Hadron Collider

[mfo]

Did anyone hear about this?

Hadron Collider breakthrough as beams collide - CNN.com

Do you think this thing will benefit us or is it just a waste of time?

Also, they say this thing can generate black holes. What's your opinion on that?

 

[Trevor]

There is a non-zero probability that it will create a black hole... it's minuscule and nearly irrelevant, but it's non-zero.

And at this point, we've built the thing. May as well use it.

-Trevor

 

[Grix]

"Did anyone hear about this"?! It's like the biggest science news so far this year!

I definately think this is a useful device, it will contribute a lot to the understanding of the universe and it's creation.

Also, the black hole thing is bogus, scientists says that small black holes can appear, but they're so small that they can't do any harm and will dissipate in no time.

 

[Traveller]

MY guess is that the Hadron collider already did manage to produce / isolate a so-called GOD particle - future tense and it was hungry, so it took a break, went back in time and had itself a bite from a baguette...

 

[pullbangdead]

Yeah, there's a non-zero probability of a stable blackhole. There's also a non-zero probability that the next step I take could tunnel me straight through to the other side of the earth, but it ain't happened yet.

I think the more interesting result than a black hole would be if it produced some stable strangelets that could come into contact with normal matter. Both would royally suck, but strangelets would be a more interesting way to go, I think.

 

[mfo]

Yeah, there's a non-zero probability of a stable blackhole. There's also a non-zero probability that the next step I take could tunnel me straight through to the other side of the earth, but it ain't happened yet.

I think the more interesting result than a black hole would be if it produced some stable strangelets that could come into contact with normal matter. Both would royally suck, but strangelets would be a more interesting way to go, I think.

Yeah, they'd both suck ass. I personally think we're playing with fire with these accelerators, but what ever.

 

[pullbangdead]

Yeah, they'd both suck ass. I personally think we're playing with fire with these accelerators, but what ever.

I'm thinking if it gets much bigger, we need to be putting it in a sandbox somewhere out in space. Of course that increases costs quite a bit, but this thing is already the most expensive science project ever built anyway.

I'm all for a sandbox approach if they get much bigger.

 

[mfo]

UFO sightings connected to Large Hadron Collider experiment? - Louth Leader

 

[Traveller]

UFO sightings connected to Large Hadron Collider experiment? - Louth Leader

They came to stop mankind from destroying the Universe (well, this Universe). Unfortunately they got distracted by the exquisite cuisine in the Swiss-French region... I'm a thinkin' that misplaced piece of Baguette was their rushed attempt to foil our progress... :undecided:



EDIT: In all seriousness, it's very fascinating stuff! Here's something I've never heard of before:

"Dark energy - A mysterious, invisible material that has an anti-gravitational action believed to be powering the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, of which it makes up 70 per cent."

Is this something derived from Quantum physics or an entirely different branch?

 

[Scotty 757]

Science makes me laugh. If they do prove that there is a GOD PARTICLE that means nothing. How did the particles get here to collide. That is the real question.

 

[pullbangdead]

"Dark energy - A mysterious, invisible material that has an anti-gravitational action believed to be powering the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, of which it makes up 70 per cent."

Is this something derived from Quantum physics or an entirely different branch?

Dark matter/dark energy isn't so much derived from quantum mechanics. Basically the idea comes from a couple of observations taht couldn't otherwise be accounted for. One is that the universe is expanding at an increasing rate. With all our models and how we thought things worked, the expansion should be decelerating, but we observed that it is actually increasing. This acceleration of the expansion needs energy. Also, if we do the math for the rates of expansion and acceleration and such, and then do the math for how much matter/energy (the same thing, just different forms) is observable in the universe, the numbers don't match.

So the universe's expansion is accelerating with an unknown energy source, and the mass/energy observable in the universe is nowhere near enough to account for the rate of acceleration and the energy required. So these ideas combined to form the idea of dark matter/dark energy: the remainder that makes the equations work right, because the things we observed don't add up to a conservation of energy. It's called "dark" because we can't observe it, it's never been observed directly, so it's called dark.

We can see many effects of it though: precise measurements of planets/systems/galaxies etc. also deviate from the observable physics the same way the universe as a whole does, so scientists have been able to determine some properties of dark matter/energy by how these systems deviate from their expected behavior if dark matter/energy wasn't present.

So we don't know what it is or where it comes from, and can't derive its origin or how it works. So it's basically an idea that was created to try to make things add up, to try to make the left hand side of the equation equal the right hand side; we know some things about it because we can observe how it affects objects in the universe, even if we can't observe it (whatever it is) directly.

 

[Traveller]

...Basically the idea comes from a couple of observations that couldn't otherwise be accounted for ... we know some things about it because we can observe how it affects objects in the universe, even if we can't observe it (whatever it is) directly.

Wow, amazing stuff. I was aware of the "missing mass" theory (or fact now...?) but you've certainly presented it in better light, thanks (+1) :beer:

You are clearly studying / working in this or a closely-related field...

 

[mfo]

Science makes me laugh. If they do prove that there is a GOD PARTICLE that means nothing. How did the particles get here to collide. That is the real question.

Are you on drugs or something?

Dark matter/dark energy isn't so much derived from quantum mechanics. Basically the idea comes from a couple of observations taht couldn't otherwise be accounted for. One is that the universe is expanding at an increasing rate. With all our models and how we thought things worked, the expansion should be decelerating, but we observed that it is actually increasing. This acceleration of the expansion needs energy. Also, if we do the math for the rates of expansion and acceleration and such, and then do the math for how much matter/energy (the same thing, just different forms) is observable in the universe, the numbers don't match.

So the universe's expansion is accelerating with an unknown energy source, and the mass/energy observable in the universe is nowhere near enough to account for the rate of acceleration and the energy required. So these ideas combined to form the idea of dark matter/dark energy: the remainder that makes the equations work right, because the things we observed don't add up to a conservation of energy. It's called "dark" because we can't observe it, it's never been observed directly, so it's called dark.

We can see many effects of it though: precise measurements of planets/systems/galaxies etc. also deviate from the observable physics the same way the universe as a whole does, so scientists have been able to determine some properties of dark matter/energy by how these systems deviate from their expected behavior if dark matter/energy wasn't present.

So we don't know what it is or where it comes from, and can't derive its origin or how it works. So it's basically an idea that was created to try to make things add up, to try to make the left hand side of the equation equal the right hand side; we know some things about it because we can observe how it affects objects in the universe, even if we can't observe it (whatever it is) directly.

They also speculate that dark matter keeps galaxies bound together despite their enormous rotational speeds.

 

[Cyparagon]

Yeah, they'd both suck ass. I personally think we're playing with fire with these accelerators, but what ever.

I'm pretty sure the law of conservation of mass and the fact that we're working with something as small as particles prevents us from destroying a planet.

 

[pullbangdead]

I'm pretty sure the law of conservation of mass and the fact that we're working with something as small as particles prevents us from destroying a planet.

It's not the size of the particles, that has little to nothing to do with the dangers.

Right now, our collisions in these accelerators are still lower in energy than what can happen out in space already. If the energy gets much higher though, we're going to be in uncharted territory, and who knows what kind of weird crap could happen as we hit higher energies.

It's not about the mass of the particle, it's about what happens at the energies these particles have when they're colliding. We could reach an activation energy for some as yet unknown event to happen. People have feared strangelets, people have feared black holes, etc, and it hasn't happened. But we're getting closer and closer to uncharted territory.

 

[Hemlock_Mike]

"When in trouble or in doubt --
Run in circles, yell and shout"

Always works for me !!!!!

HMike