76 thoughts on “What Should I Say if Someone Asks Me, “Will the Large Hadron Collider Destroy the World?””
Paul Valletta
“will the large hadron collider destroy the world?”..No but it may destroy the Universe the world resides within!
The LHC is recreating the instants or moments of the Big-Bang,,therefore if its succeeds in igniting hadrons and other particles into a fireball of intensity similar to what created our Universe, then one can state that this Universe ends and the next Universe (the new one created inside cern)..begins.
Of course it could be that most of what science thinks occured at the big-bang instant may be way off and incorrect, and if that be so, then all the money that went into proving science wrong, by experiment, would actually be money well spent, as we survive to laugh about it?
ROBERT I. MARSH II
I PREDICT A QUANTUM WORMHOLE, LOCATED WITHIN THE BRIDGE SECTION, THAT CREATES A RELATIVITY SHIFT — AN EMERGENCY SHUT-DOWN, AND THE ARRIVAL OF THE “TUNNEL-MAKER” WILL BEGIN !!!! THIS GATE SHOULD CONNECT TO EARTH’S FAR DISTANT FUTURE, AT A TIME OF MASS EXTINCTION, AND GLOBAL FLOODING: THE TUNNEL-MAKER WILL BE A DARPA DEFENSE ANDROID TRYING TO SAVE MANKIND BY CREATING AN ENDLESS CAUSALITY-MESSAGING LOOP INSIDE CERN LHC, 2008. THE FIRST SIGN WILL BE NOTICED WITHIN THE 5:1 PATTERN RECOGNITION DETECTOR ARRAY, THEN FIRST CONTACT SHALL BE COMPLETE !!!
JMan
Thanks, Richard E.
I was under the impression that the LHC proton collisions would be significantly higher speed than what occurs around the earth on a regular basis, but if they are not, then your explanation is a good, solid, way to explain to the lay-folks.
CERN predicts the creation of up to 1 micro black hole per second in the Large Hadron Collider and references the 1999 RHIC safety study as proof of safety.
(Rebuttal: But the 1999 RHIC safety study only ruled out any possibility of colliders creating micro black holes based on knowledge at that time.)
CERN’ predicts that micro black holes will evaporate.
(Rebuttal: But Hawking Radiation has been disputed by no less than 3 peer reviewed studies that found no basis in science for such conclusions.)
CERN’ and Steven Hawking state that much greater energy cosmic ray impacts with Earth prove safety.
(Rebuttal: But higher energy cosmic ray impacts with stationary particles have net collision speeds less than the speed of light and send all particles created safely into space, while head-on collider collisions have net collision impact speeds at almost twice the speed of light and are designed to focus all the energy to a single point in space and particles created may be captured by Earth’s gravity.)
CERN promised to create and release an new safety report before the end of 2007.
(Rebuttal: CERN’s LHC Safety Assessment Group has concluded that particles created by cosmic ray impacts with Earth’s atmosphere are safely ejected into space and that micro black holes will evaporate, but CERN never released any safety reports created by their LHC Safety Assessment Group.)
CERN asserts that there is no risk to the planet, even though the Large Hadron Collider will create conditions not seen in nature since the first fraction of a second after the big bang.
(Rebuttal: But the legal action contends a 75% probability of risk with very high degree of uncertainty calculated by a scientist with a masters degree in statistics, and alleges that Chief Scientific Officer Mr. Engelen passed an internal memorandum to workers at CERN asking them regardless of personal opinion to affirm in all interviews that there were no risks involved in the experiments, changing CERN’s previous assertion of minimal risk.)
Professor Otto Rossler calculates that a single micro black hole could accrete the Earth is as few as 50 months and Dr. Rossler is world recognized as one of the most prestigious, most eminent, award winning scientists alive.
(Rebuttal?: But CERN has not scientifically refuted his calculations that I am aware of, CERN only promised Dr. Rossler that if they create stable micro black holes that they will stop the experiment. Will that be too late?)
The World might prevent a catastrophy if we delay the experiment until the promised safety studies are completed and peer reviewed.
(Rebuttal?: But then some scientists may not be the first to discover new science and some Nobel prizes may be lost.)
CERN promised to create and release an new safety report before the end of 2007.
