CERN Ready To Test Fire Its Time Machine On September 10

Status
Not open for further replies.

Claimintru

Distinguished
Aug 4, 2008
68
0
18,630
0
I remember when this first made the news over a year and some ago. They actually calculated the chance of this ending the world. It was something crazy to the -18th power :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
same question what the hell does it do??
it would be nice if anyone can convert the above article into a language that normal people can understand

i would really like to know what it does and i think their would be many other people who have no clue on what the above article means..
 
G

Guest

Guest
To attempt to recreate the Big Bang and hopefully try and understand how the universe began.
 

Claimintru

Distinguished
Aug 4, 2008
68
0
18,630
0
To attempt to recreate the Big Bang and hopefully try and understand how the universe began.
Yep. The huge amounts of force colliding simulate the beginning stages of the universe on a miniature scale. Scientists are hoping to see what exactly happened in the early stages of the Big Bang, as the end result is pretty apparent.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Abstract from Dr. Rosslers plea to the world, copy available on LHCFacts.org.

A nightmarish situation, that can still be hoped to be averted in time through communication within the scientific community, is drawn attention to. Only a few weeks remain to find out whether the danger is real or nothing but a mirage. After this time window is closed, it will take years until we know whether or not we are doomed. The story line has all the features of a best-selling novel. The reader is asked to contribute constructively.

Quote from Dr. Otto E. Rossler, Professor Theoretical Biochemist, visiting Professor of Theoretical Physics, inventor of the Rossler Attractor, founder of Endophysics, winner of the 2003 Chaos Award of the University of Liege and the 2003 Rene Descartes Award.
 
G

Guest

Guest
The purpose of the high energy collisions is to try to detect particles that are predicted by modern quantum field theories, but have not yet been detected empirically. Detection or non-detection of any of these particles would be a great step forward for particle physics.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Ahh Yes. The `Big Bang'.
That obvious natural phenomenon that just like all natural explosions and bangs since - happened to create perfectly spherical balls of rock floating about in space...
Odd that that was, thank goodness that dinosaurs and stuff died so that they could get buried in specific locations and magicaly become `fossil fuel' for years to come..
 
G

Guest

Guest
"Once stable circulating beams have been established, they will be brought into collision, and the final step will be to commission the LHC?s acceleration system to boost the energy to 5 TeV, taking particle physics research to a new frontier."

errr.... wrong paste? why was this posted twice?
 

Titanius

Distinguished
Sep 24, 2007
118
0
18,690
1
ntkeith, you have absolutely seen GhostBusters too many times. We are speaking of theoretical physics, not factual nuclear powered ghost hunter equipment.
 

Master Exon

Distinguished
Jul 20, 2008
292
0
18,780
0
I thought the Big Bang theory was considered ridiculous because it required imaginary invisible undetectable things like dark matter and dark energy to fill in the gaps in mass.
 

randomizer

Champion
Moderator
Scientists enjoy smashing things, just like all of us. The only difference is they prefer to do it on a small scale and at supercalafreakingawesome speeds. They spare no expense for the best quality smahing equipment.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Quote:
I thought the Big Bang theory was considered ridiculous because it required imaginary invisible undetectable things like dark matter and dark energy to fill in the gaps in mass.
End of Quote
I think you have it a little backwards: Big Bang theory was considered ridiculous way back before cosmic microwave background radiation was discovered by Penzias and Wilson in 1965, the actual flash of light, still heard on microwave frequency, the remnant of the BB and right now it is the only scientific theory "still standing". Dark matter is required to explain why Galaxies stay together, instead of flying apart, apparently gravity holding them together is much stronger than we can account for from visible mass and dark energy is trying to explain why expansion of the universe seem to be still accelerating, instead of slowing down. That's where the CERN's LHC comes in, to either prove the BB theory with discovery of new, already predicted particles, or totally new set of questions requiring new theories.
I think the same people were predicting doom and the end of the world when accelerator at Fermie lab was being build many years ago and we already know how right those predictions were.
 

skalagon

Distinguished
Jul 31, 2008
42
0
18,530
0
[citation][nom]Dumbed down[/nom]Ahh Yes. The `Big Bang'.That obvious natural phenomenon that just like all natural explosions and bangs since - happened to create perfectly spherical balls of rock floating about in space...Odd that that was, thank goodness that dinosaurs and stuff died so that they could get buried in specific locations and magicaly become `fossil fuel' for years to come..[/citation]
ever hear of gravity ???
and as for fossil fuel, you probably actually thought that the basis of the theory of how it came about is a load of dinosaurs dying in the one place right? "It is generally accepted that they formed from the fossilized remains of dead plants and animals[1] by exposure to heat and pressure in the Earth's crust over hundreds of millions of years.[2] This is known as the biogenic theory and was first introduced by Georg Agricola in 1556 and later by Mikhail Lomonosov in 1757. There is an opposing more modern theory that the more volatile hydrocarbons, especially natural gas, are formed by abiogenic processes, that is no living material was involved in their formation."As for this organic material all dying in one place, have you ever heard of a forest?? A lot less simple than a shitload of t-rex's dying in the one spot and turning into oil eh? how about you actually look at the science behind these things before you go and have the arrogance to challenge thousands of scientists without even the knowledge that planet formation is the result of gravity, wait you know what gravity is dont you? you know the thing that holds you down? hmmm based on your retarded comment probably not
 

techguy911

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2007
1,075
0
19,460
58
Claimintru that information you saw was created by a pr guy he is not even a scientist, there has been a large number of physicist against this even legal action is being taken to stop this project.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EL2ghqv5mCg

what could happen 1 of 3 things

1) nothing happens and they get results

2) they create mini- black holes at velocities slow than speed of light they settle in core of the earth and grow, 5-30 years earth destroyed.

3) they create a stranglet particle it then causes a chain reaction with all surrounding matter and the earth explodes.

Thats a 50% chance according to a real group of physicist.

Its like give a vial of nitro to a monkey , the monkey has no idea what it is and has a 50% chance of blowing himself up.

 

bigships

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2006
7
0
18,510
0
While the particle beamshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beams created in the Tevatron top out a maximum energy of just under 1 TeV (1 billion electron volts)
I'm no physicist, but isn't TeV a teraelectron Volt, or a trillion electron volts?
 

Blessedman

Distinguished
May 29, 2001
577
0
18,980
0
they are looking for particles like the mass particle. The thing that actually gives atoms their mass. some of the biggest fears and they have theorys that they can create a miniature black hole... great gg
 

bigships

Distinguished
Jan 12, 2006
7
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]ThePatriot[/nom]Tera = 10 to the power 12 = billion
Trillion = 10 to the power 18 = exa[/citation]
ThePatriot, how many bytes in a terabyte? Isn't it a trillion bytes?
1,000,000,000,000 (10 to the power 12)? (assuming 1,000 bytes per kilobyte) A gigabyte is a billion bytes.
Wouldn't a TeV, a teraelectron volt follow the same logic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tera
Or am I mixing systems of math?

-- bigships
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY