http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/57093/Existentialist_Cat_The_LHC__amp__Strangelets_Explained/ ;o)

I'm no scientist but from what I understand of the thing, people off-site are many orders of magnitude more likely to be killed in a car accident than they are from some incident at CERN. Yet, I know of no one who sits up worrying at night about getting in a car crash.

I'm sure those people over there know what they're doing but one 'incident' there would have a much bigger effect than just an 'ordinary' car crash, that's for sure!

I am just trying to understand exactly what it is that you're afraid of. Earth is exposed to far more energetic particles every day than can ever be produced by CERN.

The only danger is to the taxpayer's pocketbook. (Fundamental physics is an expensive obsession.)

Yes Earth is exposed to greater 'energy' but was able to maintain its balance for a long time now. Who are we to destroy it with our expensive 'hobbies'?

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/57093/Existentialist_Cat_The_LHC__amp__Strangelets_Explained/ ;o)

I'm no scientist but from what I understand of the thing, people off-site are many orders of magnitude more likely to be killed in a car accident than they are from some incident at CERN. Yet, I know of no one who sits up worrying at night about getting in a car crash.

I'm sure those people over there know what they're doing but one 'incident' there would have a much bigger effect than just an 'ordinary' car crash, that's for sure!

Do you know the amount of energy there is in the events CERN is hoping to do.

At max it is hoping to do 14 TeV events, sounds big when you know T means 10^12, but one eV is 1.602176565(35)×10^-19 Joules. So actually these events are very, very small, 2.2430470818×10^-6 Joules.

One Joule is the same as 1 Watt for 1 second, the KWh that your electricity is measured in is 1000 W for 3600 seconds or 3.6×10^6 J.
Or to express in work terms, 1 J is about the energy you would expend lifting an apple 1 meter.

[quote]http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/57093/Existentialist_Cat_The_LHC__amp__Strangelets_Explained/ ;o)

I'm no scientist but from what I understand of the thing, people off-site are many orders of magnitude more likely to be killed in a car accident than they are from some incident at CERN. Yet, I know of no one who sits up worrying at night about getting in a car crash.

I'm sure those people over there know what they're doing but one 'incident' there would have a much bigger effect than just an 'ordinary' car crash, that's for sure!

Do you know the amount of energy there is in the events CERN is hoping to do.

At max it is hoping to do 14 TeV events, sounds big when you know T means 10^12, but one eV is 1.602176565(35)×10^-19 Joules. So actually these events are very, very small, 2.2430470818×10^-6 Joules.

One Joule is the same as 1 Watt for 1 second, a KWh that your electricity is measured in is 1000 W for 3600 seconds or 3.6×10^6 J.

Ok now you're talking Chinese but I'm sure you're right, no doubt:)

I envy you guys sometimez...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

CERN super collider to have twice the power.

When work at CERN's Large Hadron Collider is completed in 2015, the collider should have twice the power and be able to help unlock more of the universe's mysteries.

Twice the power that not good. Smashing particles at almost the speed of light.
Not good because something will go wrong.


http://news.msn.com/science-technology/cern-super-collider-to-have-twice-the-power

---

Even if something went wrong (always possible) there would not be any consequence at the surface. LHC is not a nuclear reactor.
Tullio

---

Had to look it up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_of_high_energy_particle_collision_experiments

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

Nuclear reactors are much more dangerous. There are 54 nuclear power plants in France and if an accident happened in any of them radioactive clouds could spread to Italy due to the prevailing Western winds. We could do nothing but pray and maybe ingest some iodine salt to prevent thyroid cancers.
Tullio

---

This guy wrote a book/review on Cern. Just some light reading.


The difficulty of trying to explain the hunt for the Higgs boson shows that nature will not be so easily defined

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/nov/20/particle-end-of-universe-higgs-sean-carroll-review

---

Phil Plait's Article may be a good read for you.

In short, there is nothing to worry about.

One thing that i have learned from my taking part in the Test4Theory@home BOINC project is that the Higgs field does not give mass to all particles but only to leptons. The mass of fundamental particles such as neutron and proton, which build up ordinary matter, are given mostly by the strong interaction. This point is largely ignored in press articles.
Tullio

---

Good news!

Open Access publishing initiative, SCOAP3, to start on 1 January 2014

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

Several popular theories of what lies beyond the Higgs boson face ‘severe’ scrutiny

Good!

http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/scientists-raise-doubts-about-several-popular-theories-of-what-lies-beyond-the-higgs-boson/

---

Stephen Hawking: physics would be 'more interesting' if Higgs boson hadn't been found

Don't quite agree with Mr. Hawking here...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

When Einstein said "God does not play dice" Wolfgang Pauli replied "Not even you can tell God what he can and cannot do". The same goes for dr.Hawking.
Tullio

---

Agreed

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

Dr Hawking also said is was "a glorious time to be alive and doing research in theoretical physics. Our picture of the universe has changed a great deal in the past 50 years, and I'm happy if I have made a small contribution."

What I think he's trying to get at is the ongoing struggle to understand the big picture. We used to call it the Grand Unifying Theory when it "only" included the nuclear forces. Now the Grail seems to be the Theory of Everything which, more or less, is the unification of QM and gravity.

He has talked about M-Theory which to my knowledge is the only realistic candidate TOE, and how we can't find any evidence to support it. And how we maybe don't even need a TOE because it might not exist.

Wouldn't it be interesting if the big picture that we don't see yet is not described by mathematics? That could be why we're having such trouble finding it.

Maybe it's for the best some things can only be explained by math. I don't know if humans are ready for the big picture anyway. We couldn't cope with it. That's maybe what Dr. Hawking means by saying fyzix would be more interesting if we don't discover certain things, e.g like the Higgs Boson. I could be wrong though.

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

A Grand Unified Theory is the Holy Grail of modern physics. Einstein attempted to build a Unified Field Theory which included gravitation and electromagnetism, but excluded nuclear forces, and failed. Other theorists, including Steve Weinberg and Abdus Salam, built an electro-weak unified theory. The task is left to future generations.
Tullio

---

The task is left to future generations

Humans do get smarter and smarter but I somehow doubt if we will ever get the big picture.

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

The task is left to future generations

Humans do get smarter and smarter but I somehow doubt if we will ever get the big picture.

Oh, I dunno. The human race has only been asking these questions in a serious, scientific way for a hundred years or so. The various religions and philosophies have been at it for thousands of years with disappointing results. Compared to that, science has only just begun.

Answers to the big questions will likely not happen in our lifetime but at least give serious science a couple thousand years to work on it before saying never.