...kudos guys (and gals), a real achievement, unprecedented like all the rest of the records that have been broken. I trust the adolescents of Zambia huffing Jenkam are in sympathetic resignation or euphoric abandon to what this advancement must mean to you and your collegues. And what about the stated claims that the accelerator is meant to study the behaviours of cosmic rays by recreating the energetic signatures of similar collisions in the ionosphere. Here as reported by the Safety Council of the Large Hadron Collider (LSAG):
The safety of the LHC
The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) can achieve an energy that no other particle accelerators have reached before, (fwshh...bang!) but Nature routinely produces higher energies in cosmic-ray collisions. (fucking nature) Concerns about the safety of whatever (whatever) may be created in such high-energy particle collisions have been addressed for many years. (many like 50?) In the light of new experimental data and theoretical understanding, (now, does this mean, what do you mean experimental data and theoretical understanding? oh right, oh i see now... i thought...sorry, i swear i'll shutup now) the LHC Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) has updated a review of the analysis made in 2003 by the LHC Safety Study Group, a group of independent scientists.
LSAG reaffirms and extends the conclusions of the 2003 report that LHC collisions present no danger and that there are no reasons for concern. Whatever the LHC will do, Nature has already done many times over during the lifetime of the Earth and other astronomical bodies. The LSAG report has been reviewed and endorsed by CERN’s Scientific Policy Committee, a group of external scientists that advises CERN’s governing body, its Council.
Cosmic rays
The LHC, like other particle accelerators, recreates the natural phenomena of cosmic rays under controlled laboratory conditions, enabling them to be studied in more detail. Cosmic rays are particles produced in outer space, some of which are accelerated to energies far exceeding those of the LHC. The energy and the rate at which they reach the Earth’s atmosphere have been measured in experiments for some 70 years. Over the past billions of years, Nature has already generated on Earth as many collisions as about a million LHC experiments – and the planet still exists. Astronomers observe an enormous number of larger astronomical bodies throughout the Universe, all of which are also struck by cosmic rays. The Universe as a whole conducts more than 10 million million LHC-like experiments per second. The possibility of any dangerous consequences contradicts what astronomers see - stars and galaxies still exist.
Here we are meant to be reassured of the accelerator's innocuous nature. Here they are essentially saying is that nature does it, so why can't they. Hey, why not? I think I can answer that: Simply put, because the universe has a lot more space and time on us, not to mention practice and because it would appear that nature knows what it's doing and you don't that's why. Maybe nature already had existence collapse in on itself 10 million million times over by creating us and allowing us to fuck around with a 7tev particle accelerator. Nature didn't figure out what to do on a chalkboard, it figured out what to do by figuring out what not to do first just like us, and the time-honored and almost unbiquitously metaphoric concept of natural selection as a means to an end of orchestral harmony and unfathomable complexity and diversity. Unfortunately, this time we may be looking at something that won't qualify as a learning experience. No explanation is good enough for me. Interstellar phenomena is a collection of apparently drastically underrated transfers of energy, and exchanges of matter that have stabilized into a state of relative equalibrium that is at least for now, safe enough or far enough away to sustain our existence. If my existence has become dependent on some guy in a white lab coat remembering to carrying a one, mistaking a variable for a value, or dropping a zero where he should have... on to the potential threats. Initially i thought we were only looking at:
Microscopic black holes
Nature forms black holes when certain stars, much larger than our Sun, collapse on themselves at the end of their lives. They concentrate a very large amount of matter in a very small space. Speculations about microscopic black holes at the LHC refer to particles produced in the collisions of pairs of protons, each of which has an energy comparable to (and i can assure you this will not be the last of these) that of a mosquito in flight. (which happens to be more than enough to destroy the earth many times over and send it's moon careening off it's trajectory into the sun right along with all of our ghastly cooked theoretical presuppositions) Astronomical black holes are much heavier than anything that could be produced at the LHC.
