DISQUS

Beams may begin September 10th, but high energy collissions are still several weeks away, time enough for an on-line emergency safety conference.

Even if micro black holes are created, Dr. Rossler’s calculations estimate that 50 months to 50 years would be required for a micro black hole to destroy Earth.

Several prominent physicists who do not appear to display a competent understanding of LHC Safety issues proclaim that more powerful cosmic rays harmlessly strike Earth regularly proving safety. This argument is nonsense.

Stable micro black holes created by cosmic ray collisions with Earth would travel through Earth at nearly the speed of light, leaving the Earth unharmed. CERN’s LHC Safety Assessment Group acknowledged this in a March 2008 email.

Abstract below from Dr. Rossler's 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.

Actually collisions are not scheduled until at least October 21 and it may take years to even determine if micro black holes were created and months or years before a micro black hole could destroy the planet.

Abstract below from Dr. Rossler's 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.

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.

Got LHCFacts.org?

Hello Dr. O'Neill.

Are you concerned by papers that categorize Hawking Radiation as an open question or does not exist? At least one CERN employee editing the Wikipedia Safety of the Large Hadron collider has argued against inclusion of any of these references. A few of the references are noted on the Talk\References page of the same article. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Safety_of_the...)

Could you expound on your impression of Walter Wager and his concerns other than "far from being a fantasist or “crank”" and speculative?

Thank you,
JTankers,
Software Developer and founder of LHCFacts.org.

The neutron star and cosmic ray safety arguments in the 2008 LHC Safety Report were deemed "unverified" by CERN's Scientific Policy Committee.

Credible arguments that neutron stars do not prove safety may be found in points 5, 6 and 7 of www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/spiritualott...

Please disregard my flawed neutron star conjecture above.

The neutron star and cosmic ray safety arguments in the 2008 LHC Safety Report were deemed "unverified" by CERN's Scientific Policy Committee, but not for the reasons above.

Credible arguments that neutron stars do not prove safety may be found in points 5, 6 and 7 of www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/spiritualott...

Please disregard my flawed neutron star conjecture above.

The neutron star and cosmic ray safety arguments in the 2008 LHC Safety Report were deemed "unverified" by CERN's Scientific Policy Committee, but not for the reasons above.

Credible arguments that neutron stars do not prove safety may be found in points 5, 6 and 7 of www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/spiritualott...

Question: Do you know many cosmic rays strike a neutron star in one Earth year?

Answer: Zero, the magnetic field of a neutron star is 1,000,000,000,000 times more powerful than Earth's!

Magnetic fields of white dwarfs are 1,000,000 times Earth's.

Hawking Radiation is unlikely, rapid micro black hole growth is plausible, no safety arguments are verified.

LHCFacts.org

Question: Do you know many cosmic rays strike a neutron star in one Earth year?

Answer: Zero, the magnetic field of a neutron star is 1,000,000,000,000 times more powerful than Earth's!

Magnetic fields of white dwarfs are 1,000,000 times Earth's.

Hawking Radiation is unlikely, rapid micro black hole growth is plausible, no safety arguments are verified.

LHCFacts.org

Do you know what you get when you mix high energy colliders with Professor Otto Rossler?s charged micro black hole theory?

Answer: a golf ball (in 50 months to 50 years...)

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A...

Do you know what you get when you mix high energy colliders with Professor Otto Rossler's charged micro black hole theory?

Answer: a golf ball

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A...

Reasonable confirmation of safety (or danger) might require a few years. Trial before US Federal Court in Hawaii is scheduled to begin June 16, 2009 to seek an injunction against operation of the Large Hadron Collider until reasonable safety can be proven.

CERN did not appear in court for the initial hearing and collisions are scheduled to begin later in 2008.

LHCFacts.org

sowinski writes: "This includes links to peer reviewed scientific documents prepared by researchers not involved in LHC research."

I assume you refer to the 2003 RHIC Safety Report. This report did not address the safety of actually creating micro black holes. The 2003 RHIC Safety Report only concluded that it was not possible to create micro black holes at any conceivable collider energy. That assumption has now changed: http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/29199

Trial before US Federal Court in Hawaii is scheduled to begin June 16, 2009 seeking an injunction until safety can be reasonably proven. CERN ignored the summons to appear for the initial hearing.

