"God Machine" Critics to U.N.: Experiment an Affront to Human Rights

by Daniel Clery on 2 November 2009, 3:57 PM | 15 Comments

Share on emailEmailShare on printPrint|Share on facebookShare on google_plusone

Share on redditShare on stumbleuponMore Sharing ServicesMore

PREVIOUS ARTICLE NEXT ARTICLE

With the CERN particle physics lab due to start shooting particles around its Large Hadron Collider (LHC) again this month, and the first particle collisions expected in December, anti-LHC campaigners are on the warpath again. A new group calling itself the Committee on CERN Experimental Dangers (ConCERNed) will submit a complaint on 3 November in the next few days (see note after jump) to the human rights committee of the United Nations calling for work with the LHC to be stopped because it threatens life on Earth and so violates the complainants human rights.

Some physicists have suggested that the extreme high energy of the collisions that will take place in the LHC could create postulated entities including mini-black holes and strangelets. Critics say that the tiny black holes could swallow up the Earth or that strangelets could convert all matter in to strange matter. But leading physicists who have studied the matter say that well-established principles all but guarantee that neither catastrophe would occur. The black holes would quickly decay back into the particles that collided to create them. To pull in positively charged nuclei, stranglets would have and maintain a negative electric charge even as they gobble up the nuclei, which would violate conservation of charge.

CERN has commissioned several safety reviews, employing internal and external scientists, and found the risks to be so small as to be not worth more delay. The main argument in these reviews has been that collisions of similar energies happen daily in the upper atmosphere as cosmic rays slam into atoms in the air and, so far, Earth has survived unscathed.

ConCERNed and similar groups argue that since such review committees are convened by CERN, and staffed with particles physicists who have devoted their careers to the results of the LHC's experiments, there is a conflict of interest. They are calling for a halt to CERN's work and for a truly independent panel, involving ethicists and risk analysis experts, to be assembled. Earlier attempts to stop the LHC, in the U.S. District Court in Hawaii and the European Court of Human Rights, have failed, but in the coming weeks particle physicists will be keeping an eye on the U.N.'s human rights committee.

(Nov. 4 note: conCERNed's press release had said 3 November, but they now say they will submit it in the next few days.)

Follow ScienceInsider on Facebook and Twitter

• Posted in
• Physics

Share on emailEmailShare on printPrint|

Share

More Sharing ServicesMore

Echo 15 Items

Admin

Robert Houston
Daniel Clery's article is commendable but needs an update. The international complaint against CERN’s LHC project was filed on Nov. 20, 2009, at the Human Rights Committee of the U.N. in Geneva. The press release and 73 page document are available at the first link in the article.

As is documented in the complaint, safety assumptions for the LHC have been put in doubt by recent studies. For example, the idea that "the black holes would quickly decay" is based on the theory of Hawking radiation, which lacks empirical evidence and has been disputed by respected physicists such as Belinski (2006), Helfer (2003), and Unruh (2004). Others calculate that even with Hawking radiation some LHC-produced micro black holes could survive for extended periods, even years (Casadio and Harms, 2002). These analyses were excluded from CERN's safety review. So was the “3rd Scenario” from physicist Rainer Plaga - at Arxiv.org/abs/0808.1415v3 - which concerns the limited growth of quasi-stable black holes “emitting Hawking radiation that would be harmful to Earth as a whole and/or the inhabitants of CERN and its surroundings” (abstract).

Linking to CERN's public safety review, Mr. Clery wrote, “The main argument…has been that collisions of similar energies happen daily in the upper atmosphere as cosmic rays slam into atoms in the air…” But regarding neutral “microsopic black holes,” the same safety review actually admits (7th Par.): “Those produced by cosmic rays would pass harmlessly through the Earth into space, whereas those produced by the LHC could remain on Earth.” (As in a car crash, the LHC’s head-on collisions result in a slowdown.) The cosmic ray argument thus has been relocated to dense neutron stars which, as Plaga notes, are protected by powerful magnetic fields.

With its safety rationales in serious doubt this dangerous project, which threatens the very future of our world, should be halted at once.

