New LHC monitoring portal LIVE DATA

[Xymox]

I have setup a very cool LIVE portal to the LHC and CERN...

I have have a brand new forum just for the LHC..

http://www.lhcportal.com/

 

[marcus]

Thanks for setting LHCPortal up! It looks like a labor of love. I just spent a very pleasant and interesting hour browsing the various stuff that you have gathered together.

I enjoyed watching "ATLAS built in 5 minutes", which is actual webcam montage, spliced together in a timelapse way so you see actual cranes operating and people running around, and the huge thing gradually comes together.

It is on Youtube
http://www.youtube.com/TheATLASExperiment

But the thing is, all this stuff is publicly available but it is scattered around different places on the web. You put it together in an organized, userfriendly way. So it becomes more accessible.
Also the volunteer "fan-club" tone is lighter and more palatable than the "official CERN outreach department" tone.

A lot of neat things like actual real-time status monitor screens from various systems and various parts of the ring.
And realtime webcams fly on the wall from various locations.
A "you are there" feel.

LHCPortal goes on my list of favorite links. Thanks for telling us about it.

 

[Xymox]

It was a labor of geeky love.. Thank you for the kind words !

The links were collected by countless hours of CERN browsing...

Yea the Document Sever multimedia section is just stunning, and endless...

http://cdsweb.cern.ch/collection/Multimedia & Outreach?ln=en

Yes... as a fan website I think it almost has to be better then the internal outreach. They have done a awesome job, but a fan gets to the very heart of the matter... Literally... hahahaha...

BUT alas... The site went viral at CERN on friday. HUGE numbers of hits from CERN.. I think they might cut off access... Maybe..

In my forums on my site I have a letter posted I sent to the Director General of Cern begging to keep things public.. I hope they listen...

If some of you posted support on that thread it would help :)

http://www.lhcportal.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=22&start=0&sid=0ba594b3eb3dc254061fc11c90e5601f

 

[Vanadium 50]

Sadly, I am afraid this will have the opposite effect.

The collaborations want to be able to decide when they have a result and when they do not. They don't want to have premature results "leak" before they are certain of them - a lot of mundane effects need to be ruled out before claiming a discovery. This process can be maddeningly slow to the impatient, but it's what science is all about.

Before this site went up, it seems the default was that a page was open unless there was a reason to protect it, and as Michael Barnett said, there were things that were not ready to be public that were accidentally available. With the launch of this site, I fear that the default will switch to being closed unless there is a good reason to make it open. And just as the last policy opened things that should be closed, this is likely to close things that should be open.

 

[Xymox]

Alas... This may be true.

Well I can't see any links that are open, or have ever been open, that were science related.

The science discussions are all seriously locked down tight. As they are at all facilities like this.

The only open links I can find are simply hardware status and pretty pictures of collisions.

For example
http://cmsdoc.cern.ch/cmscc/cmstv/cmstv.jsp?channel=4

Showing the last run of interesting triggered results is fun and harmless..

YES I would LOVE to be able to see the science go on as it happens. Frankly I think that is what a organization like CERN should be about. Sure would draw a lot more people into science. It would be very involving... And maybe, just maybe,, a complete novice might have a brilliant idea none of them would have had...

 

[Xymox]

You know... maybe just like they need a million computer CPUs all working on the collision data to detect interesting events.. Maybe they need millions of people looking at the data to find interesting events as well...

I forgot the name of that project that got the public into looking at galaxies to categorize them but that worked and had results..

Maybe the LHC should become completely open in order to have better quality results quicker :) Maybe having just a small group of people working on the science is not the best idea.

Just a thought...

 

[marcus]

...

BUT alas... The site went viral at CERN on friday. HUGE numbers of hits from CERN.. I think they might cut off access... Maybe..

In my forums on my site I have a letter posted I sent to the Director General of Cern begging to keep things public.. I hope they listen...

If some of you posted support on that thread it would help :)

http://www.lhcportal.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=22&start=0&sid=0ba594b3eb3dc254061fc11c90e5601f

I'm curious, what does "the site went viral" mean? What does huge numbers of hits on your website from people at CERN signify? Apprehension? Nervousness?
Or just a healthy interest in how they look in a new kind of mirror, or in this version of the public eye.

 

[arivero]

You know... maybe just like they need a million computer CPUs all working on the collision data to detect interesting events.. Maybe they need millions of people looking at the data to find interesting events as well...

