CERN LHC = danger?

Link: http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/news_digest/Scientists_throw_spanner_into_Big_Bang_machine.html?siteSect=104&sid=9624345&cKey=1219930577000&ty=nd

This is a quote from an article published on 28.08.08 on Swissinfo.ch:

'A group of researchers is seeking to block the planned launch of the world's most powerful particle accelerator near the Swiss-French border.

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), housed in a circular tunnel near Geneva, will try to recreate conditions just after the so-called Big Bang - the presumed birth of the universe.

Opponents of the experiment, due to begin on September 10, say it will result in black holes that could suck up the Earth.'

The article Ends with:
'The European Organization for Nuclear Research (Cern) denies the experiment is irresponsible and risky'

Read the full article at:
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/news_digest/Scientists_throw_spanner_into_Big_Bang_machine.html?siteSect=104&sid=9624345&cKey=1219930577000&ty=nd

Link: http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2008/08/suit-alleges-cern-in-violation-of-human.html

This is a quote from an article published on Wednesday 27.08.2008 on BigScienceNews Blog by Alan Gillis:

'Yesterday, a group of LHC critics filed a suit against CERN in the European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg . The authors of the suit are physicists, professors and students largely from Germany and Austria, who feel that the operation of the $10 billion Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, poses grave risks for the safety and well-being of the 27 member states of the European Union and their citizens. The Rule of Law, the suit states, is also threatened. The legal arguments that define the legitimacy of the suit appear clear-cut, and have been crafted in German by a well known Professor of International Law, Adrian Hollaender.'

And later in the article:
'What might occur at the LHC, is a new type of Bosenova from what amounts to a BEC used there as a coolant, an ultracold Superfluid Helium II, of about 60 metric tonnes in the LHC ring, and a further 60 tonnes of somewhat warmer Superfluid Helium I in refrigeration plants on the surface connected to the subterranean main ring. Whether possible or not is unknown, no experiments having been done by CERN to rule out the possibility, nor any theoretical model studies. The Bosenova risk was first raised in an article by Alan Gillis in the on-line science magazine, ScientificBlogging, July 2, 2008, "Superfluids, BECs and Bosenovas: The Ultimate Experiment".'

The article Ends with a reference to the Lawsuit placed in Hawaii:
'A similar suit is before the US court in Hawaii, launched by Dr Walter Wagner and Dr Luis Sancho, against CERN and Fermilab, court in session September 2nd. '

Read the full article at:
http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2008/08/suit-alleges-cern-in-violation-of-human.html

This is a quote from Cosmiclog:

Doomsday fears spark lawsuit
Posted: Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:00 AM by Alan Boyle

The Poster gives a introduction to the LHC:

'The builders of the world's biggest particle collider are being sued in federal court over fears that the experiment might create globe-gobbling black holes or never-before-seen strains of matter that would destroy the planet.

Representatives at Fermilab in Illinois and at Europe's CERN laboratory, two of the defendants in the case, say there's no chance that the Large Hadron Collider would cause such cosmic catastrophes. Nevertheless, they're bracing to defend themselves in the courtroom as well as the court of public opinion.

Then: 'What is the nature of dark matter? Are there extra dimensions of space out there that we haven't yet detected?'

The main risks cited in the Lawsuit are quoted as:

* Runaway black holes: Some physicists say the LHC could create microscopic black holes that would hang around for just a tiny fraction of a second and then decay. Sancho and Wagner worry that millions of black holes might somehow persist and coalesce into a compact gravitational mass that would draw in other matter and grow bigger. That's pure science fiction, said Michio Kaku, a theoretical physicist at the City College of New York. "These black holes don't live very long, and they have microscopic energy, and so they are harmless," he told me.

* Strangelets: Smashing protons together at high enough energies could create new combinations of quarks, the particles that protons are made of. Sancho and Wagner worry that a nasty combination known as a stable, negatively charged strangelet could theoretically turn everything it touches into strangelets as well. Kaku compared this to the ancient myth of the Midas touch. "We see no evidence of this bizarre theory," he said. "Once in a while, we trot it out to scare the pants off people. But it's not serious."

The cosmic-ray argument has been applied to the black-hole and strangelet scenarios as well. If such dangerous things can be created, why haven't they already eaten up Earth, along with other planets, stars or whole galaxies in the billions of years since the universe arose? To answer that question, Sancho and Wagner pose a counterargument: Perhaps cosmic-ray collisions really are creating tiny black holes or strangelets, but those little bits of doomsday zip by too fast to cause any trouble.

Release of the new report is 'imminent':
'CERN spokesman James Gillies told me that a 2003 assessment of the doomsday scenarios was being updated with the new information. Release of that updated report - the one that Sancho and Wagner apparently have been waiting for - is "imminent," Gillies told me.'