Monday, March 01, 2010, 09:53:00

– Flag – Like – Reply

Liked by

Guest

AL
Where are the 12 previous comments listed at the top of this article? Has Science in mounting an improved Comment layout permanently erased the informed criticism of CERN's LHC adventure which was appended to this and other articles on the topic?

Friday, February 26, 2010, 04:02:19

– Flag – Like – Reply

Liked by

2 Guests

Robert Houston
The international complaint against CERN's LHC doomsday machine was filed on Nov. 20, 2009, at the Human Rights Committee of the U.N. in Geneva, Switzerland. The press release and 73 page document are available at the first link in Daniel Clery's article.

The preceding two-page comment from readers in India suggests that the formation of a "micro blackhole" by the collider "would be rather a thrilling" occurrence, and that "it would also be perfectly safe." Thus, thrill-seeking is posited as an adequate reason for risking the planet, and blanket reassurance is the simple answer to serious scientific concerns. Such an attitude may be well-meaning and widespread - especially at CERN - but amounts to reckless overconfidence.

Every safety assumption for the LHC, such as those that Clery relays, have been put in serious doubt by recent studies, as is well-documented in the human rights complaint just filed. Ironically, the only study cited by the Indian commentators for their reassurance is one by Casadio et al. early this year, which raised alarm in the scientific community by concluding that micro black holes from the LHC could survive for minutes or more. This contradicted CERN's usual claim, echoed by Science Insider, that they'd evaporate in a trillionth of a second from Hawking radiation, even though such radiation has never detected in the black holes in space and has been disputed by some prominent physicists, including Belinski (2006), Helfer (2003), and Unruh and Schutzhold (2004).

On the other hand, if real, Hawking radiation from micro black holes could pose a serious danger of global warming and widespread destruction, a 3rd scenario ignored by CERN but developed in an important paper from a former group leader of the Max Planck Institute for Physics. In a new appendix to his revised paper at the physics website Arxiv.org, Rainer Plaga critiques the 2009 Casadio study, noting that it excluded without reason plausible parameter values that could result in "catastrophic growth" of some micro black holes produced by the LHC.

Sunday, November 22, 2009, 13:31:58

– Flag – Like – Reply

Liked by

anonymous

anonymous
Just as BP never imagined the as-of-yet-to be-determined amount of damage to the planet from an "unforseen" accident, imagine how much worse and what horror could occur - that we cannot even imagine - from just an "accident" with this "LHC". I've seen this written before and I'll restate it - Unless we have FULL knowledge of EVERY SINGLE POSSIBLE scenario of what could and would go wrong in the event of EVERY DIFFERENT TYPE of "accident" that could occur during "experimentation" with the "LHC" - AND - until we have KNOWN, GUARANTEED ways of preventing calamities that can occur during "experiments" - which is FAR BEYOND EVEN SAYING * LET ALONE* having GUARANTEED ways of "reversing" ANY AND ALL damage it could bring about, we should NOT allow experimentation to continue! The oil spill could - I've heard - end up killing possibly all of the earth's sea creatures, but that would be "insignificant" to the damage that just 1 irreversible mistake from this LHC could bring about. All of you who are "playing God", PLEASE WAKE UP AND THINK LARGER. BTW - The old adage applies here - "Just because we *can* DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULD!" :O

Thursday, July 15, 2010, 05:25:15

– Flag – Like – Reply

Robert Houston
The 70-page complaint by ConCERNed International against CERN's LHC project was filed today, Nov. 20, 2009, at the Human Rights Committee of the U.N. in Geneva, Switzerland. See the press release: <a href="http://www.concerned-international.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.concerned-international.com/</a>

The previous two-page comment from readers in India exemplifies common types of defense by LHC supporters. The Indians write that the formation of a "micro blackhole" by the collider "would be rather a thrilling" occurrence, and that "it would also be perfectly safe." Thus, thrill-seeking is posited as an adequate reason for risking the planet, and blanket reassurance is the simple answer to serious scientific concerns. Such an attitude may be well-meaning and widespread but amounts to reckless negligence.

Ironically, the only study they cited for such reassurance is one by Casadio et al. early this year, which raised alarm in the scientific community by concluding that micro black holes from the LHC could survive for minutes or more (see: <a href="http://arxivblog.com/?p=1136" rel="nofollow">http://arxivblog.com/?p=1136</a> ). This contradicted CERN's usual claim, echoed by Science Insider, that they'd evaporate in a trillionth of a second from Hawking radiation, even though it has been disputed by some prominent physicists.

