The end of the world...IS TOMORROW?!
LD4all » Lucid Lounge

#1: The end of the world...IS TOMORROW?! Author: Morpheus :nuu: PostPosted: Tue 09 Sep, 2008
    ----
Okay, so I've heard things on the radio, on youtube, and from my friends that the world is going to end on September 10, 2008 (tomorrow). From what I've been told is that a bunch of scientists in Europe are doing some type of experiment that COULD create a black hole, causing everybody will die.
Scientist group A: Yea, this experiment will probably work
Scientist group B: IT WILL KILL US ALL!?!?





Can somebody tell me what's going on?

#2:  Author: The HB PostPosted: Tue 09 Sep, 2008
    ----
The chances of us dying are around 1 in 100000...

So, really, I highly doubt we will.

Basically, there's this machine been made, called the Large Hadron Collider. It's basically going to fire particles or something, and reenact the big bang or something. I don't know exactly, since I haven't worked on it.

Anyway, it's due to be switched on tomorrow at 8:30am British time. And the odds are in the world's favour, at 99999 out of 100000 that the experiment will work without a hitch.

Although it could potentially create a black hole and destroy the world.

#3:  Author: tkrulewich PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
ok. I don't know that much about the physics involved, but from what my dad says (a physics nerd) the black holes will probably be created in a particle accelerator. They will fire two particles together at high speeds. Do you think this doesn't happen in nature? I would imagine rapid moving particles from space collide in our atmosphere all the time, and that hasn't killed us yet. After some research I found that scientists believe this happens on our own planet in nature quite often, and that the black holes will have an even horizon smaller than an atom, so it shouldn't be able to even pull in a single atom. It will also give off radiation (in the form of heat?) and dissipate rather quickly. Scientists could be wrong however, but I am not worried at all. My information could be wrong, as my memory isn't perfect, but I think everything I said here is correct.

#4:  Author: Morpheus :nuu: PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
I can't wait!
We either A. Get to live through a scientific breakthrough or B. Die because of a scientific breakthrough
:D

#5:  Author: casaBLANKa PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
I'll talk to my biology teacher about this...he's a genius. He should know about this kinda stuff.

Sounds interesting. I knew the British would kill us all eventually.

#6:  Author: kTFox PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
My science teacher talked some about it today. She said that the people who think that it would create a black hole are idiots and that it won't make a black hole.

#7:  Author: tkrulewich PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
well i don't know all the physics involved but I'd say the physicists and engineers know more than your science teacher tounge2

#8:  Author: Sheik PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
tkrulewich wrote:
well i don't know all the physics involved but I'd say the physicists and engineers know more than your science teacher tounge2


You never know.. Some teachers are really smart. There's an expression, those who can't do, teach. So teachers couldn't go on creating new stuff, but they know a huuge amount of information on the subject, obviously, because they teach it tounge2

#9:  Author: tkrulewich PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
teachers don't need to know vasts amounts of information on the subject. And it said kTFox's age was 14, so he would be in middle school. Middle school teachers don't need to know much at all tounge2. In fact, everything middle school science teachers really need to know is in their teachers editions of the text books :D.

#10:  Author: Essa PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Yeah my dad told me that he read about that. I laughed at him, thinking he was joking, then I found the article. The thing is, I don't think that they would actually do that if it had a high chance of killing us all, lol. I just can't see them gainning clearence to perform the experiment. What is the world commin' to? Answer? A black hole.

Can't wait for the results though! Well, as long as we don't die...I'm too young!! wink

#11:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
mildly amusing, isn't it. fun ensues when you take in consideration the fact that, if the said black hole incident does happen, it will raise considerably the odds of the theory put to test being right. i can actually picture an alien form of intelligent life, picking up radio signals from a weird civilisation which, faced with the choice between "possible black hole" and "possibly not being able to test a theory", considered the later fate to be more dreadful.

casaBLANKa wrote:
Sounds interesting. I knew the British would kill us all eventually.

with Yank money, i knew it!

#12:  Author: Win Laik Pya PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Black hole sun, won't you come?
And wash away the rain
Black hole sun, won't you come?
Won't you come?