I forgot the name of that project that got the public into looking at galaxies to categorize them but that worked and had results..

Maybe the LHC should become completely open in order to have better quality results quicker :) Maybe having just a small group of people working on the science is not the best idea.

Just a thought...

The Oxford Dictionary was done via public collaboration. It could be argued that it is a complicated training, in the case of CERN data, but on the other hand how may students of physics and engineering have you got across the world, now in the XXIth century?

 

[marcus]

You know... maybe just like they need a million computer CPUs all working on the collision data to detect interesting events.. Maybe they need millions of people looking at the data to find interesting events as well...

I forgot the name of that project that got the public into looking at galaxies to categorize them but that worked and had results..

Maybe the LHC should become completely open ...

Please don't say "completely" open. Astronomy has a carefully limited openness.
There are a few projects that you can sign up and help with. These are carefully selected.
Open participation works in certain structured situations.

There are problems with "complete" openness.

You are doing something already very effective with a lot of potential. You will shoot yourself in the foot, damage your own good cause, if you overload it by putting out what sounds like a crazy ideology.

Scientists need money and respect, and sometimes government cooperation in other departments. Outreach is a way to ensure broad support. Think of your website as an initiative that promotes a new more effective outreach, creating a solider more enthusiastic and committed public support.
Think of your website as a better kind of support for the status quo experimental physics establishment.

Don't try to start more revolutions than the one specialized one you already have.

Science management people get very nervous if they think someone is crazy, or an enthusiastic idealist social reformer, or something like that.

Don't propose changing their social organization (which is what determines the flow of data.) Just tell them that what you offer is a way into the hearts of an admiring public.

Basically the old outreach---Brian Greene on TV selling string to teens----John Ellis hyping LHC on television saying it reproduces the big bang etc etc----a lot of unreal catchy metaphors---garbage---condescending tripe.
After the string fiasco, the old forms of popularization can potentially undermine respect for science, create distrust, alienation. Eventual backlash---cuts.
What it seems to me you are helping to invent is something like reality-based outreach.

I would say to present yourself as doing something that is in the interest of the existing research establishment. And I think after all the phony stuff this real "you are there" link-up is urgently needed.

 

[Xymox]

'm curious, what does "the site went viral" mean? What does huge numbers of hits on your website from people at CERN signify? Apprehension? Nervousness?
Or just a healthy interest in how they look in a new kind of mirror, or in this version of the public eye.

hehehehe... all of the above ?

Viral... It was like one emailer sent my site to 3 more who each sent it to 3 more.. In the space of hours I had 60 IP's all located in the vicinity of CERN. None had referers. It then slowly moved out to the other universities and companies collaborating with CERN on the LHC. It is still continuing today at a slower pace. Mostly ISP's based in France and Sweden. I don't know how many IP's occurred in total but I would say a fair share of CERN saw it.

Ive seen some weird things. Like I keep seeing someone use http://anonymouse.org/anonwww.html to keep from being identified. I am concerned that someone would use that and access cern. China seems keenly interested in CERN as well.

The web stats have been pretty interesting..

_________________________________


And I have very good news. I just heard from the ATLAS team and they have said they are good with my site. In fact they said they are happy to have the open policy. Only key items will be secured on a -must- be secured level and they will keep most everything open access. I have one link they will need to secure. Its minor.

So this was great news and I have restored all the ATLAS links.

Go check out some of the ATLAS status links. They are pretty cool.

Firther I am trying to get them to put even cooler stuff up for easy live viewing for the upcoming events.

I want to be able to watch a "splash" event live when we get first beam circulation in about a week. Lots of pretty colors and crazy graphics.

 

[Xymox]

Just tell them that what you offer is a way into the hearts of an admiring public.

Marcus, I hear you... AND it just so happens that the above quoted line is exactly what I want to do. The other was just a crazy thought... Hmmm... but still... hehehehe...

 

[Vanadium 50]

Maybe they need millions of people looking at the data to find interesting events as well...

Are you arguing that the experimenters are such ignorant stumblebums that a better job could be done by a million amateurs?

Like I said, the whole scientific enterprise revolves around ruling out a large number of mundane explanations. You're suggesting the best people to do that are not the people who designed the instrument, not the people who built the instrument, not the people who operated the instrument and not the people who calibrated the instrument. It's not even people who have thought about the problem for years, studied it, maybe even wrote an article or two about it.

