Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Silly Physicists

  1. Jun 29, 2008 #1

    FredGarvin

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Great. Just after we finally get both our truck and car paid off, those silly guys at CERN are going to create a black hole and destroy the planet. Just my luck.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080628/ap_on_re_eu/doomsday_collider [Broken]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 3, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 29, 2008 #2

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    When the first atomic bomb was detonated, and then later the first thermonuclear weapon, there were scientists who thought the atmosphere would catch fire or undergo a thermonuclear reaction. Ummm - that didn't happen - nor could it have.


    Cosmic rays interact with the nuclei in the atmosphere - everyday. A small fraction of these particles have energies several orders of magntide greater than that of CERN LHC.

    Last time I checked - we're still here.
     
  4. Jun 29, 2008 #3
    I think fred was trying to be funny (successfully), but you are right astro.
     
  5. Jun 29, 2008 #4

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    I know FG was being funny, but I'm surprised that this nonsense still continues.

    I just looked out the window - the world is still out there where I left it.

    I'll keep checking - just to make sure! :rofl:
     
  6. Jun 29, 2008 #5
    I don't understand something about the way the magnet was lowered. Wouldn't it have been better to put a series of planks (in a manner of speaking - not wooden of course) under it, removing the top layers as the magnet continued down? (So if it dropped, it'd only fall a short distance.)

    Anyway, can they just flip the switch already? The excitement is killing me.
     
  7. Jun 29, 2008 #6

    I heard on a program on the history channel that the soviets? or maybe the US, creatred a bomb that was just the right size and amount to possibly cause a run-a-way reaction with some elements in the atmosphere, thus causing it to burn.
     
  8. Jun 29, 2008 #7

    Astronuc

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    The earth's atmosphere is simply not dense enough, nor the magnetic or gravity fields strong enough, to sustain a fusion reaction, which ostensibly would be the CNO cycle. The energy from any thermonuclear device dissipates too quickly.
     
  9. Jun 29, 2008 #8
    If it were to stop, though from what previous posts seem to suggest unlikely would that make it like the biggest waste of money EVER (US$5 - 10 Billion) And I thought the Millennium Dome was bad...
     
  10. Jun 29, 2008 #9
    Sadly, even in the case they shut it down, it would still be several orders of magnitude away from being the biggest waste of money ever.

    http://zfacts.com/p/447.html
     
  11. Jun 29, 2008 #10
    Yeah, I've known about it for a few months. I know that these guys are a bunch of crazies, but at some level I am concerned that they may convince enough people to stop funding the LHC. Unfortunately, most of the people who write our checks don't have PhDs in physics, so we do have to address even the most foolish of concerns.

    On the other hand, it's a good thing I'm in high energy astrophysics. The cool thing about havig God supply the acceleration mechanism is that you only have to pay for the detector. Of course you also have no idea what the accelerator is doing...
     
  12. Jun 29, 2008 #11
    Looks like the Earth-eating black hole machine might have a chance yet!:rofl:

    Government Seeks Dismissal of End-of-World Suit Against Collider

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/science/27collider.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
     
  13. Jun 29, 2008 #12

    FredGarvin

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Ya know...that was the first thing that popped into my head when I read the story. The only thing about that is that even some of Oppenheimer's guys thought that it might happen. They simply didn't know. I give them a gazillion times more credibility than these whack-os in Hawaii or wherever they are.
     
  14. Jun 29, 2008 #13

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    This is reminiscent of Andrei Sakharov's plea for a ban on experimentation with vacuum energy. Given the highly energetic stuff that happens all over the universe, it should be assumed that the quantum vacuum field is stable against disruption, but Sakharov thought that the current condition of the vacuum was only one possible phase state and that triggering a phase change through experimentation could destroy the universe. It sounds like a pretty silly idea that we humans could destabilize the vacuum, when there are GRBs, quasars, supernovae, etc, kicking up some pretty impressive tantrums. Still the universe looks to be OK.
     
  15. Jun 29, 2008 #14

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Do archeologists have to do this kind of risk assesments?
    Risk: opening this tomb might unleash an ustoppable hoard of undead zombie mummies
    Outcome: end ofworld
    Likelyhood: low
     
  16. Jun 29, 2008 #15
    Apparently even casual astronomers should start doing risk assessments:

    Risk: Astronomical observations can cause the Universe to decay.
    Outcome: End of universe
    Likelyhood: low
     
  17. Jun 29, 2008 #16
    What gets me is that these people don't seem to care that the physicists dealing with the LHC are obviously experts in the field. However, some Hawaiians know better.
     
  18. Jun 29, 2008 #17

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Seems strange to me that people who have chosen to live on volcanoes are worried about black holes. :uhh:
     
  19. Jun 29, 2008 #18

    FredGarvin

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I was also thinking along these lines. I probably know nothing about particle physics, but I am worried, so I'll take them to court because I feel there could be something funny going on like making black holes.

    It's even funnier because, if they stopped and took the time, they could probably find four or five other aspects of something that large that could either delay or shut them down for a good length of time.
     
  20. Jun 29, 2008 #19

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    However, according to one scientist involved, they didn't know then that it was impossible. There was even a number bantered around; something like a 0.1%, of the world ending [maybe far less but it was nonzero and not vanishingly small]. I remember thinking: How dare they take such a risk! Who had the right to authorize that one?

    As for the rest, it is very simple: There are many people who do not trust scientists; and in particular, physicists. It is perceived that scientists are too arrogant, and therefore dangerous. After all, who gave us the bomb?

    Keep in mind that these people are fearful and not primarily crackpots. They fear for their lives and for all of humanity, and they don't understand what is being done. They only know that scientists might be capable of wiping-out civilization - they know what a Hydrogen bomb explosion looks like.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2008
  21. Jun 29, 2008 #20
    It's still spectacular that out of billions of people in the world someone would care to challenge the LHC.


    Anyways, wasn't the highest energy cosmic ray detected a single proton carrying a couple joules of energy?
     
  22. Jun 30, 2008 #21

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There's nothing particularly new in this article, but there was this line which I found pretty funny:

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/06/30/doomsdaycollider.ap/index.html [Broken]

    ...and jeez, ya know people win lotteries every day...in fact, it happens all the time!!!

    :rofl:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 3, 2017
  23. Jun 30, 2008 #22
    One concern that I read that I cannot reconcile on my own is this:

    Cosmic rays hit our atmosphere, but the momentum is non-zero after the collision. So even after a "black hole" is created, it zooms away really fast and we never see it again. In this case the net momentum is very close to 0, so the black hole would simply sink to the center of the Earth and grow over a long period of time.

    What's wrong that that picture?
     
  24. Jun 30, 2008 #23

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    All I can say is that if they create a blackhole that eats up Europe into some Swiss sinkhole, I expect they will run a big chance of losing their funding for next year.
     
  25. Jul 1, 2008 #24

    neu

    User Avatar

    If the LHC does cause the destruction of Earth in an instant or near enough such that the period taken for it to hapen is inperceptable, then there sort of isn't a problem right?

    If you have no knowledge of your death before you die, then the time at which you die/decay into strange matter is irrelavent.

    Of course if the destruction is localised or over a protracted period then that's very very bad, but as long as the destruction is total and complete (and instant) then we having nothing to fear. Of course I'm talking arse as what I've said is of no consequence, but it's none the less true

    In that instance I'm sure the MoD would oblige them with funding if they altered their research proposals somewhat
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2008
  26. Jul 1, 2008 #25
    If I had a choice right now, I would choose to continue living. Similarily, I'd rather not have a nuclear bomb explode right next to me, even though my death would be virtually instantaneous.
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook