digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at news.wired.com

Scientists: Atom Smasher Won't Spawn Scary Black Holes

news.wired.com — The most powerful atom-smasher ever built could make some bizarre discoveries, such as invisible matter or extra dimensions in space, after it is switched on in August.But some critics fear the Large Hadron Collider could exceed physicists' wildest conjectures: Will it spawn a black hole that could swallow Earth?

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • alwaysdeparting, on 06/29/2008, -16/+76Man, the people who think the LHC would spawn a black hole are exactly the same as the people who thought the nuclear bomb would burn away the world's oceans or punch a hole in the earth's crust. The only people who complain are those who have no grasp of the mechanics and subscribe to pseudo-scientific mania.
    • AboveandBeyond, on 06/29/2008, -4/+53a nuclear bomb can burn away the ocean and punch a hole in the earth crust.
    • danharlow, on 06/29/2008, -0/+44There was an open bet by the Los Alamos scientists themselves as to if they might set the atmosphere on fire.

      Still, I get your point, it's just that your analogy is poor.
      • TheStrongForce, on 06/30/2008, -0/+1The observers set up betting pools on the results of the test. Predictions ranged from zero, a complete dud, to 18 kilotons of TNT (predicted by physicist I. I. Rabi, who won the bet[8]), to destruction of the state of New Mexico, to ignition of the atmosphere and incineration of the entire planet (this last result had been calculated to be almost impossible, although for a while it caused some of the scientists some anxiety).

        I would have posted that but, you beat me.
    • fas2, on 06/29/2008, -4/+16The only concern is that you just cannot know what might happen. You can try to predict, but it could turn out totally different than you ever imagined.
      • Lavarock, on 06/29/2008, -3/+3Yes, don't sneeze, you never know...
      • fas2, on 06/29/2008, -2/+7Did I say I was against the experiments? I don't think so.
        Plus, your analogy is not really good. Billions of people have sneezed before. But no one ever smashed particles with that amount of energy.
      • Lloope, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Particles with that amount of energy smash into earth's atmosphere every second.
      • fas2, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1@Lloope : Source, please? As far as I know, cosmic rays hit earth with about 1GeV. The protons at the large hadron collider will have an energy of about 7TeV.
      • Ramble, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_rays

        Up to 10^20 Ev just from the sun.
      • theguesser10, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Yes, that's called science. Science is finding out what happens though, not saying a black hole will magically appear.
    • getmeawhopper, on 06/29/2008, -1/+10They're just the conspiracy theory community, I was chatting to my uncle this week who is a big conspiracy theory nut and this is one of their big fears at the moment. Oh and that this group HAARP caused the earthquake in China with some sort of billion watt 'death-ray'! Its like how the Digg community is fixated on Ron Paul, Obama, NSFW, xkcd, lolcats, firefox, LINUX, etc. If you're a conspiracy theorist, you fixate on Nikola Tesla, HAARP, neocons, UFOs, 9/11, monitoring devices, tin foil hats and giant lizards!
      • cloak419, on 06/29/2008, -0/+12Reptillians actually.
      • chlyon, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2lol
      • mnky9800n, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Yes, they come out of the holes in the north and south poles from there vast underground cities. That is why we can't fly over the poles without government permission. George Bush is a Reptillian soon to be replaced by the Obama reptillian!

