One, extra dimensions do not exist. Two, they exist, but they are smaller than expected. Or three, the parameters of gravity's rainbow need to be modifiedOr four, the extradimensions are so widespread, they evade the attention, because the darkest shadow is just under the candlestick. BTW even the finding of Higgs boson belongs into evidence of extradimensions conceptually. The physicists indeed don't expect, that the true black holes will be prepared, because such an artifacts would be very unstable even by existing schematic theories. So that they can expect only slight delay between decay of intermediate product of collisions and the symmetrization of the resulting jets of decay products (analogously to jets of real decaying black holes). But this is just the way, in which the Higgs boson gets detected in product of collisions: the search for symmetry in decay products. The physicists just don't realize it, because they're burrowed under pile of math and abstract models.
Parallel universes?
That would explain some of the commenters here.
"Absolutely nothing can explain you."
sums up your comprehension of science, oracle
Go the hell awayThe karma of my comment indicates, that the LHC represents a gold cow for too many physicists, theorists and private companies involved, which they're not willing to discuss about at all. I'm hitting the surface of social black hole here - no information can be exchanged...;-)
...the LHC represents a gold cow...
You don't know how science worksOr maybe I know about it too well.. At any case, nobody here is interested about my arguments, which speaks for itself. I don't owe the scientists anything: now we are on the verge of nuclear war just because of their ignorance of cold fusion. Their social responsibility in this matter is zero.
Dethe, we do not need arguments, we need PROOFTry to prove me, that the common particles or atom nuclei are NOT mini black holes in the sense of extradimensional gravity model, instead. It's YOU who wants the money for their research - not me. BTW I'm not doing it for making money, but for saving money in futile research - so I cannot consider the support of scientists, who are motivated in their spending in this way or another. I can never get an appreciation of scientists for my activity.
But I do understand, how science works
I think Dethe is projecting his own character onto science.
I think Dethe is projecting his own character onto science.Well you do this when you make up your own facts and then cite your vast treasure of unrelated, alleged experience as qualification for doing this. you know like how high energy alpha cant penetrate skin for instance?
otto, if you had any experience in this field, you would slink away in embarrassmentNo, if you had any formal education in the field you would have known better than to tack the 'HIGH ENERGY' qualifier onto your statement about alpha. You did that just to make it appear as if you knew more about the subject than you actually did.
I'm going to find out where you live and secretly step on your lawn.Sorry I dont have a lawn. Why dont you just apologize and admit youre wrong when somebody catches you lying and making stuff up? It would save you a lot of trouble.
I'm going to find out where you live and secretly step on your lawn.
Try to prove me, that the common particles or atom nuclei are NOT mini black holesOne doesn't have to know much science or logic to know that the burden of proof always lies with the one making the claim. Should you accept my assertion that there is an extraterrestrial alien base on Pluto, just because you can't prove there isn't one? Of course not, it's absurd. So you, what?--had some psilocybin flash of inspiration that atomic nuclei are somehow mini black holes, and you expect everyone to accept that just because you strongly believe it's true, despite having no evidence to support the claim? Don't have to know much science to know that's not how it works. How do you explain radioactive decay, then? What would give your mini BH nucleus a positive charge for electrons to bind to? I'm not a physicist, but it's easy to see that your claim leaves a bucketful of unanswered questions.
Let me translate:
"We've discovered Jimmy Hoffa's remains at CERN"
or in the alternative
"We'll say anything for continued funding!"
I'm going to find out where you live and secretly step on your lawn.
Aren't black holes something that absorbs everything so if you start creating them in the LHC are we risking the earth getting sucked in?
but that contradicts the laymen definition of black hole
The real 'sucky' effect only occurs close to and beyond the event horizon (for a solar mass that would be a region a few tens of kilometers accross where you'd actually be in trouble in a spaceship - and only 6km accross where there's no turning back)This is naive belief, until the resulting black holes will be charged and magnetic - they would exhibit additional forces and fields, which would greatly accelerate their sucking effects. It has been proven already with astronomical observations, BTW.
The popularity of Kung Fu movies is a sign of increasing violent tension of existing world too, so I really don't understand the philosophy and mental state of yours. Not to say, you're normal spammer.
Please come back to realityThe reality is, this discussion is not about kung-fu spam, but about miniblack holes at LHC...
Please come back to realityThe reality is, this discussion is not about kung-fu spam, but about miniblack holes at LHC...
For something created at CERN the energies would be so low that the event horizon would be really small. The chance of something like that hitting an atom is very low. There are cosmic rays of larger energies around. If they were dangerous the Earth, and stuff in general, would long have ceased to exist.... in theory.
The extradimensions indeed exist and they're all around us. The formation of true black holes would be dangerous for terresterial life and such an experiments should be stopped ASAP. Fortunately the scientists don't understand their own theories and the hyperdimensional artifacts stabilized with extradimensions are produced at LHC routinely - it's various new particles and antimatter atoms. http://www.reddit.../ca3oc32 I'm illustrating, how the physicists systematically overlook the well established phenomena during search of effects confirming their theories.
But I do understand, how the science works - it's job creating and money consuming activity, in the same way like many others, which are subsidized with governments@the idiot ZEPHIR
The dense aether model just makes it obvious@Dunning-Kruger ZEPHIR the idiot troll
LHC. Billions of wasted dollars hunting snipe....@cantthinkforhimself
Actually Dethe has no lawn, because he is living in flat. But if somebody is planing a trip to Prague, he can say Hello to Dethe. Here is his name, adress, email and phone number:@Ultron
Admin Name:Milan Petrik
Admin Organization:Milan Petrik
Admin Street: Molakova 34/577
Admin City:Praha 8
Admin Postal Code:18600
Admin Country:CZ
Admin Phone:+420.0123456789
Admin Email: milanpetrik@atlas.cz
...@Ultron
Admin Email: milanpetrik@atlas.cz
ROTFLMFAO
you know dethe is actually ZEPHIR right?