Instead, it should be people without any such experience.

Does this make sense to you?

 

[Xymox]

Of course... I am playing devils advocate of course..

I have HUGE respect for the entire community that brought about CERN and the thinkers who shape physics today.

BUT

I am suggesting that throughout time science has been blinded many times to new ideas by being overly caught up in current and established theories. Maybe there is a amateur scientist out there right now, maybe reading this, that might have the next huge step in physics ? Maybe he/she could watch science debate/discovery at CERN live with a different way of looking at the data and suddenly notice something they missed and think completely outside the box and come up with answers traditional thinkers might miss.

Maybe the more people who participate might raise the odds that someone will come up with the next new breakthrough.

Maybe all that experience and training also causes a blindness to new and different approaches.

I think there is a valid argument to allow access to the scientific ponderings in the world. However... managing all the people who "think" they know the answers and getting down to the actual good ideas... Thats the hard part... But maybe that's where forums come in ?

I think being open minded to new ideas is very important and new ideas tend to come from people not schooled in the old way of thinking.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Your message is quite hard to follow...on the one hand, you say that you have a huge respect for the entire community - but then say that a bunch of amateurs could do a better job.

You can't think outside of the box without knowing where the box is - and to suggest that better science can be done by excluding the people who designed the instrument, the people who built the instrument, the people who operated the instrument and the people who calibrated the instrument, well, it's just silly.

I would suggest you read Steve Dutch's http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/SelfApptdExp.htm" on "Self-Appointed Experts". Lots of good stuff there.

 

[Xymox]

What I am saying is that sometimes it takes both polished, experienced, top notch experts AND amateurs novices to advance science.

The LHC is one of man's must stunning achievements. It took the combined skill, knowledge and experience of the very best people in the world to achieve it. Those who worked on the project are pioneers and have created history. Every last person who worked on it too.

I am saying that by allowing open access to this stunning project it might be possible to achieve even bigger results. I am suggesting a collaborative project on a scale as big as the LHC.

Maybe finding that next big advance in science is like searching for the Higgs. Maybe you have to look through a tremendous number of ideas to find what your looking for. Maybe a higher luminosity of ideas will result in a higher probability of finding a really good one.

I am suggesting you need a mix of experienced pros and out of box thinkers. I think the internet has the ability to bring this about by simply allowing open access to millions and the amateurs could all simply watch, post and discuss on their own forums. You never know, something amazing might come from it. I have a hard time imaging a down side to this.

Am I making myself more clear ?

 

[Xymox]

BTW... I completely enjoyed the rant you provided a link to. It was all so true. Self Appointed Experts are a plague. Sorting them out from the actual amateur who has done thought and research is hard.

But who knows. Scary as it might be, maybe a Self Appointed Expert might stumble across some important discovery for real as stunningly rare as that event might be.

 

[Haelfix]

There is literally zero chance that an amateur can spot something in the LHC data that the pros would miss.

I don't think you understand the level of sophistication that is required, or that the raw data is mostly gobbledygook without very precise and technically complicated analysis.

In fact, even a single pro at some university out there that doesn't have access to the proper computing facilities, and without an understanding of the systematic errors of the experiment and the details of the mostly proprietary codes would be hard pressed to even reproduce standard results, much less find something new.

The man hours involved just to get to a point where analysis is even possible is far more than a single person's lifetime and has been going on for literally years before the experiment was even running by many large independant groups

 

[Xymox]

I agree.. Sorry if I refereed to RAW data.

Im not really talking about raw data. However, you do never know. Stranger things have happened I suppose..

Im talking about semi processed stuff. Triggered possible interesting LHC events. I am talking about maybe a different interpretation of a event. Or a different view of the scientific meanings of a event.

Conservatives in science over long periods of time tend to get upended by some new start guy/gal who breaks all the rules. Comes up with a theory that no one says could possibly be true. Which turns out to be spot on and turns all the old theories on end. That is how science has always worked, that is how it will always work. HOWEVER the new guys/gals ALWAYS start from what the conservative science body has done previously before upending it.

Its a cycle.

Then of course the new theory becomes old and some new one that no one believes comes along and upends everything again..

I think the standard model is about due for a upending. IMHO..

So I feel its important to keep a open mind and not get blinded by current science, because it might just all be incorrect.

I think its the role of current scientists to be open minded and be keenly aware their understanding of things might be only partially correct. I think we should support new views even if they seriously conflict with what we know because one of them might well be right.