(Rebuttal: CERN’s LHC Safety Assessment Group has concluded that particles created by cosmic ray impacts with Earth’s atmosphere are safely ejected into space and that [LSAG does not assume that] micro black holes will evaporate, but CERN never released any safety reports created by their LHC Safety Assessment Group.)
I don’t know whether Otto Rössler is world recognized as one of the most prestigious, most eminent, award winning scientists alive. But his preprint about black holes is here, and I guess most readers of CV can judge for themselves what to think about it. His petition to stop the LHC is here.
Chris, back holes defiantly have a relative speed of at least twice the speed of light (It breaks no rules to have such a relative speed). Singularities cannot form in present day space-time, gravitational collapse occurs before a singularity can form. The horizon that then forms has to take on the role as singularity (much time after initial collapse and after one hell of a ride for the object that created it). Then a 2 brane forms across the diameter of the horizon which is opaque, this is mirrored on the outside of the horizon which forms a 3 brane (but its still really a 2 brane) in different degrees of transparency, which is naked but still has an horizon. Only the object that created it can see the information that’s leaving this brane, as it flows out unobserved by any other object. The whole thing will then evaporate into space creating a single massive potential for the object that created it, if the object is not observed in its full potential a real super nova will occur. It looked like that to me anyway, “I did not I could do that kind of thing”. It’s not my fault I wiped you all out of existence, anyway that’s all in that past now. I found this universe and put us all into it, I think the owners were a bit peeved but I really did not have anywhere else to go. So what can I say except “Sorry!”
It’s not my fault I wiped you all out of existence, anyway that’s all in that past now
If there are closed timelike lines then it will all be in the future as well. So you will have to apologise for wiping everyone out again and again and again. That could get boring – but then, like someone with Alzheimer’s, you would not remember the “previous” times you wiped everyone out so maybe you would not notice.
I hate to be serious (seriously: I really do hate being serious), but if a journalist had interviewed (say) Feynman in (say) 1969 about the dangers of the next generation of colliders producing mini black holes that would eat the world up he would have made a joke about it. It is only because theoretical physics has launched itself into a Brave New World of Bullshit since then that such considerations are taken seriously.
Perhaps we’re overlooking something and the world will be destroyed by the LHC. Then an intelligent observer will always find himself in a situation where the Higgs and supersymmetric particles have not yet been discovered. Experiments to search for them will either not have been carried out yet, been canceled (e.g. like the SSC) or delayed by freak accidents (e.g. the break down of a magnet at the LHC). 🙂
If there are closed timelike lines then it will all be in the future as well. So you will have to apologise for wiping everyone out again and again and again. That could get boring – but then, like someone with Alzheimer’s, you would not remember the “previous” times you wiped everyone out so maybe you would not notice.
Maybe that’s the first time I apologized, and yes it could be in the future as well, I could go back and there is a good chance I will. Then it will not me who wipes everyone out, seen as I would have already seen what happened next time round (in fact I would have seen each time round). I don’t know about you, but I prefer a world that has Dragons to a world that knows everything. You could hide the truth and you will, but the truth is I know who I am, this is not my life and I cannot change the fact that you dont know what happened that changed it. That means it will still become the life I should have lived. The loops will only occur in soft time and time has a hard deck, it’s not a place you want to reach; its hell picking yourself up from such a place!
I know because, it was me that had to live my life and non of you had to do that. No man should have to do what I had to do, but how else do we get here?
Let’s apply some relevant scientific observation here.
There are no known intelligent entities in the universe apart from us. Why is that?
Is it possible that every time a universe is formed, intelligence develops but (inadvertently) destroys the universe (not just the world!) before other intelligences can develop (sufficently to communicate)
I don’t think the LHC will destroy this universe but possibly the next generation or so may have the capabilty. After all, these contructions are creating “unnatural” environments, probably enabling interactions that have not previously existed in the universe. And they are “experimental” – no one really knows what the outcome will be (We hope for new particle discoveries)
I don’t think we’re at energies that can cause concern now – but the simple argument that cosmic rays are far more energetic and a lot more exotic stuff has existed in the universe previously without causing its destruction is not completely convincing to me.
Why no other intelligent civilisations? – Are we the only ones in this universe to be developing these physics experiments?