LMFAO
should also post the IP address he is using...
oh wait, never mind
he also uses an anonymizer which allows him to avoid being perma-banned except by sites which don't allow them
one more reason to enjoy the fruits of the frog instead of the TROLLS of the PO
what a way to ruin a beautiful city...Prague
i always thought they were progressive and intellectual when i was there... but each city has it's resident idiot... just like a town drunk
LOLOL
This is naive belief, until the resulting black holes will be charged and magnetic - they would exhibit additional forces and fields, which would greatly accelerate their sucking effects.
This being the case how can a plank scale particle mass exhibit Gravity greater than or equal to the speed of light ?
They also state that extra dimensions are a requirement for the energy to be as low as the TeV range.
The reality is, they refuse to accept that Gravity is not constant,
Would I also be right in saying that if mini bh were detected it wouldn't prove SString theory
Is it possible ... assassination?@verkle
Even if they could blast particles together hard enough to force enough energy into one small spot that might otherwise qualify it will instantly come back apart again as there is not going to be enough gravity there to hold it together over the other atomic forces.
Such vacuum structure expalin some electromagnetic fenomena.
Such vacuum structure expalin some electromagnetic fenomena.
this also goes to the scientific content: if you are not sharing from science ......... then you are NOT posting respectfully on a science site, but intentionally trying to goad someone into a flame war
You want math - get a calculator. The only way a black hole forms is to have enough mass to create the intense gravity needed. You are not going to get that intense gravity in a pin spot created by banging protons together in the CERN. That requires a whole lot of mass and it won't be there.
Is this "posting respectfully" on a science site?@Benji-haha
ask him if he can do Differential Equationsbut funny enough, when asked to DEMONSTRATE YOUR OWN ability, you FAIL EPICALLY
You threaten to commit identity theft on me & confronting me at my "doorstep" is respectful? Tell us why YOU are not your own definition of what you label as someone posting disrespectfully?i never threatened to do anything
You just don't know what great fun it is continuing to aggravate you into posting@benjiTROLL
your only college course was that Psychology course you took at that local community college in TexasLMFAO
By the way, almost every housewife in the country also knows how to copy & paste links to other sitesso you are saying you are not even as smart as a housewife?
Math, please.
You want math - get a calculator. The only way a black hole forms is to have enough mass to create the intense gravity needed.
Behind every thought stands mathematics. But the mathematical apparatus known to mankind has no the power to describe all phenomena in the universe. It is at very low level yet.
.......it seems to me that some don't understand the difference between mass and density. It ought to obvious when reading simple algebraic sums where one finds examples of the calculation say for the Earth (Earth BH size of a pea etc.). But these are just math exercise and not to be taken as possible real outcomes.
In principle, a black hole can have any mass equal to or above the Planck mass (about 22 micrograms)https://en.wikipe...ack_hole
preaching to the rest of us how to live but never practicing it yourselfand yet you are preaching and NEVER supporting your conjecture with evidence?
try starting here at my school: http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htmGood school. Maybe a little much for the laytrolls on this blog. Maybe he'd be happier with this, http://motionmountain.net/ - "Wonder and Thrill on Every Page".
Nope, there's just plain old discrimination going on here@baud
calling for "Empirical Evidence"BECAUSE these theories are based upon the physics/math that we KNOW is true (GR/SR) then we can use this to search for observations that match the predictions (as stated)
@Benni depends on how one interprets E=mc² doesn't itNo, it's the math & what occurs when atoms are fissioned or fused....the sum of the parts always equals the whole.
m covertable to E or m is equivalent to an amount of E. If m is vewed as a state of E then a BH would depend upon concentration of E within a particular volumeIt is not "conversion" that takes place via Energy/Mass Equivalence Principle (E=mc²) as calculated in Special Relativity, the correct term is TRANSFORMATION.
So to a lay person like me that would mean if one continued to pour energy into some quantum state then one might end up with a qbh and I assume that LHC might be capable of doing that.This largely depends on what assumptions one makes about the "quantum state", but in the end the sum of the parts must ALWAYS equal the whole, nothing is wasted in the process of TRANSFORMATION, and conversely nothing is created in transformation.
when the EU claims that BH's are not BH's, i ask "where is the evidence" because they are making an ASSumption based upon a pseudoscience or a picture, NOT upon physics or mathBH theories are based on observation, and the mathematics can be created to fit a desired paradigm. There are any number of theories based on the possible physics of what is going on in BH's, so again the physics can only provide possible explanations, but no proof. So, while I agree that black holes exist, because we can see evidence of them, answers to questions pertaining to why they exist is still largely the product of creative thinking, as are any ideas to the contrary, and all of these ideas are equally valid until the empirical evidence tells us otherwise.
BH theories are based on observationYep, there are some pretty well done observations about very fast orbiting stars at the very center of our MW. They certainly act like they're doing everything they can to avoid falling into something with very high gravity.
and the mathematics can be created to fit a desired paradigmJust as Einstein did when he calculated gravitational lensing long before it was observed.
There are any number of theories based on the possible physics of what is going on in BH's, so again the physics can only provide possible explanations, but no proofAgree with you there, there may be some answers here that the infrared JWT will give us.
while I agree that black holes exist, because we can see evidence of them, answers to questions pertaining to why they exist is still largely the product of creative thinking.... and all of these ideas are equally valid until the empirical evidence tells us otherwise.Seems reasonable.
You'd have to be a moron to think it will be different the next time, and king of the morons if you believe you are learning anything about "the nature of matter" in these experiments.
Dethe
Mar 18, 2015