On the other hand, if real, Hawking radiation from semi-stable micro black holes could itself pose a serious danger, a 3rd scenario ignored by CERN but developed in a brilliant paper from a former group leader of the Max Planck Institute for Physics. In a new appendix to his recently revised paper - at <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.1415v3"rel="nofollow">http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.1415v3</a> - Rainer Plaga critiques the 2009 Casadio study, noting that it excluded without reason plausible parameter values that could result in catastrophic growth of a micro black hole produced by the LHC.

Saturday, November 21, 2009, 13:27:48

– Flag – Like – Reply

Professor Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya

LHC experiment-in November 2009, will it result end of this Planet by a black hole?
Authors_:
Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya-Bsc(cal), Msc(JU), 7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 Parganas(north) Kol-110,West Bengal,India**Professor Pranab kumar Bhattacharya- MD(cal) FIC Path(Ind), Professor of Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 a AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India***Mr.Ritwik Bhattacharya B.com(cal)7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 parganas(north) ,Kolkata-110,WestBengal, India****Miss Upasana Bhattacharya- Student, Mahamayatala, Garia, kol-86,daughter of Prof.PK Bhattacharya**** Mrs. Dalia Mukherjee BA(hons) Cal, Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north) West Bengal, India**** Miss Aindrila Mukherjee-Student ,Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north), West Bengal, India**** Dr. Srabani Chakraborty MD(cal) Asst. Professor Pathology, IPGMER, Kol-20 Mrs. Chandrani Dutta Bsc(zoology) ****Dr. Debasis Chakraborty MD(cal) Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 a AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India

To the Editor,
The Science
Any powerful particle accelerator of todays has probably two main purposes. One purpose is the production of new and newer particles sub-particles and the other is scattering of those particles (in 3-D space). Particle scattering is a method of determining what sub atomic (constituent) particles look like and their properties. It is using the collision of energized particles to give a "snapshot" or clear "picture" of the particle being studied, whether a proton, electron, quarks, sub-quarks or a whole bunch of other interesting particles. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which was built at the European Centre for Nuclear Research (CERN) near Geneva, Switzerland, using a 27-kilometre underground ring. The LHC will whiz hadrons( protons), which are far heavier particles than electrons, to energies of up to 14 trillion electron volts[1]. Two beams of subatomic particles called 'hadrons' â&#x20AC;&#x201C; either protons or lead ions â&#x20AC;&#x201C; will travel in opposite directions inside the circular accelerator, gaining energy with every lap. Physicists will use the LHC machine to recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. Teams of physicists from around the world will analyze the particles created in the collisions using special detectors in a number of experiments dedicated to the LHC[2a]â&#x20AC;¦One of its primary goals will be thus searching for the Standard Model (SM) Higgs particle and the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionize our understanding, from the minuscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe . The main SM Higgs boson production mechanism at the LHC will be by gluon-gluon fusion, while the qq!qqH process, or Vector Boson Fusion (VBF), will account for about 20% of the total cross section. Next-to-leading order (NLO) corrections are of major relevance in particular for the gluon-gluon fusion production, with K-factors ranging from 1.7 to 2.0. A review of Higgs production cross sections can be found in. The particle identified in the title is the zero mass particles, and the particle that gave mass in Higgs Field. Professor Peter Higgs actually joked that Lederman originally wished to label this particle as "the goddamn particle or godâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Particle[1].