#13:  Author: tkrulewich PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
just thought id point out that the machine starts in 1 hour and 20 min as of now. It will be midnight where I am when it starts.

#14:  Author: kTFox PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
tkrulewich wrote:
teachers don't need to know vasts amounts of information on the subject. And it said kTFox's age was 14, so he would be in middle school. Middle school teachers don't need to know much at all tounge2. In fact, everything middle school science teachers really need to know is in their teachers editions of the text books :D.


Umm, actually .. no. I'm 15 and a Sophomore in high school. Just to clarify things. And yeah the machine is coming on soon. The experiment begins on September 10 soon after 9 a.m. (0700 GMT).

#15:  Author: Win Laik Pya PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
I think many people don't understand the PURPOSE of the machine (and if you are reading this post, more than likely we are all still alive, unless you are some razy time demon.)

The purpose of the machine is to create a mini black hole by launching particles art each other at the speed close to light.

The black hole is so tiny, it dissipates within a millisecond.

this more than likely happens around us all the time and we don't notice it, because obviously we don't notice when particles collide.

it also happens in the earth's atmosphere, which we do know. guess what? we're still here!

So when they say 'black hole' they DONT mean mega huge planet-sucking thing. They mean tiny, atom sized black hole that we can record. which is good. we may be able to study material that hasn't been around since the big bang!

woohoo!

#16:  Author: Tundra PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
casaBLANKa wrote:
I'll talk to my biology teacher about this...he's a genius. He should know about this kinda stuff.

Sounds interesting. I knew the British would kill us all eventually.


Sorry to dissapoint... but the machine is underneath Cern in Geneva..

We'll try to destroy the world some other time then eh?

#17:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Ryan wrote:
The purpose of the machine is to create a mini black hole by launching particles art each other at the speed close to light.

no it's not. it's just to make particles clash at a preposterous velocity to see what happens when you force quarks away from their triplets.

Ryan wrote:
The black hole is so tiny, it dissipates within a millisecond.

there is a little less than a chance in five hundred that a singularity will show up. it's likely that it'll dissipate. however, given the heat and the weird situation in which timespace will be at inside that big collider, it might just be that the odds of the singularity stabilising and becoming a baby black hole. (the odds were calculated at a little less than 1 in 10 000). in that case, there's a chance a little over 10% (making the whole shebang 1 in 100 000) that the black hole itself will not poof away. in which case we get doomsday before christmas.

Ryan wrote:
this more than likely happens around us all the time and we don't notice it, because obviously we don't notice when particles collide.

yes, but in a normal condition, timespace borrows energy from the future in the form of a particle-antiparticle pair which undergoes anihilation and releases a lot of energy --- at which point the baby black hole goes. what we don't know is whether or not in weird simulated conditions this will hold, as the whole "borrowing energy from the future" thing is about as complicated as quantum goes.

Ryan wrote:
it also happens in the earth's atmosphere, which we do know. guess what? we're still here!

now you're just skimming through the wikipedia. what arguably happens at the atmosphere is the formation of strange matter, and that's only provided a massive ammount of energy, like a solar storm. nothing to do with black holes. as for strage matter, it might be more risky in a lab than in the skies because there's a lot more energy going on in the LHC, and the two mainstream physics standard models of now are particularly contradictory when it comes to strage matter: one says it will dissipate under lots of energy, the other predicts that if you give it matter and heat it will subverting the whole matter around it into strangelets.

at any rate, what you're dismissing here, Ryan, is that there is a chance a weird thing comes up from this test. the chance is very small --- but it's not a pointing at others and saying "ha, told ya" matter. no matter how small our calculated risk is, we shouldn't treat "oh, and there's a risk we'll anihilate the world in the process" as someone else's problem! there still is a chance. a small chance is nice that way: it's not like saying it won't happen. it just might happen.