According to the well-established properties of gravity, described by Einstein’s relativity, it is impossible for microscopic black holes to be produced at the LHC. There are, however, some speculative theories that predict the production of such particles at the LHC. All these theories predict that these particles would disintegrate immediately. Black holes, therefore, would have no time to start accreting matter and to cause macroscopic effects. Although theory predicts (theoretically predicts) that microscopic black holes decay rapidly, even hypothetical (hypthothetically) stable black holes can be shown to be harmless by studying (studying) the consequences of their production by cosmic rays. Whilst collisions at the LHC differ from cosmic-ray collisions with astronomical bodies like the Earth in that new particles produced in LHC collisions tend (tend) to move more slowly than those produced by cosmic rays, one can still demonstrate (one can still... is equivalent to a potential reality) their safety. The specific reasons for this depend (on) whether the black holes are electrically charged, or neutral. Many stable black holes would be (would be) expected to be electrically charged, since they are created by charged particles. In this case (if this were true then we could reliably assume that) they would interact with ordinary matter and be stopped while traversing the Earth or Sun, whether produced by cosmic rays or the LHC. (and for the coup de grat catchall rationale which we haven't seen the last of) The fact that the Earth and Sun are still here rules out the possibility that cosmic rays or the LHC could produce dangerous charged microscopic black holes. If stable microscopic black holes had no electric charge, their interactions with the Earth would be very weak. Those produced by cosmic rays would pass harmlessly through the Earth into space, whereas those produced by the LHC could remain on Earth. (remain on earth, mmm.. we're okay with that right?) However, there are much larger and denser astronomical bodies than the Earth in the Universe. Black holes produced in cosmic-ray collisions with bodies such as neutron stars and white dwarf stars would be brought to rest. The continued existence of such dense bodies, as well as the Earth, (here they are citing the continued existence of the earth again) rules out the possibility of the LHC producing any dangerous black holes.
so okay, microscopic black holes are unstable and will theoretically collapse so were out of the woods right? Spain, France, Morocco, Portugal, Greece -you're powers going to be off for a minute, we're exploring the deepest most fundamental questions of the universe and we expect to then still be around to do the conducting of some similarly comprehensive inquiry and analysis of the results, put your meats and dairys on ice.
Strangelet (wait strangelet... hehe that's an endearing name for a what is a strangelet) is the term given to a hypothetical (hypothetical?) microscopic lump (is that a technical term?) of ‘strange matter’ (okay so you don't really know either that's why you named it a strangelet!) containing almost equal numbers of particles called up, down and strange quarks. (which you said are things that don't "exist" in the traditional sense either, just like the thing that they make when they get together with each other) According to most theoretical work, strangelets should (there's that word again) change to ordinary matter within a thousand-millionth of a second. But could strangelets coalesce with ordinary matter and change it to strange matter? (hmmm... i give up -tell me!) This question was first raised before the start up of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, RHIC, in 2000 in the United States. A study at the time showed that there was no cause for concern, and RHIC has now run for eight years, searching for strangelets without detecting any. (i thought they were hypothetical) At times, the LHC will run with beams of heavy nuclei, just as RHIC does. The LHC’s beams will have more energy than RHIC, but this makes it even less likely that strangelets could form. (but more likely that something else will which is why you're doing the goddamed experiment in the first place! you don't know what's going to happen! you must be after something unknown, something missing, and you'll stop at nothing to nail it down you poorly-adjusted adolescent-minded gamertards, you can't have sex with the answer once you have it and that's the not-fucking point! get in your planned obsolescence-equipped subaru and go find someplace to get laid and leave the big questions to the next generation of idiots that just had to take it on. you're not going to get famous anyway, you're team leader's going to take all the credit you know that) It is difficult for strange matter to stick together in the high temperatures produced by such colliders, (wait for the brilliant analogy) rather as ice does not form in hot water. (yesss, something we can all understand) In addition, quarks will be more dilute at the LHC than at RHIC, making it more difficult to assemble strange matter. Strangelet production at the LHC is therefore less likely than at RHIC, and experience there has already validated the arguments that strangelets cannot be produced.
there's more? holy shit.
Vacuum Bubble
There have been speculations that the Universe is not in its most stable configuration, and that perturbations caused by the LHC could tip it into a more stable state, called a vacuum bubble, in which we could not exist. If the LHC could do this, then so could cosmic-ray collisions. Since such vacuum bubbles have not been produced anywhere in the visible Universe, they will not be made by the LHC.
concision, we like that. so you're all done then well, i don't know what all the fuss is about, I had myself all worked up for noth...