The Higgs particles could be as light as 78 GeV without however being detected at LEP, while detection at the LHC is extremely challenging one the present authors thinks so. However many of the super- and global symmetry partners of the standard model particles should be easily observable at the LHC. Furthermore, the LHC should be able to observe a â&#x20AC;&#x153;wrongâ&#x20AC;? Higgs that is a 300â&#x20AC;&#x201C;400 GeV heavy Higgs-like particle with suppressed couplings to W and Z that by itself does not account for electroweak precision observables and the unitarily of WW scattering. At the same time, the true Higgs may be deeply buried in the QCD background. Hopes of finding the Higgs boson are pinned on two massive detectors at the LHC: the ATLAS or A Toroidal LHC apparatus and the CMS or Compact Muon Solenoid. These two detectors have the same goals but their designs are radically dissimilar.
Some scientists, went to the European Court for Human Rights to try to stop the LH collider being turned on in nov2009[5]. They fear it may create a mini black hole â&#x20AC;&#x201C; which would certainly violate our rights by sucking the planet into .The creation of black holes at the Large Hadron Collider is very unlikely according the authors. However, some theories do suggest that the formation of tiny 'quantum' black holes may be possible. Will that energy of Micro Black hole be able even to ignite a bulb even?[4]. The observation of such an micro blackhole would be rather a thrilling in terms of our understanding of the Universe as we do feel; it would also be perfectly safe. Black holes always form in the space time when certain stars, much larger than our Sun, collapse on themselves at the end of their lives. They concentrate a very large amount of matter in a very small space. They are so dense that the gravity they exert is such that not even light can travel out of them. However there are some published papers, published by CERN itself that black hole may be produced in LHC [2]. The Black hole may grow, and then decay by Hawking Radiation or remnant of it may remain. Growth and decay of black holes possibly produced at the Large Hadron Collider, based on previous studies of black holes in the context of the warped brane-world scenario. The black hole mass accretion and decay was obtained as a function of time, and the maximum black hole mass is obtained as a function of a critical mass parameter but there will not be any possibility of catastrophic black hole growth to engulf the earth at the LHC.[2] .Though the final phases of the black hole's evaporation are still unknown, the formation of a black hole remnant is a theoretically well expectation.[3] Speculations about black holes at the LHC actually refers to particles produced in the collisions of pairs of protons. These scenarios include large or warped extra dimensions, propagation of matter and gauge degrees of freedom on brane worlds, and a fundamental Planck scale of O(TeV). If the scale of quantum gravity is near TeV we will have a copious production of mini black holes at the Large Hadron Collider. These are microscopic - or quantum - black holes. Scientists are however not at all sure whether any quantum black holes does exist. The creation of a black hole at the LHC will thus confirm theories that our universe is not 4 dimensional (3 space plus 1 time dimensions), but indeed hosts other 10 dimensions too as per string theory. It will be then quite a spectacular philosophical outcome! In the same way that the theory of relativity or of quantum mechanics revolutionized our way of thinking, discovering the existence of extra dimensions would be a major new milestone in our understanding of the Universe.Many people will next start speculating about using these extra dimensions for space and time travel, or as a source of clean energy, and who knows what else. It is rather tempting to compare it to the discovery of magnetism by the Phoenicians who could not foresee that electricity and magnetism would completely reshape modern life... Professor Stephen Hawking had a bet in 2008 for 100 dollars (70 euros) that a mega-experiment this week will not find an elusive particle seen as a holy grail of cosmic science. Rather the experiment could discover super partners, particles that would be "super symmetric partners" to particles already known about. Their existence would be a however key confirmation of string theory, and they could make up the mysterious dark matter that holds galaxies together. Prof. Hawkings told in 2008 in a meeting with BBC.Raveling the zero mass particle and Higgs particles responsible for mass of all particles in the universe will of course award Professor Peter Higgs and Rupak Bhattacharya

 a Nobel prize for physics we belief, who told about Higgs feild it in 1964[4].