So I think having more people from outside the box look at LHC science might well have advantages.

Again... and I want to make sure I am clear... The new theories COULD NOT get started unless there were lots of very skilled and educated professionals paving the way.

This is a cycle we should support not suppress.

And BTW the LHC will have first circulation of beam 1 during the first shift at CERN on saturday. However it may occur as early as friday. tThey are just turning on the beam now to start global testing. Second shift on saturday will do beam 2. Then some number of days later,,, first collisions at low power. Then a week later collisions at 1GeV.

Pretty exciting stuff. Everybody wish the LHC teams good luck.

 

[Xymox]

See sometimes novices can be helpful. At least NASA thinks so

http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,28348,26367998-5014239,00.html

 

[Vanadium 50]

Xymox, as a practicing researcher, I have to tell you that I am offended by your post.
A few points:

Im not really talking about raw data.

Of course not. Let someone else do all the hard work of calibration, alignment, reconstruction, data quality, etc. and then - only then - deign to look at it. Why should you dirty your hands with all this?

So I feel its important to keep a open mind and not get blinded by current science, because it might just all be incorrect.

Do you have any evidence - any at all - that supports your charge that the LHC experimenters are closed-minded? If not, you might want to retract that.

I think its the role of current scientists to be open minded and be keenly aware their understanding of things might be only partially correct.

And what evidence do you have that they are not? Again, I think you should put up or shut up. You are accusing them of being bad scientists. I think you need to support these charges. Or stop making them.

 

[Xymox]

I am also kinda offended.. But its ok. Its what forums are for, debate..

I -AM NOT- saying that the most brilliant people in the world in physics, who currently have created the LHC, are anything, but, well brilliant. Not to mention ALL the people who created every aspect of every part of the experiment. Its really the pinnacle of technology and science in one mighty man made project. I've said this a number of times.

I am simply stating that big revolutionary advances in science can come from novices and be from left field.

Do you disagree ?

 

[chroot]

Xymox, I think your effort to bring the wonders of the LHC to a larger audience should be applauded. As long as the LHC personnel are okay with your work, I think you're doing a great service to a wide-eyed and inquisitive population. I am fully in support of any and all science outreach programs, and wish the frontiers of scientific research were documented with even 1/1000th the effort spent to document weekend football games. I think most people on this forum would agree.

I think people just have a problem with your assertion that the next great scientific discovery could come from anyone, including an amateur watching your LHC dashboard. This just isn't supported by history -- it has literally never happened. It's like suggesting that a rank amateur just might walk onto the field of a professional football game and proceed to score ten touchdowns in a row. It's not true, and it's insulting to professional football players. We live in an increasingly egalitarian society, but that does not mean credentials mean any less than they once did.

I think you should bill your site as a grand way for the rest of the world to "peek through the doors" at the scientists at work at the LHC. I also think you should stop short of billing it as an avenue for amateurs to upstage those scientists.

- Warren

 

[Bob S]

I am simply stating that big revolutionary advances in science can come from novices and be from left field.

Donald Glaser (Lawrence Berkeley Lab and UC Physics Dept. ) won the Nobel prize in 1960 for inventing the bubble chamber, which he conceived over a glass of beer. Is this left field?
See
http://www.osti.gov/accomplishments/glaser.html
Bob S

 

[Vanadium 50]

Donald Glaser was hardly a novice. He was a professor at Michigan with a PhD from Caltech at the time of his invention.

 

[Bob S]

CERN/LHC on twitter has just reported circulating beam in both directions.
Follow cernlhc on twitter.
Bob S

 

[Xymox]

Sorry.,...

I got really overloaded with several aspects of the new site. It got VERY popular very quickly..
MANY emails from press and from CERN guys.

Everybody loves the site.

It has been great fun watching the LHC team's success and right on schedule. In fact maybe early :)

Ok... Again I am not wanting to offend anyone.

Einstein. Now correct me if I am wrong. Hehehe I am sure you will...

Einstein was a complete unknown with very little formal training when he wrote his first paper "The Investigation of the State of Aether in Magnetic Fields"". Correct ?

I think he was a example of someone I might think of as left field at the time. He then continued to produce left field ideas as he went along. Later of course all proved correct so far.

No ?