        /s
      • DukeMojo, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2I fixate on Tesla even though I'm not a conspiracy nut.
    • sk11, on 06/29/2008, -0/+13The crazies are just worked up because of the date, we're close to 2012 (?), which is when the world is supposed to end or something. Besides Y2K turned out to be a major disappointment to the nutjobs in the world, so they're hoping for something sometime soon.
      • lazyrussian, on 06/29/2008, -5/+1The magnetic poles start shifting in 2012 - that's all that happens.
        Byproduct: Major climate change.
      • chlyon, on 06/29/2008, -12/+2in 2012 the Mayans predict that the calendar will end IE the old 365 days a yr will no longer be true maybe more maybe less. why ? cos threes a large planet heading our way (8 or so earth masses). which will upset the panets tilt , crust etc etc . So you maybe asking why no ones seen this planet x well the answer is they have ! . in 1984 NASA said they had found it using a satellite called IRAS (scientists know there is another planet in our solar system due to Gav wobbles in the outer planet) but then a month later they denie finding it . So its not quite the end of the Earth but your probably going to die in 2012 from the solar flares solar lightning , gamma radiation and o yea almost forgot the 1-2 km high tidal waves caused by the insanely high Gav pull of the approaching planet .
        and if you survive all that you wont have any food to eat and your be at the mercy of your government officials .. can someone say id chips for food ?. I could go on but look it up 4 yourself :) in you tube
      • chlyon, on 06/29/2008, -10/+1in 2012 the Mayans predict that the calendar will end IE the old 365 days a yr will no longer be true maybe more maybe less. why ? cos threes a large planet heading our way (8 or so earth masses). which will upset the panets tilt , crust etc etc . So you maybe asking why no ones seen this planet x well the answer is they have ! . in 1984 NASA said they had found it using a satellite called IRAS (scientists know there is another planet in our solar system due to Gav wobbles in the outer planet) but then a month later they denie finding it . So its not quite the end of the Earth but your probably going to die in 2012 from the solar flares solar lightning , gamma radiation and o yea almost forgot the 1-2 km high tidal waves caused by the insanely high Gav pull of the approaching planet .
        and if you survive all that you wont have any food to eat and your be at the mercy of your government officials .. can someone say id chips for food ?. I could go on but look it up 4 yourself :) in you tube
      • mnky9800n, on 06/29/2008, -0/+6I hope that is sarcasm chlyon because otherwise the men in the white lab coats will be at your door soon.
      • directedition, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3This is why we need to set up super-freaky science experiments on Mars.
    • 3leggedHorse, on 06/29/2008, -0/+12Before the first atom bomb was detonated, scientists involved in the Manhattan project admitted they had no idea what would happen when it went off.
      Some thought it might ignite the atmosphere.
      Truth is when trying to open new frontiers weird ***** can happen and stuff can go wrong.
      Personally if it created some cascade effect or black hole that would be cool as *****.
      • RAGEdemon, on 06/29/2008, -3/+11Bunch of idiots. Faster particles hit the earth's atmosphere all the time with no adverse effects.

        If these people had their way, we would still be living in caves.

        "Oh the Sun God will smite us if we don't give him a virgin sacrifice this summer"

        Oh will he indeed?
      • withoutamartyr, on 06/29/2008, -10/+5@RAGEdemon
        Wow, aren't you pretentious.
      • lazyrussian, on 06/29/2008, -1/+7RAGEdemon is right. Neutrinos and Muons are CONSTANTLY bombarding our atmosphere, and they go really ***** fast.

        Blame the sun for the Neutrinos :)
      • pixelguru, on 06/29/2008, -0/+5These ultra-fast particles strike my sock drawer all the time, blinking random socks out of existence. I have the proof upstairs... dozens of single unmatched socks!!!
      • Ramble, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Check the washing machine, there seems to be a high level of radiation in there which causes all sorts of things to disappear.
      • directedition, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Resonance cascade FTW! The free man will save us all!
    • Myztry, on 06/29/2008, -13/+2Turn off the accelerators. The scientists already know what's going to happen, they just enjoy building things.
      It's like nuclear reactions. They happen in nature (on Earth) all the time. If they didn't then they couldn't use particle collisions to trigger them artificially...
      The same with Black Holes, Suns (of varying types), cosmic clouds, etc. When the scientists were there at their creation, a completely different method was used to create them. It was a scientist who made Orien's Belt in MIB.
      It's not like they just sit back and watch these events billions of years after their creation, from a vaste distance and theorize from faint post creation artefacts.
      Rather than a false pretence of understanding, they'd be better off admiting they haven't a clue but have a burning desire to find out. At any cost.
      • Albumen, on 06/29/2008, -0/+13"The same with Black Holes, Suns (of varying types), cosmic clouds, etc. When the scientists were there at their creation, a completely different method was used to create them. It was a scientist who made Orien's Belt in MIB."