References-:
1] Rupak Bhattacharya, Professor Pranab kumar Bhattacharya, Ritwik Bhattacharya ,Upasana Bhattacharya, Aindrila Mukherjee, Srabani Chakraborty, Chandrani Dutta etal â&#x20AC;&#x153;Can the LHC Experiment will prove the existence of Sub2quark particles, a Zero mass particles or Higgs Particle and there antiparticles?â&#x20AC;? comments no 1 of 9 comments published on Nov3 2009 for the article â&#x20AC;&#x153; God Machineâ&#x20AC;? Critics to UN: experiment an Affront to Human Right By Daniel Clery at Science Policy Blog ScienceInsider, Science, November 2,2009
2] Casadio, Roberto ; Fabi, Sergio ; Harms, Benjamin â&#x20AC;&#x153;On the Possibility of Catastrophic Black Hole Growth in the Warped Brane-World Scenario at the LHCâ&#x20AC;? CERN 21 Jan 2009 arXiv:0901.2948
2a] â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Large Hadron Collider Our understanding of the Universe is about to changeâ&#x20AC;? CERN Europian Organization for Nuclear Research - The Large Hadron Collider.htm
3] Koch, B ; Bleicher, M ; Hossenfelder, S â&#x20AC;&#x153;Black Hole Remnants at the LHCâ&#x20AC;?J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2005) 053
4] Professor Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya, IPGMER Kolkata,W.B, India Liz Wager on the Large Hadron Collider - a qualified success? BMJ Group blogs BMJ 10th Sep,20 08 | by BMJ Group
5] News of the Week from the Science Policy Blog â&#x20AC;&#x153;ScienceInsiderâ&#x20AC;?: Science, 6 November 2009:Vol. 326. no. 5954, p. 783;DOI: 10.1126/science.326_783b

Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 19:56:39

– Flag – Like – Reply

Robert Houston
The opposition to the LHC has been spurred by scientists and environmentalists, and is not religion-based. "The God Machine" in Daniel Clery's title was a nickname applied to the LHC by journalists in the UK in 2008. It was derived from the term "the God particle," which was coined not by a religionist but by a Nobel laureate physicist, Leon Lederman, for the title of his 1993 book on the Higgs boson. Critics of the LHC prefer the sobriquet in Clery's earlier piece, "Is the LHC a Doomsday Machine?" (Science, Sept. 5, 2008).

In answer to a previous comment, a microscopic black hole might damage or even destroy the Earth if it grew large enough by accretion of matter. Using the equations of CERN's own safety theorists, physicist Rainer Plaga found that the mass of a semi-stable micro black hole could increase at the rate of 19,000 kilograms per second (see p. 7: <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.1415v3" rel="nofollow">http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.1415v3</a> ).

According to CERN-affiliated physicists Barrau and Grain writing in the CERN Courier, Nov. 12, 2004: "the 14 TeV centre-of-mass energy of the LHC could allow it to become a black-hole factory with a production rate as high as about one per second." At that rate it would produce in two minutes the number of micro black holes that cosmic rays hitting Earth are estimated to produce in one year - but with a big difference. As CERN states on p. 2 of in its own public safety report that was linked by Clery: "Those produced by cosmic rays would pass harmlessly through the Earth into space, whereas those produced by the LHC could remain on Earth."

Saturday, November 07, 2009, 14:16:17

– Flag – Like – Reply

me
IATWalrus, what has LHCphobia got to do with the bible? I realise that "interpretations" similar to those applied to Nostradamus can be applied to the bible, permitting extraction of "predictions" that match any circumstance, but beyond that... I fear you're barking (walruses do bark, don't they?) up the wrong tree.

Saturday, November 07, 2009, 06:27:21

– Flag – Like – Reply

I am the Walrus
All of you people who waste your life sucking god's d*ck need to realize something.
There is no "God" as such as what the "Bible" 'says'.
The Bible is simply just a load shit, written by who f*cking knows.
You go ahead and say that any sort of science related thing is bad and is the work of the devil, because it is based on Real Hard Evidence and has disproved the crap in the bible.
Anyone that is not stupid (thats people who know the bible is utter crap) knows that science is the best thing that has happened on the earth.
If you really think you didnt evolve from monkeys, then you should check and make sure your a human.
I am f*cking sick of all of you people ruining anything and everything good that has happened or is planned.
The LHC WILL NOT destroy the earth.
BUt maybe thats not why you are trying to prevent it.
The biggest problem you have, is you are SCARED.
Scared that it will finally PROVE the Big Bang theory, once and for all reinforce the fact that the bible is f*cked!
Stop worrying about everything and have fun. Live life properly, not by some f*cked up book!

Thursday, November 05, 2009, 19:20:37

– Flag – Like – Reply

Alexander from Oregon
A blackhole the size of 2 protons would not destroy Earth because it is too small. If you are still concerned about this, then why don't you talk to the most highly trained, educated, and *relevant* group of scientists on the planet: the nuclear phycisists at CERN. They know more than you about the blackhole situation, they know more than the conCERNed group, and they know more than the people who have commented on this site (including myself).