#18:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
also, we work with given figures here, but math in quantum physics is nowhere near trivial. it might just be that we're playing the figures down compared to what they really are --- and vice versa. this machine brings particle colliding to such a new level that we don't really know what to expect. as particles approach the speed of light, they gain mass (Einstein's equation) and lose space (Lorentz contraction) approaching ever more state necessary to form a stable singularity. and hey, the LHC is still a human-made machine --- the collider itself is subject to math errors and engineering flaws.

helium leaks, that kind of thing: we simply cannot predict what will happen. the tiniest helium leak would set up a self-sustained fusion process, and what you would have is basically the world's largest fusion reactor. presto: "large hadron collider" becomes "massive H bomb" and you can say goodbye to your european friends.

#19:  Author: Carnun PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
bruno wrote:
"large hadron collider" becomes "massive H bomb" and you can say goodbye to your european friends.


I'm no scientist, but I am guessing that is why they decided to build it deep into the ground and not on the surface?!

#20:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
we can't even tell what exactly would happen if helium leaked, Carnun, whether it would be an explosion, a fireball, a nuclear explosion or plasma erupting. if its done just the right way, it doesn't matter that the whole shebang is underground, it would wipe a considerable part of Europe from the face of Earth, and most of the human population would (face extinction yadda yadda) be under the risk of having kids with tails. during the construction of the LHC, they already managed to have a helium leak.

(at any rate, i'm not particularly concerned with any of this, but that's because of what i believe in and stuff --- what i don't get is, given there is indeed a real chance things go really wrong, how come everyone else isn't worried).

also: this is most instructive (no doomsday predictions, just a somewhat amusing piece of nerd rap).

#21:  Author: The Moon Man PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Errrmm...
And...ummm...
Nvm...
Let's hope we don't all die grin1
So...if i wake up in the morning....WE WILL LIVE!
Meh...just wait and see

Just hope we don't die....

#22:  Author: blazinfish PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
If Stephen Hawking dismisses the fears of creating black holes and the dangers of it, I'll believe him.
Stephen Hawking stated that the purpose of the experiment, was to find the hidden "Higgs boson" particle, which supposedly gives mass to other particles. He even bet $100 that they wouldn't find it.
I'm guessing that since we are still here, he won the bet?

#23:  Author: Win Laik Pya PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
bruno wrote:

now you're just skimming through the wikipedia.


ha! nice try, but it was Msn.com!

tounge2

bruno wrote:
it's not like saying it won't happen. it just might happen.


Well, yes, in truth we aren't certain of anything when it comes to particle physics or quantum mechanics (never thought i'd say those words without putting 'ugh' before it tounge2 ). However, considering the fact that no other particle accelerator has run into these problems, plus scientific findings against such problems occurring (this, i will admit, i don't have actual evidence for. I was reading articles last night and many said 'yeah, we have scientific evidence against it.' However, this evidence was not listed, only assured that 'it's there'. I'm not going to lie, i have no intention of further pursuing this, in a sort of "i have so much to do why am i posting on a forum?" kind of way. If anyone has the time and is interested and could refute or confirm this, cookie for them cookiemonster), i think that many of the fears people have of it are unfounded.

Besides, didn't we go through similar fears like this the LAST time a new particle accelerator was made? If i recall correctly, this issue has shown up in the past.

oh and one more thing.

I mean sure we'd all die. However, wouldn't it kinda be a cool way to go out? In the pursuit of science to make our understanding of the universe better, we suck ourselves into a black hole?

way to go out in style. sounds like a classic Vonnegut plot.

#24:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Ryan wrote:
ha! nice try, but it was Msn.com!

:P

google it up --- this way, you have more than one source to use, and people can't track you back to a single article. ;p

Ryan wrote:
However, considering the fact that no other particle accelerator has run into these problems,

sure, but they were completely different in many ways: the energy involved, the velocity involved, the particles to be clashed, the cooling system.

Ryan wrote:
plus scientific findings against such problems occurring

here's the big controversy that got people postal about black holes: the notion that baby black holes are stable and tend to dissolve, that very notion is so closely related to what was being tested that you can pretty much say today's collision is when they finally checked whether or not it was true.

