how to do this.
I'm surprised, actually, that we haven't had a Soapbox rant on this topic. I mean, it really is closely related to the book he just released. Why wasn't Brian playing at the ceremonial Switch-on?
[/QUOTE]
See Brian's new book "Pop!" for details on how to do this.
I'm surprised, actually, that we haven't had a Soapbox rant on this topic. I mean, it really is closely related to the book he just released. Why wasn't Brian playing at the ceremonial Switch-on?
The collisions are not going to cause anything scary either. Even in the unlikely event of a black hole occurring, it would not have sufficient mass to sustain itself for more than a few fractions of a millisecond, and thus could do little more than slightly damage the tube it formed in. Even so, it is unlikely that anything worse than a minor shock-wave would occur.
If scientists (read: people who know what they are talking about) say it's safe, then I'm more willing to go with that than with the paranoia of people who thought Y2K was a real threat.
The Large Hadron Collider is on...
Damn, I thought this was a euphemism...
Damn, I thought this was a euphemism...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If scientists (read: people who know what they are talking about) say it's safe, then I'm more willing to go with that than with the paranoia of people who thought Y2K was a real threat.[/QUOTE]
Since when do scientists know what they're talking about? Open a science text from 100 years ago, have a good laugh, then think "how big a laugh will today's science books be in 100 years?" Today's scientists only know as much as has been surmised and not yet proven absolute.
See: flouridated water, appendectomy, tonsilectomy, eugenics, lobotomy, flat earth, sun revolving around Earth, etc, etc, etc.
Since when do scientists know what they're talking about? Open a science text from 100 years ago, have a good laugh, then think "how big a laugh will today's science books be in 100 years?" Today's scientists only know as much as has been surmised and not yet proven absolute.
See: flouridated water, appendectomy, tonsilectomy, eugenics, lobotomy, flat earth, sun revolving around Earth, etc, etc, etc.
we dead yet?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]JoxerTheDeityPirate wrote: [/QUOTENAME]we dead yet?[/QUOTE]Twice.
Cheers,
Hor
Cheers,
Hor
The same group that sued CERN (in a Texas court!) had already tried to stop the PREVIOUS particle accellerator from being used, saying that the collisions between Au atoms could cause a major scale disaster and destroy the world.
They were so correct that we all have survived to watch scientists build an even bigger one.
They were so correct that we all have survived to watch scientists build an even bigger one.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If scientists (read: people who know what they are talking about) say it's safe, then I'm more willing to go with that than with the paranoia of people who thought Y2K was a real threat.[/QUOTE]
You talk about the millenium bug? I can tell you that there would have been a big problem as hadn't discovered it on time.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Raf wrote: [/QUOTENAME]...and the world wasn't sucked by artificial black holes, neither filled with exotic matter. Suck it, conservative bitches.
By late October, high energy collisions should be taking place, and then we'll just have to wait until Higgs boson stops being shy and shows up for us. :P
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2008/09/10/scicern810.xml [/QUOTE]
Well, other scientist tried to find how how black holes grow... They arise when a planet, bigger than the sun, implodes. Then the gravity will be that huge, that even light can't escape from it. But how the hell will a human be able to simulate that?
You talk about the millenium bug? I can tell you that there would have been a big problem as hadn't discovered it on time.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Raf wrote: [/QUOTENAME]...and the world wasn't sucked by artificial black holes, neither filled with exotic matter. Suck it, conservative bitches.
By late October, high energy collisions should be taking place, and then we'll just have to wait until Higgs boson stops being shy and shows up for us. :P
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2008/09/10/scicern810.xml [/QUOTE]
Well, other scientist tried to find how how black holes grow... They arise when a planet, bigger than the sun, implodes. Then the gravity will be that huge, that even light can't escape from it. But how the hell will a human be able to simulate that?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The Mir@cle wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
You talk about the millenium bug? I can tell you that there would have been a big problem as hadn't discovered it on time.
[/QUOTE]
Nope.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]kagezan1313 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Since when do scientists know what they're talking about? Open a science text from 100 years ago, have a good laugh, then think "how big a laugh will today's science books be in 100 years?" Today's scientists only know as much as has been surmised and not yet proven absolute.
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps I should have rephrased my post..
Suffice it to say; I'm going to go with logic over paranoia. Scientists mightn't know it all, but I can't think of many situations where I'd rather listen to the average Youtube user (or Queenzone user for that matter) over somebody like Stephen Hawking.
I mean for crying out loud, I'm not hearing one convincing argument that this LHC is going to do much harm at all. All I'm hearing is the same tired 'black hole' crap that has already been explained plenty of times in a fairly logical fashion.
The best case for switching it off that I've seen so far was some guy on the internet insisting that the LHC will open a doorway to Hell.
You talk about the millenium bug? I can tell you that there would have been a big problem as hadn't discovered it on time.
[/QUOTE]
Nope.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]kagezan1313 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Since when do scientists know what they're talking about? Open a science text from 100 years ago, have a good laugh, then think "how big a laugh will today's science books be in 100 years?" Today's scientists only know as much as has been surmised and not yet proven absolute.
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps I should have rephrased my post..
Suffice it to say; I'm going to go with logic over paranoia. Scientists mightn't know it all, but I can't think of many situations where I'd rather listen to the average Youtube user (or Queenzone user for that matter) over somebody like Stephen Hawking.
I mean for crying out loud, I'm not hearing one convincing argument that this LHC is going to do much harm at all. All I'm hearing is the same tired 'black hole' crap that has already been explained plenty of times in a fairly logical fashion.
The best case for switching it off that I've seen so far was some guy on the internet insisting that the LHC will open a doorway to Hell.
I can't wait to see them try to justify the cost of this thing. For that much Jack, I would want to have a couple of black holes.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]kagezan1313 wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zebonka12 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]If scientists (read: people who know what they are talking about) say it's safe, then I'm more willing to go with that than with the paranoia of people who thought Y2K was a real threat.[/QUOTE]
Since when do scientists know what they're talking about? Open a science text from 100 years ago, have a good laugh, then think "how big a laugh will today's science books be in 100 years?" Today's scientists only know as much as has been surmised and not yet proven absolute.
See: flouridated water, appendectomy, tonsilectomy, eugenics, lobotomy, flat earth, sun revolving around Earth, etc, etc, etc. [/QUOTE]
Flat earth is a fallacy; mankind never actually believed that, this is just a case of 19th century historians mis-interpreting the layout of medieval maps, which were not too good at putting across depth/perspective.
Since when do scientists know what they're talking about? Open a science text from 100 years ago, have a good laugh, then think "how big a laugh will today's science books be in 100 years?" Today's scientists only know as much as has been surmised and not yet proven absolute.
See: flouridated water, appendectomy, tonsilectomy, eugenics, lobotomy, flat earth, sun revolving around Earth, etc, etc, etc. [/QUOTE]
Flat earth is a fallacy; mankind never actually believed that, this is just a case of 19th century historians mis-interpreting the layout of medieval maps, which were not too good at putting across depth/perspective.