Thursday, November 05, 2009, 08:27:01

– Flag – Like – Reply

Anonymous
Congratulations to the authors of the above three highly lucid critiques of the weaknesses both in the CERN case and in the people of the Earth's governance processes for the global catastophic risk which therefore we are all under.

Even if CERN advocates reply with attempted rebuttals, they will already not have been as quick off the mark as the above writers. And if past efforts are any indication - CERN have still not replied to Dr Plaga's latest well-researched points - I expect the quality - or lack of it - in the attempted rebuttals will also be apparent to any fair-minded and reasonable reader.

To think that, after all, what should have been the flagship of reason, rationality and the scientific method is reduced to its absolute antithesis - press-on regardless dogma and blind faith.

Push the button, Max.

Thursday, November 05, 2009, 06:07:12

– Flag – Like – Reply

luis sancho
After 2 years involved in suits against CERN, it seems clear to me that if this happens, it will be a collective error. The purpose of those suits was mainly to provide information for the press to research and the public to study rationally those dangers and politicians to act.
THis has not happened as expected, not because the issue was not serious and the dangers self-evident, but because our industrial society seems to have neutered with the tools of marketing, fiction thought, ad hominem campaigns, 'think tanks' of self-interested experts and political corruption all attempts to confront the real issues of mankind today. So only a posteriori, after tragedies happen truths are revealed. Problem is this tragedy if happening will have not a posteriori solution. Now, in simple terms, what LHC represents is the opening of a new 'russian doll' of mass/energy, that of quarks which hold 99.9% of the mass/energy of the known universe and act with a 'strong force' 100 times stronger than our 'weak force'. Ths machine is to the Nuclear Bomb what he A-BOmb was to dynamite. So the creation of any type of big crunches, quark stars, Einstein-Bose quark condensates, quark strangelets, top quark stars (black holes in the models of fractal relativity, which follow Einstein's concept of frozen stars), dark matter, dark atoms (bc-tau), etc. etc. is not only possible but very probable under gellmann totalitarian principle (all particles that are possible should happen). This is plainly speaking a factory of quark bombs which is not under military supervision because we haveprivatized after the cold war, istruments of nuclear research and now we market th most atrocious industries as 'peace endeavors'. It is an orwellian 'newspeak' evident in our wars which are always 'peace' troops. CERN's lousy lies are surprising, because even an undergraduate will tell you that cosmic rays are not quarks, that we never founddeconfined quarks in cosmic rays that to deconfine quarks outside novas aned supernovas only the lhc provides enough criticl mass (density) and accuracy. SO indeed cosmic rays have more energy in their collisions, so it does my fingers typing this but the pc is not exploding. What matters is the concentratio of energy, the 'russian doll' it releases and the critical mass. 5 kilos of uranium are needed for an atomic bomb. According to the CHinese National Nuclear Institute only 10.000 quarks are needed to create ice-9 the detonator of mass bombs, cern wil release 10000, many papers prove that negative strangelets can be formed. All those 'soft' detailed arguments of CERN to prove nature will break the totalitarian principle and NOT form dark quark matter are surrealist beccause THE MACHINE IS MADE TO FORM DARK, QUARK MATTER and now CERN must deny for safety reasons its machine will do what is created to do. This crazy contradiction arouses from the fact the machine took too long to create and science advanced with pen an paper in that time to prove the machine ws dangerous. And now nobody wants to stop it. The faillure of our institutions, the press, the executive, the judges to resolv this issue is appaling. t has been too easy to disqualify critics, instead of confronting the issue. This impotence of our govvernments, this idea that you can change the laws of the Universe by denying it, that we humans can invent reality is ou demise. IT is amazing that nly this blog brings the news f the ONU complain

Wednesday, November 04, 2009, 19:54:21

– Flag – Like – Reply

Liked by

anonymous

Robert Houston
Most reporters covering the LHC have behaved like handmaidens to CERN's PR office. Dan Clery has been one of the few to take objective note of scientific opposition to the collider.

