Strangelets

[Bettina]

How true is this.... Can the LHC produce a particle that could be dangerous? I know the tiny black holes would evaporate pretty quickly but what about some unknown particles not thought of. Like some surprise that won't go away.

 

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2006/09/10/3371.aspx

 

Bee

[ecoli]

This won't answer your question, but the sci-fi novel, Cosm, by Gregory Benford, tries to depict a certain scenerio. Not at LHC, but with RHIC at Brookhaven national labs.

 

http://www.harpercollins.com/books/9780380790524/Cosm/index.aspx

[Rocket Man]

when i was reading about the LHC, i found that there is a team of scientists devoted to doomsaying for just such a scenario or the possibility of something going terribly wrong and punching a hole in our side of the galaxy...

again, it doesnt answer the question but there are a number of people making a profit from the notion.

[insane_alien]

there are a few speculations on this.

 

1. black holes are created and devour the earth.

yes blackholes could be created(and i think probably have been already) but are so tiny that they evapourate very very quickly

 

2. we cause the vacuum to "drop" a few energy levels thereby changing the laws of physics.

if that happens we're f****d and so is the rest of the universe. not much anybody would be able to do.

[Locrian]

Theorists in particle physics have about thirty years of doing a superbly awful job predicting anything anyone measures before it's measured. This problem has seemed to get worse, not better. Whether or not what the LHC is doing is dangerous (certainly not), the fact that some guy somewhere predicted something bad might happen can be ignored, since there is no good reason to think he's anywhere within the realm of reality.

[Severian]

Theorists in particle physics have about thirty years of doing a superbly awful job predicting anything anyone measures before it's measured. This problem has seemed to get worse, not better. Whether or not what the LHC is doing is dangerous (certainly not), the fact that some guy somewhere predicted something bad might happen can be ignored, since there is no good reason to think he's anywhere within the realm of reality.

So the predictions of QCD, the running of alpha_s, the W and Z bosons, the top quark, the gyromagnetic ratios of the electron and muon, the rho parameter, and countless predictions of cross-sections and widths have all been rubbish, have they?

 

The problem in the last 30 years has been that the theory has been too good. We have been unable to find any (or very little) deviation from it because it predicts the right answers almost every time!

[YT2095]

Fascinating!

 

although I doubt they`ll post My comment, I`m all for it Go CERN!

[[Tycho?]]

Theorists in particle physics have about thirty years of doing a superbly awful job predicting anything anyone measures before it's measured. This problem has seemed to get worse, not better. Whether or not what the LHC is doing is dangerous (certainly not), the fact that some guy somewhere predicted something bad might happen can be ignored, since there is no good reason to think he's anywhere within the realm of reality.

 

Step 1: learn something about physics.

Step 2: post on a forum.

 

You have mastered the second step, but the first step needs some review time. The Standard Model has been extremely successful at predicting the existance of particles.

[Spyman]

Theorists in particle physics have about thirty years of doing a superbly [str]awful[/str'] job predicting anything anyone measures before it's measured. This problem has seemed to get worse, not better. Whether or not what the LHC is doing is dangerous (certainly not), the fact that some guy somewhere predicted something bad might happen can be ignored, since there is no good reason to think he's anywhere within the realm of reality.

awful = terribly

 

I don't think that was what you meant because your post makes more sense with "awful" removed.

[YT2095]

LOL, they posted my comment