Ryan wrote:
i think that many of the fears people have of it are unfounded.

fear of black holes and strangelets and what-have-you, yes. well, there's always a chance, but then again people make nuclear power plants without as much as a second thought, why would they care about the much-smaller chances of uh-oh doomsday situations particle colliding yields?

what i was concerned about was not what could be produced within the experiment, but of possible engineering flaws. see, for a stable black hole to show up and eat the Earth, every thing must happen just the right way. for a massive human-error-caused disaster, on the other hand, something has to go wrong. and the prospect of something going generally wrong tends to scare me way more than the prospect of everything happening just the right way.

Ryan wrote:
Besides, didn't we go through similar fears like this the LAST time a new particle accelerator was made? If i recall correctly, this issue has shown up in the past.

well, it's a risk every time. next time can always be the time where the damned black hole stabilises & eats us all.

Ryan wrote:
I mean sure we'd all die. However, wouldn't it kinda be a cool way to go out? In the pursuit of science to make our understanding of the universe better, we suck ourselves into a black hole?

four to seven minutes of being sucked by an ever-increasing force of gravity, subject to internal bleeding and excruciating migraines, not to mention the ground trembling and tearing itself open, and houses generally falling on you? (wait, that actually does sound kind of cool).

at any rate, i'm still rather embarrassed about humankind & the whole situation, from a what-will-the-aliens-think perspective.

#25:  Author: The HB PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
bruno wrote:
casaBLANKa wrote:
Sounds interesting. I knew the British would kill us all eventually.

with Yank money, i knew it!


Actually, it was the Swiss...

#26:  Author: tkrulewich PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Well it is located in Switzerland, but according to wikipedia (could easily be wrong lol) the people working on it and funding it are from all over.

#27:  Author: Morpheus :nuu: PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
We talked about this in physics today.

My teacher said that basically, they're doing the exact opposite thing of an atomic bomb. Instead of splitting two atoms, they're combing two with a large force and see what type of junk it comes up with.

The chance of everybody exploding is very, very minimal and they're looking for whatever they could find for evidence of the big bang theory. He said they could find anything from dark matter, tiny black holes, and other things. And if black holes are created they would be microscopic and would only last a millisecond before disappearing .

And, the other possibility is that just nothing would happen...

#28:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Morpheus wrote:
My teacher said that basically, they're doing the exact opposite thing of an atomic bomb. Instead of splitting two atoms, they're combing two with a large force and see what type of junk it comes up with.

not the opposite of an atomic bomb: they're doing the opposite of fission (splitting a particle into pieces), which is fusion (throwing particles against each other until they split and their pieces recombine to form different kinds of particles). both reactions can be used in the craft of bombs, the generation of energy, and scientific experimentation.

Morpheus wrote:
The chance of everybody exploding is very, very minimal and they're looking for whatever they could find for evidence of the big bang theory. He said they could find anything from dark matter, tiny black holes, and other things. And if black holes are created they would be microscopic and would only last a millisecond before disappearing.

as i said before, the fact that the tiny black holes disappeared is still disputed. they will naturally decay if the singularity at their core isn't stable, but we don't know for sure about a certain "Hawking radiation" which is theoretically behind the anihilation of the ones that are stable --- in fact, if we did get swallowed by a black hole, it would be a somewhat funny step forward to science: it would prove that the theory of Hawking radiation (which hasn't just yet been confirmed or refuted) is, well, wrong.

Morpheus wrote:
And, the other possibility is that just nothing would happen...

something is bound to happen, we just don't know what. we have a few clues as to what we should be looking for --- Higgs bosons, supersymmetry, strange matter --- and perhaps what we're looking for is actually none of these: but it still must be somewhere right under our noses. something causes particles to have mass, and that something must show up at some point or another, in some form.

#29:  Author: Nate879 PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
The purpose of the LHC is to create the Higgs boson, NOT to create a black hole. And it's not going to do anything cosmic rays don't do already. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LHC.

#30:  Author: Ghosteh PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Come on, were still here, the black hole has eaten us by now, besides, the holes are too weak to eat something. You need something it can eat (metals are too solid too be eaten by small holes). And thats it tounge2

#31:  Author: Tundra PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Ah well what do you know? I'm not dead...