The idea that "the black holes would quickly decay" is based on a theory of Hawking radiation, which lacks evidence and is disputed by respected physicists such as Helfer (2008) and Belinski (2006). Others calculate that an LHC-produced micro black hole could survive for extended periods and become "metastable" (Casadio and Harms, 2002). These analyses were excluded from CERN's safety review. So was the "3rd Scenario" from physicist Rainer Plaga involving the limited growth of metastable black holes that "emit Hawking radiation that might be dangerous to Earth as a whole or the inhabitants of CERN and its surroundings" (at: <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.1415v3" rel="nofollow">http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.1415v3</a> ).

Mr. Clery provided a link to an LHC safety review and wrote, "the main argument...has been that collisions of similar energies happen daily...as cosmic rays slam into atoms in the air..." But regarding neutral "microsopic black holes," CERN's safety report now admits (7th par.), "Those produced by cosmic rays would pass harmlessly through the Earth into space, whereas those produced by the LHC could remain on Earth." (As in a car crash, the LHC's head-on collisions result in a slowdown.) The cosmic ray argument thus has been relocated to dense neutron stars which, as Plaga notes, are protected by powerful magnetic fields.

With the its safety rationales in serious doubt, this dangerous project, which threatens the very future of the world, should be halted at once.
Robert Houston

Wednesday, November 04, 2009, 10:57:14

– Flag – Like – Reply

Liked by

anonymous

malcolm mcewen
at the end of your article you correctly identify the principle flaw with CERN's safety reports: none of the scientists involved are independent of their beliefs, faith and total reliance on the maths at CERN being correct less they fail to justify their own work and careers.

It's not just a case of commissioning a report into a project to determine whether the project satisfies acceptable safety parameters that have been determined through historically gained knowledge and experiences, (for example the commissioning of a nuclear power plant), but whether the science and mathematics that underpins it is itself valid: thus it brings into question not the project itself but the mathematical reasoning behind it.

Under such conditions a report that was to give credence to the fears and dangers would similarly question the validity of the standard model and undermine the very foundations of the whole field of particle physics: thus for an 'Expert' to determine that CERN was wrong the expert would similarly determine that he/she was also wrongâ&#x20AC;¦and confine particle physics to the same draw that the fields of flat Earth and geocentric astronomy now reside in. Clearly such career suicide is highly unlikely.

Furthermore the claim that these types of collisions take place in space all the time is false. Sure collisions take place, collisions take place all the time and not just in space: but the collisions planned at CERN are unique, they will not occur under any currently existing environmental conditions found anywhere in the Universe.

The collisions will occur in an environment kept at temperatures lower than that found in the most empty and vacuous place in the Universe; this is considerably warmer than the temperatures of our outer atmosphere: where these collisions are claimed to be observed. In a sense it is like claiming the physics associated with the properties of a gas (i.e water vapour) are similarly valid for the properties of a solid (i.e. ice). Furthermore this temperature; absolute zero, is known to afford some unique properties to materials; in particular metals become super conductors with no loss in energy, thus allowing the high intensity magnets which clad the main chamber to operate and offset, effectively cancel the gravitational, electromagnetic and nuclear forces that would ordinarily act on these protons. Even in the most empty and vacuous part of space a particle is still above this temp and under the influence of the gravitational forces of the universe and whilst these may be minute, from a relative perspective: the gravitational influence of two protons to each other (0/0) to a proton and the Universe (0/0+); this difference is infinitely greater and yields the following relative differences:

Gravitational influence of PP = 0/0 . therefore relative difference = 0
Gravitational influence of PU = 0/0+ . therefore relative difference = 1

The conditions under which the collisions at CERN will take place have a relative value of (0) compared to the relative value of the collisions that may occur in space (1); thus when compared to each other the relative difference between the LHCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s conditions and natural conditions is 0/1. There is absolutely no comparison. The conditions are so unique as to have never occurred previously or to have only ever occurred once, when the universe consisted of nothing but two.

It is a bit like comparing the collision of two super tankers on the high seas with the collision of two similar sized meteorites in our atmosphere or one with our planet. The former may cause a localised environmental incident whereas the latter would result in an explosion, one so great that the destruction of all life on this planet would be the inevitable consequence. Remember it is the conditions under which a collision takes place rather than the collision itself that determines the outcome.