In order for Earth to be in danger from the Large Hadron Collider, based on current assumptions, the following would need to be true:

- If Micro black holes are created -- Unknown, predicted by some physicists.

- Hawking Radiation would need to fail. -- Unknown, challenged by some studies and polls.

- Micro black holes would need to grow quickly. -- Unknown, predicted by some theories.

Cosmic ray impacts do not prove safety because results of cosmic rays pass through Earth and into space at nearly the speed of light. If colliders create micro black holes from head-on collisions, some percentage will travel too slowly to escape Earth's gravity.

CERN employees and supporters are censoring opposing views from Professors and PHDs of Math, Physics and other theoretical sciences from the Wikipedia article on Large Hadron Collider Safety: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Safety_of_the...

There is a good article about censorship at Wikipedia, preventing published peer reviewed papers from math and science professors that challenge safety assumptions. And guess who edits the Wikipedia article.... CERN employees: http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=124

There is a good article about censorship at Wikipedia, preventing published peer reviewed papers from math and science professors that challenge safety assumptions. And guess who edits the Wikipedia article.... CERN employees: http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=124

"but we’re pretty positive they evaporate." Actually several recent papers have been published adjusting the odds to closer to 50% chance, with quotes such as from Dr. Adam Helfer "no compelling theoretical case for or against radiation by black holes" or from Professor Belinski “…the effect [Hawking Radiation] does not exist.“.

What is crazy are reports that CERN, even though they have not completed their new safety study, is going to begin collissions at the Large Hadron Collider in a few months anyway and SWISS News At A Glance reports that CERN will not show up in US Federal Court today before Judge Helen Gillmor!

Good info at the Large Hadron Collider article on Wikipedia also.

Great Article... Short and too the point... My comment may be longer...

The prevailing view is that the risks are small, perhaps 1 in 50,000,000 as was estimated for the RHIC collider, but this is strongly disputed as entirely unsupportable with respect to the LHC collider.

The lawsuit before US Federal Court estimates the risk at closer to 50% with a very high degree of uncertainty. (Credible scientists assert that those risk probability calculations are as accurate as can be currently supported. Actually risk may be closer to 0% or closer to 100% depending on what assumptions prove correct.)

I am a former US Army Officer, and I am willing to accept a fairly high level of risk, I would not oppose 1 in 50 million odds, but I also have a non-trivial physics back ground, and I have done extensive research related to LHC Safety risks, including creating the web site LHCFacts.org. And I am very concerned because I conclude that the risks may be exceedingly high, potentially a probability, and I conclude that CERN has NOT been open and honest about the risks involved. And I believe we can prove this in court.

In short, these are the conditions necessary for safety or not:

If the following reasonable and plausible assumptions prove to be correct, then the uncomfortable truth may be that the probability of destruction of Earth could be closer to 100%, far from the often quoted 1 in 50 million, though only mother nature currently knows for certain due to our limited understanding of the physics involved.

A. LHC Creates black holes as CERN Predicted (1 per second)
B. Micro Black holes do not evaporate as LSAG accepts as plausible.
C. One or more micro black holes are captured by Earth’s gravity as LSAG accepts as plausible.
D. Micro Black holes grow exponentially as Dr. Otto E. Rossler’s paper predicts and calculates.

Supporting references to PHDs and Professors of Math, Physics and other Theoretical Sciences that very strongly support these arguments in favor of possible extreme risk are available at http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=53

I should have prefixed this with "large meteorite danger" is similar in scope, but may be far far less likely than creating micro black holes on Earth. CERN believes that such matter might evaporate, even though several PHDs and Professors of Math and Physics have published credible peer reviewed papers that state "no compelling case for micro black hole evaporation", "it may not exist", and even "it does not exist".

But CERN is betting the planet that Hawking Radiation does exist and is real (and that Dr. Steven Hawking 30 years ago was more correct than Dr. Albert Einstein). That is not a good bet!

Learn more at LHCFacts.org

Did you know...

The LHC Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) agreed with us that if cosmic rays produce micro black holes, they will be relativistic and travel too fast to be captured by Earth's gravity, whereas if LHC head-on particle collisions produces micro black holes they will be non-relativistic with some that can be captured gravitationally, either by the Earth, or by the Sun.