><

Yay.

*stands round being bored*

*sighs*


#32:  Author: Ghosteh PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
And now we can party3 the whole day, the doomsday is soon however.

#33:  Author: UneNoid PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
I do not know exactly this system, but I do believe that this H bomb possibility is even more negligible than black hole and other fears. Helium is a product of usual fusion processes and amount of the accelerated particles is probable quite small to start some kind of chain reaction.

#34:  Author: The HB PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Actually, it was just starting today... The first real high-energy collision is on the 21st of October. According to my sources anyway.

#35:  Author: TriniT-Shirt PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Tundra wrote:
casaBLANKa wrote:
I'll talk to my biology teacher about this...he's a genius. He should know about this kinda stuff.

Sounds interesting. I knew the British would kill us all eventually.


Sorry to dissapoint... but the machine is underneath Cern in Geneva..

We'll try to destroy the world some other time then eh?


Geneva, anyone notice something about this? xD

Upon Google....

Economic Times wrote:
Geneva experiment not disastrous. Scientists...



Sorry, I had a sudden burst of FF nerd rage. kiekeboe

Any-who, I don't think it will kill us all. If it does, okay, it does. Like HB said, if it does kill us all, you don't want to sit around moping that you'll die soon. We'll all die sometime -- when your life flashes before your eyes, make it worthwhile.

If it doesn't kill us, then oh lookie, you have another one or more year[s] to live. Don't spend those years panicking about the doomsday scare after this one, spend them living.

#36:  Author: casaBLANKa PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Tundra wrote:


Sorry to dissapoint... but the machine is underneath Cern in Geneva..

We'll try to destroy the world some other time then eh?


truit alas you have seen through my charade.
bravo.
Bruno wrote:
with Yank money, i knew it!

Bruno, you always crack me up

#37:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Wed 10 Sep, 2008
    ----
Eyelids: say what?

UneNoid wrote:
I do not know exactly this system, but I do believe that this H bomb possibility is even more negligible than black hole and other fears. Helium is a product of usual fusion processes and amount of the accelerated particles is probable quite small to start some kind of chain reaction.

nope, the odds are actually higher than those of a stable black hole showing up. nuclear power plants are based on fission, which requires way less energy than fusion. in fact, there's no such a thing as fusion power plant because we don't have the technology to even deal with the ammount of energy released by industry-scale fusion.

the LHC is basically a big machine that produces a very tiny fusion reaction and tries to videotape it. there's a twist: its cooling system is actually fuel for a much higher-scale fusion reaction, and on top of that, the power produced by the particular fusion done in the LHC is of a scale much, much higher than what we could ever dream for a fusion-based power plant. and, like i said before, there's no known technology to deal with this kind of reaction: the self-sustained fission process we can produce today is of the "bomb" kind, never of the "power plant" kind.

HebrewB wrote:
Actually, it was just starting today... The first real high-energy collision is on the 21st of October. According to my sources anyway.

your sources are right.

#38:  Author: Lizard King PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Right, it takes a while for it to be fully ready to go. Today just started the process.

If it does engulf the earth, none of us would even know. Doesn't sound like a bad way to go right? I'd say it's better than any other possible way, so I say, LET'S GO BLACK HOLE!

#39:  Author: Essa PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Well, now that my/everyones hype about doomsday is down-ish...I wonder what they learned from it? I've always liked science so I want to know more! :D

I usually don't have time to come on the computer to research with starting highschool and all. And the homework.... overspannen

#40:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Lizard King wrote:
If it does engulf the earth, none of us would even know. Doesn't sound like a bad way to go right? I'd say it's better than any other possible way, so I say, LET'S GO BLACK HOLE!

to be sure:

Quote:
four to seven minutes of being sucked by an ever-increasing force of gravity, subject to internal bleeding and excruciating migraines, not to mention the ground trembling and tearing itself open, and houses generally falling on you? (wait, that actually does sound kind of cool).

#41:  Author: casaBLANKa PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Bruno you've been tearing an intellectual new one into everyone on this topic.

