tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post1678064592778274407..comments2023-10-31T03:21:02.309-07:00Comments on Aether Wave Theory: AWT and LHC safety riskZephir AWThttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14427698206253594481noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-4344151889302361242009-12-25T15:13:39.558-08:002009-12-25T15:13:39.558-08:00According to Roberto Casadio at the Universita di ...According to Roberto Casadio at the Universita di Bologna and associates, raising concerns with some physicists, a <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.2948" rel="nofollow">new study</a> of <br>Mini-black holes generated by the Large Hadron Collider suggests they could decay over a period of more than one second.Zephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-71236053812006174142010-01-24T00:09:26.690-08:002010-01-24T00:09:26.690-08:00The only subtle problem is, they already demonstra...The only subtle problem is, they already demonstrated, when extradimensions are involved, black hole can be formed with compare to existing theories:<br><br><i>Does that mean the LHC will make black holes? Not necessarily, Choptuik says. The Planck energy is a quintillion times higher than the LHC's maximum. So the only way the LHC might make black holes is if, instead of being three dimensional, space actually has more dimensions that are curled into little loops too small to be detected except in a high-energy particle collision. Predicted by certain theories, those extra dimensions might effectively lower the Planck energy by a huge factor.<br></i><br><br>Funny thing is, we have theory of extradimensions forty years already, which just waits for its confirmation - it's a string theory. If existing theory of black hole formation could be impeached so easily, what about theory of Hawking radiation? After some month some other guy will anounce with smile, the presence of extradimensions would slow-down black hole evaporation considerably, neverthelles "LHC is still pretty safe".<br><br>Well, if some extra-dimensions could wipe-out one quintillion factor (?!?) of LHC safety expected - what we can expect about theory of Hawking radiation?<br><br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_black_hole" rel="nofollow">Randall-Sundrum model of microblack holes</a> is based on string theory and it considers the existence of stable primordial microscopic holes, for which quantum mechanical effects play an important role. These black holes should be stable enough to survive up to present time.<br><br>The funny thing is, we have theory of stable black holes already for many years, which just waits for its confirmation at LHC. I'm not sure, I really want to confirm these theories just by LHC.Zephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-69720697317840519862010-01-24T00:40:09.223-08:002010-01-24T00:40:09.223-08:00The ability of scientists to predict some problems...The ability of scientists to predict some problems is pretty pathetic. Even small child could expect, when some supermagnet will explode, the leak of helium from neighboring supermagnets will lead to their quenching, too.<br><br>Believe it or not - no one expected it.<br><br>They're just trying to cover their incompetence, which makes CERN is more secretive, then the Vatican. For example, <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16254-gallery-first-images-of-the-damage-that-shut-the-lhc.html" rel="nofollow">they published first photos</a> of LHC destruction just after three months - until this time they babbled about "some helium spill"Zephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-80117078112138148772010-01-30T11:04:58.426-08:002010-01-30T11:04:58.426-08:00John Conway informed about a fresh decision concer...John Conway <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2010/01/29/decision-for-the-lhc-1-inverse-fb-at-7-tev-or-bust/" rel="nofollow">informed</a> about a fresh decision concerning the plans for the Large Hadron Collider: In 2010, the LHC will be pumped up pretty quickly to twice 3.5 TeV i.e. 7 TeV center-of-mass energy. 7 TeV is a whopping 3.5 times higher than the current total energy at the Tevatron. It will work to accumulate one inverse femtobarn of collisions and stop, but not later than at the end of 2011.Zephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-3869756758103660532010-02-16T12:49:47.433-08:002010-02-16T12:49:47.433-08:00Secret danger of steady-state models:It's well...<i><b>Secret danger of steady-state models</b></i>:<br><br>It's well known, general relativity predicts, every sufficiently dense object should collapse into singularity fast, the faster, the smaller such object is. But the main problem of Schwarzschild black hole model is, it's a steady-state model: it doesn't care, how much time it would take to create true singularity for such dense matter (where energy spreads very slowly). As the result, true singularity can never exist in Universe of finite age.<br><br>The same, just AdS/CFT dual problem exist for quantum mechanics, which predicts in Hawking model of black hole radiation, every sufficiently dense black hole should evaporate fast - the faster, the smaller is. In this theory no such dense object could really exist inside of Universe...<br><br>Well, in Universe of infinite time, again.... But can our Universe wait for it? Note that even Albert Einstein didn't believe in both singularities, both in quantum mechanics very much.Zephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-70528210523549268282010-03-01T19:48:29.976-08:002010-03-01T19:48:29.976-08:00A Critical Review of Safety Papers Concerning Blac...<a href="http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org/LHC_safety.pdf" rel="nofollow">A Critical Review of Safety Papers Concerning Black Holes at the LHC</a>Zephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-10887674402815145322010-03-12T06:38:42.352-08:002010-03-12T06:38:42.352-08:00Seven Reasons for Demanding an LHC Safety Conferen...<a href="http://www.scientificblogging.com/big_science_gambles/blog/interview_professor_otto_r%C3%B6ssler_takes_lhc" rel="nofollow">Seven Reasons for Demanding an LHC Safety Conference</a><br><br>1) Black holes cannot evaporate because their horizon is effectively infinitely far away in spacetime according to my new interpretation of the Schwarzschild metric [1].<br><br>2) Black holes are effectively uncharged [1]. Therefore, charged elementary particles cannot at the same time be black holes (or point-shaped). Hence non-point-shaped mini objects exist already. This makes mini black holes much more likely.<br><br>3) Mini black holes grow exponentially rather than linearly inside the earth: "mini-quasar principle". Hence the time needed by a resident mini black hole to eat the earth is maximally shortened – perhaps down to “50 months”. This contrasts with the "50 million Years" obtained assuming linear growth by BBC Horizon and CERN’s analogous "5 billion years"<br><br>4) CERN [4, 5] counters that if the hoped-for mini black holes are stable as claimed, equal stable particles must arise naturally by ultra-fast cosmic-ray protons colliding with planet bound protons. However, there remains a fundamental difference: Only the man-made ones are "symmetrically generated" and hence dangerous. For they alone are slow enough with respect to the earth that one of them (at less than 11 km/sec) can take residence – in contrast to the almost luminal speeds of their natural cousins.Zephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-32256857809005020632010-03-14T12:00:17.143-07:002010-03-14T12:00:17.143-07:00Busza, Jaffe, Sandweiss, and Wilczek regarded a on...Busza, Jaffe, Sandweiss, and Wilczek <a href="http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118775110/abstract" rel="nofollow">regarded a one-in-5,000 risk</a> of destroying Earth as <br>"comfortable." It's a risk of Hirschsprung's disease, Down's syndrome or the risk of melanoma syndrome development during human lifetime.Zephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5749517869523631020.post-43979353650857902062010-03-19T04:22:14.952-07:002010-03-19T04:22:14.952-07:00Today, an international group of critics and exper...Today, an international group of critics and experts filed a complaint at the HRC at Geneva concerning risks and dangers of the planned experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) operated by the CERN in Switzerland.<br><br>http://lhc-concern.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/un-communication-lhc-cern-concerned-international.pdf<br><br>Please take a closer look at this important paper including a detailed physical part describing the scientific discourse but also having a general and very profound approach to the topic with clear suggestions to improve safety and to urgently set new standards in high energy particle collider risk evaluation.<br><br>Request to CERN Council and Member States on LHC <br><br>http://lhc-concern.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/request-to-cern-council-and-member-states-on-lhc-risks_lhc-kritik-et-al_march-17-2010.pdfZephirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06010623752049244967noreply@blogger.com