LSAG also states that they are also not assuming Hawking Radiation is valid in their new safety study.

CERN states that the safety study is completed, but they have not released the report to allow the world's scientists to validate the proof. CERN states that they have already selected an independent body to review the results in a closed process. Why the secrecy? Why not allow the world's scientists four months to validate that the world is not in reasonable danger of destruction?

Have you heard these quotes:

“ …after 50 months the earth to a centimeter would have shrunk. It would be nothing more there, not only no more life, there but also the earth would be… a small black hole.
-Prof. Dr. Otto E. Rossler

“ … the scientists are fully aware that it is not a project without a grave risk to the life of the Earth.”
-Dr. Raj Baldev

I have been researching this topic for months, and I share these concerns for scientific reasons. The real unknown odds, that only mother nature knows for certain, may actually indicate certain danger to the planet, but we can not verity either way at this time. LHCFacts.org

Did you know:

The LHC Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) agreed with us that if cosmic rays produce micro black holes, they will be relativistic and travel too fast to be captured by Earth's gravity, whereas if LHC head-on particle collisions produces micro black holes they will be non-relativistic with some that can be captured gravitationally, either by the Earth, or by the Sun.

LSAG is also not assuming Hawking Radiation is valid in their new safety study.

Have you heard these quotes:

“ …after 50 months the earth to a centimeter would have shrunk. It would be nothing more there, not only no more life, there but also the earth would be… a small black hole.
-Prof. Dr. Otto E. Rossler

“ … the scientists are fully aware that it is not a project without a grave risk to the life of the Earth.”
-Dr. Raj Baldev

I have been researching this topic for months, and I share these concerns for scientific reasons. The real unknown odds, that only mother nature knows for certain, may actually indicate certain danger to the planet, but we can not verity either way at this time. LHCFacts.org

Christine writes "collisions like those that will occur at the LHC occur all the time in space".

The cosmic ray argument claims that cosmic ray impacts with Earth create the same conditions as head-on particle collider collisions.

But Patrick is correct, head-on particle colliders create results that are at "rest relative to the Earth", unlike cosmic ray collisions with relatively stationary particles on Earth, which send all results safely into space.

And I find it difficult to comprehend how a single stray cosmic ray (a rare proton traveling so fast as to have energies as high as 10^20 eV) hitting a relatively stationary particle on Earth, even if the impact was exactly center mass, could create the same conditions as head-on particle collider collisions where powerful magnetic fields laterally and opposing momentums of thousands of protons or protons to anti-protons traveling in exactly opposite directions at 99.9999991% the speed of light collide in head-on collisions, at temperatures colder than space, designed to focus the energies between the particles on impact, which might create micro black holes at a rate of up to 1 per second according to CERN's own predictions.

I don't know where in nature are these conditions are replicated, but these conditions may exist on Earth some time in 2008 if all goes as currently planned...

"we'll never know because we'll all be instantly killed"

Actually Dr. Otto E.Rossler of Germany, father of Chaos theory, has calculated that a single micro black hole might require at least 50 months to accrete (destroy) the Earth, possily much longer.

The best guess is that the odds of danger are probably closer to either 0% or 100%, science just does not know enough yet to calculate the odds with any degree of confidence. But we could know the answer as quickly as 50 months after collissions begin later this year if the probability is actually closer to 100%. CERN is betting that the probability is closer to 0%. I hope they are correct, because collissions are scheduled to begin later this year.

Unless the lawsuit seeking a safety study is successful in delaying startup until after reasonable risk assessment is completed now that CERN predicts that the Large Hadron Collider might create micro black holes at a rate of up to 1 per second. (A few years ago it was believed that micro black hole creation was not possible, but some theories tend to change over time...)

Still CERN believes that micro black holes would evaporate before they grow, and if not then they would grow too slowly to pose a threat to Earth. CERN promises to provide a theory of proof soon...

Of course other physicists, including Dr. Adam Helfer have published peer reviewed thesis questioning the belief that micro black holes might evaporate or not. And then there is Dr. Rossler's calculation of as few as 50 months. I don't know how other people feel, but I am in favor of a safety study first...

JTankers
LHCConcerns.com