At the very least, it would make a neat sci-fi movie franchise – suppose we discover an extremely subtle condition that can cause the destruction of the universe – then even if we prevent it ourselves, we would then have to seek out future civilisations in the entire universe and ensure they don’t overlook the condition in their own experiments.
Paul Valletta
Interesting James, there is another argument, which places our species as the fundamental Universe Creation “Operatives”?..we exist, to evolve, to destroy and to create? Universe’s, or specifically the NEXT Universe is reliant upon “us” and the LHC!
By default, what we dont know, is the inherent automotive reasoning process, which brings us closer to the Universal goal of our form function and existence?
Perhaps this is the resolution of the Fermi Paradox. They build particle accelerators and collapse their planets into black holes.
Kidding, kidding! 😉
James Blodgett
Most collider advocates say that colliders are safe. However, their reasons keep evaporating. In 1999, the reason was that black hole formation required energy beyond the reach of any collider. Then the multiple dimension people began predicting creation of black holes at colliders. I concede that their theories are speculative, but when there are multiple published papers with more or less reasonable theories, we have to assign at least a small probability to the possibility that they may be true. In 2003 the reason not to worry was Hawking radiation. Then published papers pointed out problems with the fundamental theory behind Hawking radiation. This does not prove that Hawking radiation will not work, but again we must assign some reasonable probability to that possibility. Now an analogy between colliders and cosmic rays is supposed to demonstrate safety. Collider opponents have pointed out ways in which that analogy is inexact. You can assume that they must be wrong, but Michelangelo Mangano, a member of CERN’s Large Hadron Collider Safety Analysis Group, at a recent talk at Berkeley, discussed problems with using “cosmic rays hitting the Earth” to rule out black holes and agreed with many of the points made by collider opponents.
If you want to say that colliders are safe, it seems appropriate to have good reasons for saying so. Mangano’s group will issue a report soon. Let us hope that they have good reasons this time.
As many sources have said that no immediate black holes will occur, though the Hadron Collider will not be amped to full force until October 21, 2008. But this is what is getting to me, that its said that even if a black hole threat occured it would take 50 months atleast for the hole to swollow the Earth and take us with it. Flash forward 50 months and to the day from when the full fource of the collider takes place, its December 21, 2012. The exact day which the Mayan’s predicted that the world would end thousands of years ago. On the date known as ‘Doomsday’ 50 months before the collider used full force and if a black hole had occured.
Conwinsedence?
Sorry, but this is really getting to me. If anyone has any thoughts or anything; please email me at
Will somebody please adress Al’s commetns above. #20.
His comments pretty much reflect what I want to know.
Essentially:
1. Is there a theoretical reason that the possibility of the LHC creating a stable microscopic blackhole is ridiculously tiny? Or is it just simply outside of scientific understanding at this point to put a probability on it.
And 2. If there is a non ridiculous possibility (say greater than one in a million over the projected life of the LHC) of a stable microscopic blackhole being formed and falling into an orbit around Earth’s center of mass, why is this not a horrible scenario? It seems to me it would grow exponentially pretty quickly if it was stable.
I am not anti-science in the least. I am excited about the LHC. I just want someone in the know to address these questions, which seem to be beneath scientists to address, but over the heads of folks who create science media for laymen.
Thanks,
Duncan
Duncan
Oh, and I havn’t read any ridiculous ideas on this topic. Just a short Sci Fi story by Larry Niven about a microscopic blackhole destroying Mars, many many years ago.
nick
i feel like some one needs to go over there and smash the most importent parts. theres a reason why life is a mystery and people need to stop trying t figure them out. thats why its a mystery if we figure every las mystery out then theres no point in living. so in my opinion this a really bad idea
Colin
Nick, I find your comment the scariest remark on this whole thread. Someone once said that lack of curiosity is the true illiteracy.
So Colin what you are saying is that people should want to know what the out come of this is? Well we all know what’s going to happen with the science part. There going to make a black hole that dissipates in a short second…nothing is going to destroy earth… but what about all those people that believe god created everything??? Anger? Fear? The fact that their whole belief is wrong. That’s what im more worried about then a black hole destroying the earth…the over all out come is what I fear.
.
