All the latest UK technology news, reviews and analysis
|
|
|
28 Mar 2008
A US District Court in Hawaii has been petitioned to stop the operation of the Cern Large Hadron Collider (LHC) over fears that it might cause the end of the world.
Walter Wagner, a former nuclear safety officer, has filed the suit as he fears that the LHC could create a mini black hole that could swallow the planet.
He also expressed concerns that transmuting matter into so-called strangelets could change all other matter into a similar form.
The claims have been dismissed by physicists at Cern. "Some physicists suggest that microscopic black holes could be produced in the collisions at the LHC," said the organisation in a statement.
"However, these would only be created with the energies of the colliding particles, which is equivalent to the energies of mosquitoes."
Cern insisted that no microscopic black holes produced inside the LHC could generate a strong enough gravitational force to pull in surrounding matter.
"If the LHC can produce microscopic black holes, cosmic rays of much higher energies would already have produced many more," the statement added.
"Since the Earth is still here, there is no reason to believe that collisions inside the LHC are harmful."
This is not the first time that the safety of the LHC has been called into question. Russian scientists suggested last month that time travel may occur when the LHC fires up later this year.
It is unclear why Wagner's lawsuit has been filed in Hawaii, since the LHC is located under the Swiss/French border and has no links with the US.
The LHC forms a 27km circle and is the world's largest piece of laboratory equipment.
Once active it will fire a stream of protons into each other at near light speed. The resulting collisions will generate examples of material found in the first seconds of the universe.
Latest stories from Components
Related articles
Related jobs
Poll
What is the most important IT priority for your company this year?
Hands on with the highly anticipated Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich hybrid tablet
Connect with V3.co.uk
This paper focuses on a series of best practices and techniques for development teams looking to improve their software development processes
Why good data management at all levels is essential in the modern business (video, 6mins)
Application Support Analyst with exceptional communication...
Software Development Manager- Rugby/Warwickshire - Attractive...
Working for a leading Retail organisation, you will be...
business analyst, tester, fixed income, fi, derivatives...
Keep up to date with the latest products, services and technologies from the world's leading IT companies. IThound.com brings you over 2,000 white papers, case studies and analyst reports.
Do you agree?
How much time will the world be given to review their safety study when completed?
CERNs web site states that we have not been destroyed by effects of cosmic rays and micro black holes will evaporate. However, cosmic rays travel too fast to be captured by Earths gravity, while collider particles smash head on and can be captured by Earths gravity. Einsteins relativity theory predicts that micro black holes will not decay but instead only grow, and Hawking Radiation is an unproven and disputed theory that contradicts relativity. The LHC Safety Assessment Group has been trying for months to prove safety without success. However science may still be a few years away from being able to prove safety or not. Professor Dr. Otto E. Roessler, Theorist Dr. Raj Baldev and others are warning of a very real possible danger to the planet from the Large Hadron Collider. If this experiment is so safe, why arent CERN scientists allowed to express any personal fears they might have about this Collider? Alleged in the legal action: Chief Scientific Officer, Mr. Engelen passed an internal memorandum to workers at CERN, asking them, regardless of personal opinion, to affirm in all interviews that there were no risks involved in the experiments, changing the previous assertion of minimal risk. (Statisticians generally consider minimal risk as 1-10%). Which would more wise, conduct a full and independent adversarial safety study first, or just turn it on now and see what happens? JTankers LHCConcerns.com
Posted by: JTankers 12 Apr 2008
lets ask...
brian may, he might have a good answer
Posted by: adolfo 02 Apr 2008
a mini black hole is still a black hole
Im no nuclear physicist, but isnt a mini black hole still a black hole nonetheless. I mean, black holes are 'theoretically' supposed to suck everything around it, gobbling everything in its vicinity and growing ever larger. Worst case scenario is that it may possibly well compress this earth, and we go supernova. Can the scientist 100% positivley rule out that such an event wont happen? No they cannot. After all the worst case scenario here affects every person, animal and thing on this planet. So out of thier own curiousity sake, they waiver the majority safety and go ahead with thier little experiment, little knowing of what the potential consquences of thier action may bring. I mean its like if I were to do a nuclear experiment in my backyard. I may contain it the best I can, but at the end of the day, I needed to have consulted with my neighbours. Have these scientist really consulted with the rest of the world -nope, nope and nope. Just reckless abandonment to the safety of the majority. Even though the possibility of a 'doomsday' event may be very minuscle, still does not warrant it to go ahead. If the experiment is to be done, it should be done furthest away as possible, like on edge of the universe knowable universe, in the event something catastrophic may happen. Even then, there is still room for debate as to whether or not such an experiment should be allowed. Recreating conditions like after the big bang is not a casual matter. In the name of science, the experiment is all good, but for prudence sakes, its definitely a no-no. Pandoras box, may well be pandoras bomb.
Posted by: peter 30 Mar 2008
Big Bang
I love science, I understand science, but this is one big experiment by irresponsible lunatics going too far and ignoring the potential consequences of their actions just so that they get their adrenalin or whatever "high" or fix. I live not too far and know some of these guys. They are nice people, but are out of touch of reality and have no idea about management of risks. Yes, we need to move the boundaries of science forwards, but let them do it on the moon with this particular experiment, not here on Earth!
Posted by: Fred 30 Mar 2008
Shows what this US lawyer knows!
This US Lawyer must be nuts, what about Fermilab who just happen to be based in the US, they do pretty much the same thing that CERN will be doing once the Large Hadron Collidor gets switched on this year (I hope), is it because the Americans are scared of us as CERN will blow Fermilab out of the water? As for these black holes, does he not realise they will be so tiny you could fit one billion of them into your fingernail and due to the lack of energy created will dissipate very quickly and so in all honesty there is nothing to worry about. If the LHC at CERN can find the Higgs Boson, that would push particle physics forward into the future so lets not let some pathetic petition ruin it for us.
Posted by: Amy 30 Mar 2008
Its only 2 days away!
The May date is a lie!!! I have been studying CERN and their agenda for about 7 years now.
Posted by: neil 29 Mar 2008
Nuclear Safety Officer?
Walter L. Wagner if you look is a Nuclear Safety Officer in the same way Homer Simpson is! His claim to fame is that Frank Wilczek made the mistake of engaging him in discussion over his theories prior to the start up of the RHIC at brookhaven. Even though it's clear Wilczek in his responses was humouring Wagner and explaing the implausability of his suggestions. Wagner has since used this publication in SciAm as an endorsement of his theories, when this has never been the case. Looking through the web at some of Wagner self aggrandisment, it's clear he believes he his quite an eminent physcist, yet amongst all of this information is not one single peer reviewed published article, which I think puts this law suit in perspective.
Posted by: Cuthbert 29 Mar 2008
Former nuclear safety officer. . .
Wait, wasn't that Homer Simpson's job. . ..
Posted by: bennyprofane 28 Mar 2008