Given such it is clear that we cannot rely on reports which are produced by people who have a vested interest in the outcome and conclusions and similarly bases its claims on atmospheric collisions which occur under completely different environmental conditions.

Tuesday, November 03, 2009, 21:36:39

– Flag – Like – Reply

Liked by

anonymous

Professor Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya

Can the LHC Experiment will prove the existence of Sub2quark particles, Zero mass particles or Higgs Particle and there antiparticles?

Authors-:Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya-Bsc(cal) Msc(JU), 7/51 purbapalli,Sodepur, Dist 24 parganas(north) Kol-110,West Bengal, India**Professor Pranab kumar Bhattacharya- MD(cal) FIC Path(Ind), Professor of Pathology, Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education & Research,244 a AJC Bose Road, Kolkata-20, West Bengal, India***Mr.Ritwik Bhattacharya B.com(cal) 7/51 Purbapalli, Sodepur, Dist 24 parganas(north) , Kolkata-110,WestBengal, India****Miss Upasana Bhattacharya- Student, Mahamayatala, Garia, kol-86,daughter of Prof.PK Bhattacharya**** Mrs. Dalia Mukherjee BA(hons) Cal, Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north) West Bengal, India**** Miss Aindrila Mukherjee-Student ,Swamiji Road, South Habra, 24 Parganas(north), West Bengal, India****Dr. Tarun Biswas MBBS(cal) Demonstrator,Pathology, IPGME&R, Kolkata-20***** Dr. Srabani Chakraborty MD(cal) Asst. Professor, Pathology, IPGME&R, Mrs. Chandrani Dutta Bsc(zoology)

Any powerful particle accelerator of today has probably two main purposes. One purpose is the production of new and newer particles sub-particles and the other is scattering of those particles (in 3-D space). Particle scattering is a method of determining what sub atomic (constituent) particles look like and their properties. It is using the collision of energized particles to give a "snapshot" or clear "picture" of the particle being studied, whether a proton, electron, quarks, sub-quarks or a whole bunch of other interesting particles. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which was built at the European Centre for Nuclear Research (CERN) near Geneva, Switzerland, using a 27-kilometre underground ring. The LHC will whizz protons, which are far heavier particles than electrons, to energies of up to 14 trillion electron volts. One of its primary goals will be the search for the Standard Model (SM) Higgs particle. The main SM Higgs boson production mechanism at the LHC will be then by gluon-gluon fusion, while the qq!qqH process, or Vector Boson Fusion (VBF), will account for about 20% of the total cross section. Next-to-leading order (NLO) corrections are of major relevance in particular for the gluon-gluon fusion production, with K-factors ranging from 1.7 to 2.0. A review of Higgs production cross sections can be found in. The particle identified in the title is the zero mass particles, and the particle that gave mass in Higgs Field. Professor Peter Higgs actually joked that Lederman originally wished to label this particle as "the goddamn particle or godâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Particle.

The Higgs particles could be as light as 78 GeV without however being detected at LEP, while detection at the LHC is extremely challenging one the present authors thinks so. However many of the super- and global symmetry partners of the standard model particles should be easily observable at the LHC. Furthermore, the LHC should be able to observe a â&#x20AC;&#x153;wrongâ&#x20AC;? Higgs that is a 300â&#x20AC;&#x201C;400 GeV heavy Higgs-like particle with suppressed couplings to W and Z that by itself does not account for electroweak precision observables and the unitarily of WW scattering. At the same time, the true Higgs may be deeply buried in the QCD background. Hopes of finding the boson are pinned on two massive detectors at the LHC: the ATLAS or A Toroidal LHC apparatus and the CMS or Compact Muon Solenoid. These two detectors have the same goals but their designs are radically dissimilar.Professor Stephen Hawking had a bet in 2008 for 100 dollars (70 euros) that a mega-experiment this week will not find an elusive particle seen as a holy grail of cosmic science. Rather the experiment could discover super partners, particles that would be "super symmetric partners" to particles already known about. Their existence would be a however key confirmation of string theory, and they could make up the mysterious dark matter that holds galaxies together. Prof. Hawkings told in 2008 in a meeting with BBC.

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/11/critics-of-god.html