 

[Xymox]

"During his stay at the Patent Office, and in his spare time, he produced much of his remarkable work and in 1908 he was appointed Privatdozent in Berne."
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1921/einstein-bio.html

Spare time... kinda sounds like a novice to me ? No ?

 

[Vanadium 50]

Einstein was a complete unknown with very little formal training when he wrote his first paper "The Investigation of the State of Aether in Magnetic Fields"". Correct ?

I think he was a example of someone I might think of as left field at the time. He then continued to produce left field ideas as he went along. Later of course all proved correct so far.

No ?

No. Einstein was a 15 year old boy when he wrote that, and that paper had no influence at all in the development of physics.

After Einstein got his PhD, then he wrote some papers with influence.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Apparently chroot's excellent football example wasn't convincing.

Perhaps you could answer a yes/no questions: "Do you believe the LHC physicists will miss a major discovery?"

You can probably see the followup - if the answer to that is "no", your point is moot. If the answer is "yes", understand that you are accusing the people working on the experiments of being bad scientists. I'd ask you to back up that accusation with some evidence.

Furthermore, I don't think you have thought this through. The LHC experiments in aggregate produce several petabytes of data per year. How on Earth is someone by themselves going to run over this much data? And, again, to continue to flog a dead horse, do you have any idea how insulting it sounds to say, "I haven't really looked into what this would take, but I am sure that I (and my buddies) could do a better job than you."

 

[Redbelly98]

"During his stay at the Patent Office, and in his spare time, he produced much of his remarkable work and in 1908 he was appointed Privatdozent in Berne."
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1921/einstein-bio.html

Spare time... kinda sounds like a novice to me ? No ?

No, he already had earned a degree in physics. Not a novice, and thoroughly grounded in the issues and current state of physics at the time.

 

[Xymox]

Well this is certainly a spirited discussion. I am trying my best :)

Just for the record again. I do not believe there are any more talented people then the ones working in every aspect of the LHC project. Are all of us human ? can any of us miss something or make a mistake ? Of course. Its human nature. Is that likely at the LHC ? hardly. BUT it -can- happen.

Well we do have our minds already made up don't we. So the answer is that no one from outside the established physics taught academia can come up with any news ideas ?

So anyone not already established can't come up with a new idea or a observation that other missed ? Its impossible that a novice could come up with a Earth shattering idea ?

Your saying its impossible is that correct ? mathematically infinitely impossible correct ?

As far as Einstein goes, I am not a expert as I said. I would personally consider a paper from a 15 year old fairly impressive and honestly think he would have to be considered a novice at 15 ? But I will concede defeat on that I suppose and just stick with math on this debate.

I think it -IS- mathematically possible that a random person could contribute in a positive way to the outcome of the experiment results from the LHC. I think it is also mathematically possible that the more people that contribute, the more the possibility goes up that someone might find something others did not.

Lets try that angle.

This is NOT disrespecting any of the fine and frankly awesome people at CERN.

You know, do not get me wrong either. I have great respect for you Vanadium.

I just wish some of the really experienced people here, like yourself, might come visit my forum now and then. I am -NOT- a expert and I have some people asking questions I can't answer and with the massive traffic the site is getting I really want to make sure answers get tended to correctly by people who know what they are talking about. I do not. I have stuff I do know, but physics I do NOT know. I feel a very compelling desire to help address the whole "The LHC is going to create a black hole and gobble the earth" issue. To combat this I need some experienced pros who can answer these debates to firmly address the fears of these lay people.

I hate to ask that here in the forum, in the middle of this debate, but its a pressing need. It would be good for CERN and for physics in general. I am getting 7000 new IP's a day. 90,000 hits / day. Not too many people on the forum, mostly the portal but the stats show people do look. This might be a good way to address the incorrect fear some people have of physics being something bad.

Just pointing that out...

We can just forget I said all that and continue with the debate if you desire

 

[Redbelly98]

Well, let's suppose for the sake of argument that it's possible for an amateur to discover something new, if given access to the data. On the other hand, it is also be possible for an amateur to:

• Believe he had discovered something, when he really hadn't
• Pester the LHC scientists about his "new discovery"
• Get some reporter or other news media to believe he has a "new discovery"
• Pester Physics Forums with his new discovery

Experience says the latter scenario is far more likely. So much, that it may not be just one amateur claiming a new discovery but tens or hundreds of them. Some of the professionals' time is then be taken up with dealing with the misinformation, distracting them from their own work of extracting physics from the raw data. In summary: a royal PITA for the LHC scientists.