Magnetic Monopoles
...Magnetic monopoles (magnetic whats?) are hypothetical particles with a single magnetic charge, either a north pole or a south pole. (does santa have a workshop there too?) Some speculative theories suggest that, if they do exist, magnetic monopoles could cause protons to decay. (we need them right? or no) These theories also say that such monopoles would be too heavy to be produced at the LHC. Nevertheless, if the magnetic monopoles were light enough to appear at the LHC, cosmic rays striking the Earth’s atmosphere would already be making them, (who's making them....why I'll...!?) and the Earth would very effectively stop and trap them. (say it with me...) The continued existence of the Earth and other astronomical bodies therefore rules out dangerous proton-eating magnetic monopoles light enough to be produced at the LHC.
we're not done yet..
Runaway Fusion Reaction
Concern has recently been expressed that a 'runaway fusion reaction' might be created in the LHC carbon beam dump. (you can read about this on your own if you're interested)
...and as if that weren't enough of a categorical dispelling of mythical concerns, heretical uncertainty and heresay:
Bose-Nova
Finally, (more) concern has also been expressed that the LHC beam might somehow trigger a '' in the liquid helium used to cool the LHC magnets. (in the same fashion that stan goetz may cools our jets after a hectic day shouting at inept subordinates) A study by Fairbairn and McElrath has clearly shown there is no possibility of the LHC beam triggering a fusion reaction in helium. We recall (we do?) that 'Bose-Novae' are known to be related to chemical reactions that release an infinitesimal amount of energy by nuclear standards. We also recall that helium is one of the most stable elements known, and that liquid helium has been used in many previous particle accelerators (a people accelerators like gentle blimps) without mishap. (sorry, that's confusing: they don't mean blimp mishaps) The facts that helium is chemically inert and has no nuclear spin imply that no 'Bose-Nova' can be triggered in the superfluid helium used in the LHC.
Well, I'm ready for bed. I'm feeling a little sick and tired of all this rhetorical bullshit! I suppose if (let's suppose that) I weren't familiar with the idea of suppositionally determinative, mutually dependent protofactual nonsense and hadn't had a fucking doctorate in (where and) what people won't stop saying, doing, pleading and protesting (at exactly nowhere) to further their own rediculous interests, I might lap this up like a dog eat's litter encrusted exclusively meat and peanut butter cat diarrhea shit. I'm no theoretical phycisist, but if I were, I'd still look upon this thing learily, even if I knew what these guys are referring to and which they've done a terrible (and illustrative device poor) job of explaining. I'm almost afraid to ask what the purpose of all this is because I think I already know the answer. 7 billion dollars later, and we have nothing but 4 years and counting years of delays and their attendant costs, and are still left lot of unanswered questions namely, whether or not this will be the last question we ever ask of our universe. It used to be that if you had a question that didn't have an answer you just went on your whole life wondering, most good questions, even the one (one or perhaps a few) that will be answered by revving this contraption up to full tilt, will only give way to a bunch more questions, until we're a just a bunch of depraved melancholic people who can't sit with what will one way or another ultimately be failure in fully satisfying runaway curiosity. Fuck this particle accelerator (there I said it), what about the next honking heap of scrap metal and glass I'm sure they're already planning. They'll just print more money and put it up along with a few new nuclear power plants nearby to run it. And after that? Go dig a lot of deep holes in your backyard and fill them back in when you get an insatiable compulsion to tear apart space and time in the name of science -fucking amateurs. Experimentation is fucking around with guys in college, not maybe, oh and by the way, creating a small black hole that we're pretty sure, even almost entirely sure will collapse in one half of a trillionth of a millisecond, and not gather momentum instead and swallow the earth and nearby galaxies in 6 seconds. Get a Porsche and go find a curvy road upstate. Leave you're imagination alone goddamn it! You're not going to destroy it no matter what you have an answer for. Resolve to stay mystified now. I for one don't want the answer, whatever you find out, you can keep it to yourself, I'll be off trying to do something 40 lifetimes worth of impossible that I could've done with 7 billion dollars and an auditorium full of brilliant researchers, in 4 minutes. Fuck off and take your charts and graphs with you.
for the sadists among you, you can dredge up more fact-based horseshit at: http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/Safety-en.html