Then he does the reality check:
'Saying something is absolutely impossible doesn't always come easy. Some scientists find it difficult to state categorically that such-and-such a theoretical catastrophe has no chance of happening, and Fermilab spokeswoman Judy Jackson told me that the doomsayers have "cynically distorted" that natural reluctance to rule out even the most outlandish theoretical possibilities.'

Source: Cosmic Log
Link: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/27/823924.aspx

This is a quote from the internet:

'I once interviewed a physicist who had written an article for a popular publication telling us not to worry. His reasons were not clear from the article, so I asked him over lunch. It was a stimulating conversation, he seemed to be a nice guy, and he paid for lunch. His reason turned out to be that he did not believe in any kind of black hole. As he said, "When an equation goes to infinity, that is a sign that there is something wrong with the equation." He has a point, and he might just be right. But that is not what most physicists believe. I applaud him for his theoretical creativity. I understand why he might not be personally concerned. But he doesn't quite realize that he is betting the Earth, and telling others it is okay to bet the Earth, based on a theory that many would question.

Scientists are used to testing theories carefully. In order to publish, data need to be statistically significant, and they need to pass peer review. They tend to think like this about risk too, wanting it to be proven before they will believe it. (Consider, "The risk is only 50%, that is not proven, so we will launch.") To address this, risk specialists have developed what they call the precautionary principle. The precautionary principle reverses the burden of proof in areas of scientific risk. Precaution does not need to prove risks to a high degree of confidence. Rather, the burden of proof is on those who propose risky experiments, to show that they are safe. The precautionary principle has been touted by many risk specialists, and has been formally accepted by the European Union, the home of CERN. Unfortunately, many scientists are not used to this type of thinking, are not aware of the precautionary principle, or if aware do not like it. Even those who accept it are sometimes reluctant to apply it. Even though the precautionary principle has been formally adopted by the European Union, EU functionaries are currently passing the buck as to who is responsible for its implementation.

The Large Hadron Collider at CERN is Europe's moon shot. They have spent billions. It will bring them back to the preeminence in physics they enjoyed in 1910, when Einstein and Bohr and Heisenberg were all Europeans. Also, a sizable portion of the world's physicists are working on the LHC, or on theories that will be impacted by the LHC. They are reluctant to hear that it might have a problem. If that problem is a low probability risk, that is a risk they are willing to take, or rather willing to ignore.

This is a quote from the site of LHCconcern:

'Why we're concerned

• Raising the questions that need to be asked •

What are we talking about?

In May of 2008 the largest, most expensive scientific experiment, The Large Hadron Collider will be completed. This mechanical behemoth located along the French and Swiss border with a total estimated circumference of 17 miles will be the most powerful particle accelerator in existence. The principal behind a particle accelerator is that by speeding up the smallest elements of matter and then colliding them together that they can be broken down further into even smaller fundamental particles, just as Atoms were once thought to be the smallest units, so then were Quarks(Up and Down), Electrons, and Protons discovered.

The Large Hadron Collide is hoped to discover what is referred to as the "Higgs Boson". Although a theoretical scalar particle theorized by Peter Higgs in 1974, it is actually a member of the standard model, and it is believed that the Higgs Boson is what gives matter "mass". To achieve the observation of the Higgs Boson, the LHC will be smashing these Hadrons (specifically Protons) together at speeds almost unimaginable to the average person, at near c( .99999999 % the speed of light).

To quantify the types of collisions, it must be pointed out that two beams will be set to collide with each other, each beam of protons contains roughly 2,800 Protons with an energy of 7 TeV (1 Teraelectron Volt = 1.60217646 x 10-7 joules) so the combined energies will be 14 TeV. Although such energies in collisions are certainly occurring every day in space, this will be the first time that energies such as these will be observed on Earth, however what is alarming to us are the myriad of other possibilities that could arise.

And then the site quotes an excerpt from Safety at the LHC

"If the LHC can produce microscopic black holes, cosmic rays of much higher energies would already have produced many more. Since the Earth is still here, there is no reason to believe that collisions inside the LHC are harmful. "

'So, what's the problem', the article then asks:

'In theory (according to Hawking Radiation) any Black Hole created would evaporate in Femtoseconds, not having the chance to accrete any mass, and being essentially harmless, although this is comforting in theory, It has never been proven, and in fact has been questioned before. The problem is that although most people in the physics community believe in Hawkings Radiation, it has no basis in observation. In 2003 Adam D. Helfer Published a paper concerning Hawking's Radiation coming to the conclusion that Hawking's Radiation may in fact be incorrect, and that a Black Hole would not lose mass in such a way. (For the full text of this document go here Paper By Adam D. Helfer on Hawking Radiation.)

But, the article then says:

This actually brings me back to a second point raised, referred to as the mosquito analogy, where CERN describes the collisions as having the force of a mosquito, however this also logistically differs from CERN's own analogy of the LHC as "recreating the conditions shortly after the Big Bang Singularity", but this also affects the size and force requirements of such MBH's, so that analogy falls apart as well.'

Source: lhc concerns
Link: http://www.lhcconcerns.com/