-claps-

#42:  Author: tkrulewich PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Btw, If we are going to die, it won't happen until they do some actual collisions in the lhc. (on Oct. 21?)

#43:  Author: Carnun PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Lizard King wrote:
Right, it takes a while for it to be fully ready to go. Today just started the process.

If it does engulf the earth, none of us would even know. Doesn't sound like a bad way to go right? I'd say it's better than any other possible way, so I say, LET'S GO BLACK HOLE!


Actually, they predict it could take around 50 months for the man made black hole to stablise, grow and then suck in the earth.

#44:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Carnun: so you say it could be out there, right now? how exciting!

#45:  Author: Ghosteh PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Much talk about something that hasnt happened. I do not know how you find these sources, but there is no risk for the earth to be eaten. A black hole doesnt grow like this: wolfbite (the left head is the hole, the right one earth), it takes time, and besides the holes are WAY too weak to eat the machine, so you can just :puh: on LHC. And thats it tounge2

#46:  Author: UneNoid PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Still I do not understand the reason why this He from the magnets should start the fusion process. Ok theoretically every light element since iron 56 can undergo fusion reaction but practically heavyer product than helium are rare even in star reactions (exept supernova).

In H-bomb the He is the product not a fuel.

#47:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
UneNoid wrote:
Still I do not understand the reason why this He from the magnets should start the fusion process. Ok theoretically every light element since iron 56 can undergo fusion reaction but practically heavyer product than helium are rare even in star reactions (exept supernova).

In H-bomb the He is the product not a fuel.

wikipedia: "criteria & candidates for terrestrial [fusion] reactions".

↑ nope, He can also be used in fusion reactions.

#48:  Author: Aksel PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Some calculation estimates that it might take 50 months to 50 years for a stabilized black hole to grow big enough to tear us up big time. Life would suck for a long time in other words.
We shouldn't forget the hypothetical strangelets, though o_O
Imagine the earth as a pile of strange matter eek2

Someone at school mentioned that she found it funny that some claimed a micro black hole to spend around 50 months to become big enough, as that's about 4 years from now. Will we bring 2012 upon ourselves? woo eek2

But I think I'll just trust Hawking on this one.

#49:  Author: UneNoid PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
I also metnioned that if I sayd except iron 56. But look at the table in your link and you will see that where is no reaction presented there He 4 is a reactant (fuel). It is alway a product. So making a nuclear bomb from He 4 is not the easiest thing smile

The case would be different if they use He 3 for cooling (physicists sometimes do that), but its much more expensive and I do not see the reason for that in this system.

I still exculde this H-bomb danger.

#50:  Author: Carnun PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
bruno wrote:
Carnun: so you say it could be out there, right now? how exciting!


eh Carnun rereads his post... Nope Bruno, I did not say or suggest such things. As has already been posted the first collision is still to take place some time in mid October.

#51:  Author: Arabinator PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
According to a newspaper in the town i live in, there were reports of 14-year olds coming to their school crying about the world going under.

#52:  Author: Ghosteh PostPosted: Thu 11 Sep, 2008
    ----
Arabinator wrote:
According to a newspaper in the town i live in, there were reports of 14-year olds coming to their school crying about the world going under.

Some panic from the "old" schoolstudents, right, or do they know about this?

#53:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Fri 12 Sep, 2008
    ----
Arb wrote:
According to a newspaper in the town i live in, there were reports of 14-year olds coming to their school crying about the world going under.

were you among them? ;p anyhow, tell your colleagues they needn't worry: they can keep track of doomsday online (rss feed available), and should there be any reason for them to freak out and go live life like there was no tomorrow, they'll be told in advance. :-)

#54:  Author: Lizard King PostPosted: Fri 12 Sep, 2008
    ----
bruno wrote:
to be sure:
Quote:
four to seven minutes of being sucked by an ever-increasing force of gravity, subject to internal bleeding and excruciating migraines, not to mention the ground trembling and tearing itself open, and houses generally falling on you? (wait, that actually does sound kind of cool).


I doubt that. The rate would be constantly accelerating, I'd imagine once it gets some ground it'd get going very fast. It's a black hole after all.