“will the large hadron collider destroy the world?”..No but it may destroy the Universe the world resides within!
The LHC is recreating the instants or moments of the Big-Bang,,therefore if its succeeds in igniting hadrons and other particles into a fireball of intensity similar to what created our Universe, then one can state that this Universe ends and the next Universe (the new one created inside cern)..begins.
Of course it could be that most of what science thinks occured at the big-bang instant may be way off and incorrect, and if that be so, then all the money that went into proving science wrong, by experiment, would actually be money well spent, as we survive to laugh about it?
I PREDICT A QUANTUM WORMHOLE, LOCATED WITHIN THE BRIDGE SECTION, THAT CREATES A RELATIVITY SHIFT — AN EMERGENCY SHUT-DOWN, AND THE ARRIVAL OF THE “TUNNEL-MAKER” WILL BEGIN !!!! THIS GATE SHOULD CONNECT TO EARTH’S FAR DISTANT FUTURE, AT A TIME OF MASS EXTINCTION, AND GLOBAL FLOODING: THE TUNNEL-MAKER WILL BE A DARPA DEFENSE ANDROID TRYING TO SAVE MANKIND BY CREATING AN ENDLESS CAUSALITY-MESSAGING LOOP INSIDE CERN LHC, 2008. THE FIRST SIGN WILL BE NOTICED WITHIN THE 5:1 PATTERN RECOGNITION DETECTOR ARRAY, THEN FIRST CONTACT SHALL BE COMPLETE !!!
Thanks, Richard E.
I was under the impression that the LHC proton collisions would be significantly higher speed than what occurs around the earth on a regular basis, but if they are not, then your explanation is a good, solid, way to explain to the lay-folks.
CERN predicts the creation of up to 1 micro black hole per second in the Large Hadron Collider and references the 1999 RHIC safety study as proof of safety.
(Rebuttal: But the 1999 RHIC safety study only ruled out any possibility of colliders creating micro black holes based on knowledge at that time.)
CERN’ predicts that micro black holes will evaporate.
(Rebuttal: But Hawking Radiation has been disputed by no less than 3 peer reviewed studies that found no basis in science for such conclusions.)
CERN’ and Steven Hawking state that much greater energy cosmic ray impacts with Earth prove safety.
(Rebuttal: But higher energy cosmic ray impacts with stationary particles have net collision speeds less than the speed of light and send all particles created safely into space, while head-on collider collisions have net collision impact speeds at almost twice the speed of light and are designed to focus all the energy to a single point in space and particles created may be captured by Earth’s gravity.)
CERN promised to create and release an new safety report before the end of 2007.
(Rebuttal: CERN’s LHC Safety Assessment Group has concluded that particles created by cosmic ray impacts with Earth’s atmosphere are safely ejected into space and that micro black holes will evaporate, but CERN never released any safety reports created by their LHC Safety Assessment Group.)
CERN asserts that there is no risk to the planet, even though the Large Hadron Collider will create conditions not seen in nature since the first fraction of a second after the big bang.
(Rebuttal: But the legal action contends a 75% probability of risk with very high degree of uncertainty calculated by a scientist with a masters degree in statistics, and alleges that Chief Scientific Officer Mr. Engelen passed an internal memorandum to workers at CERN asking them regardless of personal opinion to affirm in all interviews that there were no risks involved in the experiments, changing CERN’s previous assertion of minimal risk.)
Professor Otto Rossler calculates that a single micro black hole could accrete the Earth is as few as 50 months and Dr. Rossler is world recognized as one of the most prestigious, most eminent, award winning scientists alive.
(Rebuttal?: But CERN has not scientifically refuted his calculations that I am aware of, CERN only promised Dr. Rossler that if they create stable micro black holes that they will stop the experiment. Will that be too late?)
The World might prevent a catastrophy if we delay the experiment until the promised safety studies are completed and peer reviewed.
(Rebuttal?: But then some scientists may not be the first to discover new science and some Nobel prizes may be lost.)
JTankers
LHCConcerns.com
Correction:
CERN promised to create and release an new safety report before the end of 2007.