It comes down to a risk-vs-reward analysis, and the result is that it isn't worth it to open up the data as you propose.

p.s. we deal with a similar issue at Physics Forums, and is the reason why we don't allow discussion of non-mainstream, personal theories here. We take a small risk of missing out on the next great revolution in physics, but the reward is that we don't have tons of misinformation getting posted here.

 

[Xymox]

Hehehe...

Well you do have a point... Along with a great smiley to make your point.

No dispute that the masses would produce masses of incorrect answers and waste time, resources and energy. But, what if,,, hahahaha,,, the real big answer was out there !.. hheheheh... Yes I know... Don't slap me...

Im tellin ya. I need some help over at the LHCPortal. I need pros. You guys are pros.. I am NOT. It is not in the best interests of physics that I try and answer any of these questions. You guys have to admit that's true ? No argument on that one right ? hehehehe

 

[Xymox]

There are almost no posts on my forum. Its easy. I set up a forum just to bring the "end of the world" people so I could address their fears. Its kinda worked. I have a very nice, concerned, intelligent person who has gone back and forth and its been fun. It has been a great thread to help lay people understand that particle colliders are nothing to fear.

BUT he/she is starting to ask questions I just can't handle. Not to mention my other answers might no be fully correct. NOTE I said in every answer I WAS NOT a expert and was going to try my best tho.

I am very patient and answered in ways she/he could follow..

 

[chroot]

Xymox,

If your purpose is to attract pros to your portal, you are working against yourself in this very thread. Instead of exciting people with your work, you are exasperating them with your words.

Your buddy Einstein once said "If A is a success in life, then A equals x plus y plus z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut."

- Warren

 

[Vanadium 50]

This is NOT disrespecting any of the fine and frankly awesome people at CERN.

Of course it is. It's showing utter contempt. You are arguing that they are sufficiently bad scientists that they will miss a major discovery, and sufficiently bad scientists that a bunch of amateurs would do a better job. Think about the football analogy - if you said that you've never played in the NFL, or even in college, but you could score ten touchdowns in one quarter against the Colts or the Saints, what do you think people's reactions would be?

Now imagine you making the same statement in the locker room of the Colts or Saints. Like Warren said, you will have a hard time attracting real scientists to your site if you treat them in such an exasperating manner.

I also note that there is a huge difference between "having ideas" and "discovering something in the data that the researchers missed".

There's another point that Redbelly could have mentioned. People can "rediscover" old wrong things. About once a month we have someone post here that they have a revolutionary new theory of gravity. Except that it's not true - it was first proposed in 1690.

If you want to discover something new, you need to learn what is already known. That means devoting the time to study it.

 

[arivero]

Perhaps the point is "contributing work". It should be some way to add amateur and undergraduate level work to the prof work. Of course it could imply a discovery coming from the amateur work, but it should be the same that a discovery done in the collisions collected during the night shift of researcher John Doe in Aleph... it should still be a discovery of Aleph@CERN, not a discovery of John Doe.

 

[daschaich]

... I believe that everyone should have fair access to data, then apply analysis tools suited for the job of finding experimentally predicted/unpredicted results...

To rephrase what Haelfix and Vanadium have been saying, there are no such "analysis tools" that can be applied out-of-the-box. Hundreds of scientists have already devoted years of their lives to performing LHC analyses, and will be devoting years more in the decades to come. There is no way an outsider can even begin to make sense of the data independently, even if it is "semi-processed" as Xymox suggested. Haelfix said it best:

There is literally zero chance that an amateur can spot something in the LHC data that the pros would miss.

Something that I think should be emphasized more than it has been so far is that the LHC experimental collaborations are not monolithic entities. I think this is being overlooked in comments like:

So I think having more people from outside the box look at LHC science might well have advantages.

You know... maybe just like they need a million computer CPUs all working on the collision data to detect interesting events.. Maybe they need millions of people looking at the data to find interesting events as well...

...

Maybe the LHC should become completely open in order to have better quality results quicker :) Maybe having just a small group of people working on the science is not the best idea.

The collaborations are not "small groups of people", but include hordes of (often fiercely competing) scientists spanning the range from "conservatives" to iconoclasts, each promoting their favored searches and analyses. They're not going to overlook anything that anybody else could discover.

 

[ninar]

wow... i had never before acknowledged this fierce side of physicists. i like it.