Four to seven minutes has got to be too much.

#55:  Author: Bruno PostPosted: Fri 12 Sep, 2008
    ----
Lizard King wrote:
Four to seven minutes has got to be too much.

alright, first off: i was joking. no really, half my posts in this topic aren't serious, mainly because i myself can't take doomsday seriously --- i'm not saying i don't believe in doomsday, i just can't take it seriously.

that being said, and now in all seriousness, you might be right: four to seven minutes can be too much. they can also be way too little: a black hole can take years to consume a planet the size of Earth. here's a quick explanation of what a black hole is: it's a point (as in "a zero-size body") called singularity with a preposterous quantity mass. if you were to do it old school and calculate its density as mass over volume, you'd find out its mass is infinite, which under old school gravitation laws would mean singularities are quickly swallowing the universe.

lucky for us that theory has been proved wrong already. what happens with singularities is, their mass will create a (really strong) gravitational force. things will be attracted to the singularity. and there's some point, which varies greatly depending on the mass of the singularity, at which there's no return. there's this distance from singularities which we call "event horizons", explaining exactly what they mean is quite dull, but it works for now to ask you to think that whatever gets closer to the singularity than that distance has no coming back.

that weird system made of a bodiless point, the singularity, and its influence zone within the event horizon, is what we call a black hole. right. so what is the size of a baby black hole? honestly, i've no freaking idea. but here's an interesting figure: the minimum mass for a primordial black hole (i.e. one originated at the Big Bang) seems to be 1 000 000 000 000 kg (= 2 200 000 000 000 pounds). it would take 10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 years for one such baby black hole to swalow the whole Earth. (which i suspect is longer than the Earth will live, anyway, and at any rate long enough for you not to care).

for more information: great article on Universe Today, and then some more. ;-)

#56:  Author: Lizard King PostPosted: Fri 12 Sep, 2008
    ----
That's interesting. It makes it impossible to imagine what exactly it would look like (not literally) should a black hole form that has the power to consume the planet.

Surely the mass has to come from somewhere, leading me to believe that the concept of this destroying earth is preposterous.

But of course, if it does happen, and it's a quick consumption, I would assume that although we may not die right away, consciousness would be gone in a matter of seconds due to forces acting on the body.

#57:  Author: Ghosteh PostPosted: Sat 13 Sep, 2008
    ----
Why even concern confused this hole is nothing to be afraid of. Were not going under and thats it tounge2

#58:  Author: Lizard King PostPosted: Sat 13 Sep, 2008
    ----
GHOSTIE11 wrote:
Why even concern confused this hole is nothing to be afraid of. Were not going under and thats it tounge2


Agreed.

#59:  Author: Mew151 PostPosted: Mon 22 Sep, 2008
    ----
If it does create a black hole, the black hole will be extremely weak, and would last only an extremely small period of time.
And besides, the Earth is still here right now.

#60:  Author: Ghosteh PostPosted: Mon 22 Sep, 2008
    ----
Mew151 wrote:
If it does create a black hole, the black hole will be extremely weak, and would last only an extremely small period of time.
And besides, the Earth is still here right now.


True, the only fear of earths destruction is because of incompetent (sorry) people who dont realise that the holes are too weak. I was worried too, til my SC told me its nothing dangerous.
And thats it tounge2

#61:  Author: G. atlanticus PostPosted: Mon 22 Sep, 2008
    ----
I have little to contribute but this:

I love this forum! Sanity + actual logic? I haven't posted here in a while, but I've been online enough to see the chaos the Internet is in over this important experiment. I've taken enough physics in my short education to know the LHC is being blown way out of proportion in terms of its danger, and its potential to change our understanding of particle physics is being horrendously downplayed.


bruno wrote:
i can actually picture an alien form of intelligent life, picking up radio signals from a weird civilisation which, faced with the choice between "possible black hole" and "possibly not being able to test a theory", considered the later fate to be more dreadful.


"Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly." ~Arnold Edinborough

#62: Are we treading where we shouldnt be? Author: Kava PostPosted: Wed 24 Sep, 2008
    ----
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider


I dont really understand this fully, but aparently this expirament might prove how the universe was created. There are therorys saying it may create small black holes that would threaten our planet, or open up a doorway to another dimension.

#63:  Author: Scarecrow PostPosted: Wed 24 Sep, 2008
    ----
There is already a topic about this, it's in the lounge. It's called "the end of the world is tomorow".

#64:  Author: Stricken PostPosted: Wed 24 Sep, 2008
    ----
There are theories that it could create small black holes, yes. The portal to another dimension stuff is pure nonsense. For one, the fourth dimension is generally considered time, and any dimensions beyond that probably don't exist. a Dimension isn't actually a physical place, just the way we look at things. For example, the first dimension is width, second height, third depth, so traveling through additional dimensions would simply add more perspectives, such as time.

As for the black hole thing, even if that were to happen, they would be far too small to have even the slightest impact. Everyone simply instantly distrusts new technology. The atom bomb was the end of the world, then television caused cancer, then microwaves caused cancer, then cell phones emitted microwaves. Nothing will ever come of it, people will freak out for a bit and move on, like Y2K, 2012, and every other event ever.

#65:  Author: Kza PostPosted: Wed 24 Sep, 2008
    ----
Stricken is right. And, even if it was made, it, by the same science that made it, would die. Hawking's theory, the one that gave him fame, was that black holes DIE. One so small would die instantly.

Oh, here's some webcam of the LHC. I love how many people are around it, working so constantly. If you don't see any, odds are there will be in a few moments.

http://www.cyriak.co.uk/lhc/lhc-webcams.html

#66:  Author: Lucidity_Master PostPosted: Wed 24 Sep, 2008
    ----
From the way I understand it, the LHC was built to collide protons in order to test the Standard Model ( the basic model for particle physics). The experiment (theoretically) is expected to produce a particle known as the Higgs Boson which is the only particle not yet observed. The discovery of this particle would help explain various issues with mass and explain how other elementary particles acquire mass.

According to the Wikipedia article there was equipment failure and, as such, the collider won't be operational again until Spring 2009.

#67:  Author: UltimateReaper PostPosted: Wed 24 Sep, 2008
    ----
People think they are so smart, its so sad

#68:  Author: Stricken PostPosted: Wed 24 Sep, 2008
    ----
Lucidity_Master wrote:
From the way I understand it, the LHC was built to collide protons in order to test the Standard Model ( the basic model for particle physics). The experiment (theoretically) is expected to produce a particle known as the Higgs Boson which is the only particle not yet observed. The discovery of this particle would help explain various issues with mass and explain how other elementary particles acquire mass.

According to the Wikipedia article there was equipment failure and, as such, the collider won't be operational again until Spring 2009.


Something like that...they had a malfunction, and as such the initial startup of the machine was delayed, and it will not run at full capacity until spring 2009.

As for what the LHC was built for, in addition to the above, I believe it is supposed to simulate the collision of particles during the Big Bang, showing us how stars and planets and all other astral bodies are initially formed. It's quite a huge prospect for discovery of new things.

#69:  Author: meta_phy PostPosted: Wed 24 Sep, 2008
    ----
There is way too much argueing over this. Scientists have gotten death threats and some girl killed herself because of it. This is something to be greatful for, to be in the midst of a scientific revolution. Who cares if we die because it will be all of us! It wont make a difference. I personally dont beleive they would waste billions of dollars on something that they are that skeptical about. It will reveal very mysterious things, it just needs a little time.

#70:  Author: Lucidity_Master PostPosted: Thu 25 Sep, 2008
    ----
It will probably do two things if all goes smoothly.

1. We will see the Higgs Boson which will add evidence to our current standard model of particle physics.
2. We won't find it at which point scientists will probably decided that either the collider wasn't big enough/ this wasn't the right way to approach the problem OR it will be decided that the standard model isn't good and revision or a new model will need to be made.



LD4all » Lucid Lounge


Page 1 of 1
printed from the LD4all.com lucid dreaming forum. Content copyrighted by the author.
Lucid dreamers unite! visit LD4all.com