(Rebuttal: CERN’s LHC Safety Assessment Group has concluded that particles created by cosmic ray impacts with Earth’s atmosphere are safely ejected into space and that [LSAG does not assume that] micro black holes will evaporate, but CERN never released any safety reports created by their LHC Safety Assessment Group.)
I don’t know whether Otto Rössler is world recognized as one of the most prestigious, most eminent, award winning scientists alive. But his preprint about black holes is here, and I guess most readers of CV can judge for themselves what to think about it. His petition to stop the LHC is here.
JTankers, where did you learn Special Relativity? At your grandmother’s knee?
Chris, back holes defiantly have a relative speed of at least twice the speed of light (It breaks no rules to have such a relative speed). Singularities cannot form in present day space-time, gravitational collapse occurs before a singularity can form. The horizon that then forms has to take on the role as singularity (much time after initial collapse and after one hell of a ride for the object that created it). Then a 2 brane forms across the diameter of the horizon which is opaque, this is mirrored on the outside of the horizon which forms a 3 brane (but its still really a 2 brane) in different degrees of transparency, which is naked but still has an horizon. Only the object that created it can see the information that’s leaving this brane, as it flows out unobserved by any other object. The whole thing will then evaporate into space creating a single massive potential for the object that created it, if the object is not observed in its full potential a real super nova will occur. It looked like that to me anyway, “I did not I could do that kind of thing”. It’s not my fault I wiped you all out of existence, anyway that’s all in that past now. I found this universe and put us all into it, I think the owners were a bit peeved but I really did not have anywhere else to go. So what can I say except “Sorry!”
If there are closed timelike lines then it will all be in the future as well. So you will have to apologise for wiping everyone out again and again and again. That could get boring – but then, like someone with Alzheimer’s, you would not remember the “previous” times you wiped everyone out so maybe you would not notice.
I hate to be serious (seriously: I really do hate being serious), but if a journalist had interviewed (say) Feynman in (say) 1969 about the dangers of the next generation of colliders producing mini black holes that would eat the world up he would have made a joke about it. It is only because theoretical physics has launched itself into a Brave New World of Bullshit since then that such considerations are taken seriously.
Perhaps we’re overlooking something and the world will be destroyed by the LHC. Then an intelligent observer will always find himself in a situation where the Higgs and supersymmetric particles have not yet been discovered. Experiments to search for them will either not have been carried out yet, been canceled (e.g. like the SSC) or delayed by freak accidents (e.g. the break down of a magnet at the LHC). 🙂
If we destroy the universe with the LHC it would, scientifically speaking, merely be embarrassing as we would have no real idea how we did it.
And God would then feel obliged to create a new, tamper-proof universe in order to fulfil his Plan.
Maybe that’s the first time I apologized, and yes it could be in the future as well, I could go back and there is a good chance I will. Then it will not me who wipes everyone out, seen as I would have already seen what happened next time round (in fact I would have seen each time round). I don’t know about you, but I prefer a world that has Dragons to a world that knows everything. You could hide the truth and you will, but the truth is I know who I am, this is not my life and I cannot change the fact that you dont know what happened that changed it. That means it will still become the life I should have lived. The loops will only occur in soft time and time has a hard deck, it’s not a place you want to reach; its hell picking yourself up from such a place!
I know because, it was me that had to live my life and non of you had to do that. No man should have to do what I had to do, but how else do we get here?
Let’s apply some relevant scientific observation here.
There are no known intelligent entities in the universe apart from us. Why is that?
Is it possible that every time a universe is formed, intelligence develops but (inadvertently) destroys the universe (not just the world!) before other intelligences can develop (sufficently to communicate)
I don’t think the LHC will destroy this universe but possibly the next generation or so may have the capabilty. After all, these contructions are creating “unnatural” environments, probably enabling interactions that have not previously existed in the universe. And they are “experimental” – no one really knows what the outcome will be (We hope for new particle discoveries)
I don’t think we’re at energies that can cause concern now – but the simple argument that cosmic rays are far more energetic and a lot more exotic stuff has existed in the universe previously without causing its destruction is not completely convincing to me.
Why no other intelligent civilisations? – Are we the only ones in this universe to be developing these physics experiments?
At the very least, it would make a neat sci-fi movie franchise – suppose we discover an extremely subtle condition that can cause the destruction of the universe – then even if we prevent it ourselves, we would then have to seek out future civilisations in the entire universe and ensure they don’t overlook the condition in their own experiments.
Interesting James, there is another argument, which places our species as the fundamental Universe Creation “Operatives”?..we exist, to evolve, to destroy and to create? Universe’s, or specifically the NEXT Universe is reliant upon “us” and the LHC!
By default, what we dont know, is the inherent automotive reasoning process, which brings us closer to the Universal goal of our form function and existence?
Perhaps this is the resolution of the Fermi Paradox. They build particle accelerators and collapse their planets into black holes.
Kidding, kidding! 😉
Most collider advocates say that colliders are safe. However, their reasons keep evaporating. In 1999, the reason was that black hole formation required energy beyond the reach of any collider. Then the multiple dimension people began predicting creation of black holes at colliders. I concede that their theories are speculative, but when there are multiple published papers with more or less reasonable theories, we have to assign at least a small probability to the possibility that they may be true. In 2003 the reason not to worry was Hawking radiation. Then published papers pointed out problems with the fundamental theory behind Hawking radiation. This does not prove that Hawking radiation will not work, but again we must assign some reasonable probability to that possibility. Now an analogy between colliders and cosmic rays is supposed to demonstrate safety. Collider opponents have pointed out ways in which that analogy is inexact. You can assume that they must be wrong, but Michelangelo Mangano, a member of CERN’s Large Hadron Collider Safety Analysis Group, at a recent talk at Berkeley, discussed problems with using “cosmic rays hitting the Earth” to rule out black holes and agreed with many of the points made by collider opponents.
If you want to say that colliders are safe, it seems appropriate to have good reasons for saying so. Mangano’s group will issue a report soon. Let us hope that they have good reasons this time.
What God has put asunder, let no man join together.
Pingback: Live-Blogging the LHC Startup! | Cosmic Variance
As many sources have said that no immediate black holes will occur, though the Hadron Collider will not be amped to full force until October 21, 2008. But this is what is getting to me, that its said that even if a black hole threat occured it would take 50 months atleast for the hole to swollow the Earth and take us with it. Flash forward 50 months and to the day from when the full fource of the collider takes place, its December 21, 2012. The exact day which the Mayan’s predicted that the world would end thousands of years ago. On the date known as ‘Doomsday’ 50 months before the collider used full force and if a black hole had occured.
Conwinsedence?
Sorry, but this is really getting to me. If anyone has any thoughts or anything; please email me at
xo_bubbley_babe_xo@hotmail.com
.. or post comments.
Will somebody please adress Al’s commetns above. #20.
His comments pretty much reflect what I want to know.
Essentially:
1. Is there a theoretical reason that the possibility of the LHC creating a stable microscopic blackhole is ridiculously tiny? Or is it just simply outside of scientific understanding at this point to put a probability on it.
And 2. If there is a non ridiculous possibility (say greater than one in a million over the projected life of the LHC) of a stable microscopic blackhole being formed and falling into an orbit around Earth’s center of mass, why is this not a horrible scenario? It seems to me it would grow exponentially pretty quickly if it was stable.
I am not anti-science in the least. I am excited about the LHC. I just want someone in the know to address these questions, which seem to be beneath scientists to address, but over the heads of folks who create science media for laymen.
Thanks,
Duncan
Oh, and I havn’t read any ridiculous ideas on this topic. Just a short Sci Fi story by Larry Niven about a microscopic blackhole destroying Mars, many many years ago.
i feel like some one needs to go over there and smash the most importent parts. theres a reason why life is a mystery and people need to stop trying t figure them out. thats why its a mystery if we figure every las mystery out then theres no point in living. so in my opinion this a really bad idea
Nick, I find your comment the scariest remark on this whole thread. Someone once said that lack of curiosity is the true illiteracy.
Pingback: Talking About LHC Safety | Cosmic Variance
So Colin what you are saying is that people should want to know what the out come of this is? Well we all know what’s going to happen with the science part. There going to make a black hole that dissipates in a short second…nothing is going to destroy earth… but what about all those people that believe god created everything??? Anger? Fear? The fact that their whole belief is wrong. That’s what im more worried about then a black hole destroying the earth…the over all out come is what I fear.
.