        WTF?!? What part of the Matrix are you from? Are Scientists part of a super-race that lives forever like Q from the Continuum? MIB was a movie. It can't be used in a logical argument about science.

        Stop posting while high!!

        My apologies if this was, in fact a stab at Kauffman-esque humor on your part.
      • mnky9800n, on 06/29/2008, -1/+0I just want to know where the nuclear reactions take place on Earth naturally.
      • Myztry, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1LOL. The saracastic (intentionally ludicrous) voicing went straight over peoples heads.
        1. Particle collision events that don't happen in nature, can be induced. eg. Nuclear reactions (explosions). It's an extremely poor argument that keeps getting re-iterated.
        2. Scientist have no understanding of cosmic events (like Blackhole triggers). Science deems observation and testing. You're right. They have neither in order to draw a scientific conclusion. It's all (educated) guess work.

        At this stage, anyones guess is about as good as a scientists guess. But we'll find out soon enough. (At least as far as the LHC. Black Holes and such will still most likely remain a mystery)
      • a3r0, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fissi ...

        (For some reason I can't reply directly)
    • dragonrice, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2By your powers combined, I am Captain Planet!
      • BoneheadFarker, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Oh jeez...Ted Turner's lost it again...
    • mnky9800n, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Captain Planet! He's our hero! Gonna take pollution down to zero!
    • fx666, on 06/29/2008, -3/+4I am a physicist and I concur that these fears are totally unfounded. Some idiots totally misinterpret scientific facts and fuel wild unscientific speculations. Then the general population gets scared and demands to abandon a project, which is a loss to the science.
      • antonio97b, on 06/29/2008, -7/+2Enjoy reading digg in your Moms basement.
    • Brad324, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2the great part about arguing that everything will be safe... is if you're wrong then no-one can rub it in your face.
    • FreshPineSent, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1A nuclear bomb can ignite the atmosphere.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1There's a lot more atom smashing going on at the center of the sun. No black hole.
    • Beakerboy1, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Did anyone else realize that one of the doomsday yahoos was a Physicist/Lawyer? I guess his physics couldn't cut the mustard so he spends his time being a crank. But doing a little light googling turns up the the Physicist/Lawyer from the article only MINORED in physics no MAJOR certainly no GRAD SCHOOL. He is a Lawyer & Botanist who is a self proclaimed nuclear physicist. That hardly gives him the necessary credentials to legitimately attack the LHC at CERN. He uses highly speculative arguments with little to no evidence that these hypothesized phenomena even exist. Any experiment has chance of being dangerous due to some unknown and therefore unplanned for risk. But the risk seem relatively minuscule and the rewards could be great. Since the risks are very small and are much smaller than the rewards, the LHC seems to be a worthy experiment.
    • Iztikeit, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0Yeah, we're going to do what the Dwemer did in Morrowind, remove ourselves from existence!

      That's what I always think about when the overblown destructive tales start arising.
    • puter, on 06/30/2008, -0/+0Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that the scientists at CERN have said that micro blackholes had an 80% chance of being created, and they dismissed them saying that they would evaporate. Problem is that the evaporation has never been proven.

      Oh, and since the particles are being collided at nearly equal but opposite velocities, if a blackhole is created, and it does not evaporate, then it will simply be drawn to the center of the earth.

      The question of whether or not black holes will be created is not the concern the concern is whether or not they will evaporate. I believe it is a valid concern.
  • sgiffy, on 06/29/2008, -4/+74Why is it every time science does something cool, discover evolution, land on the moon, build a huge supercollider, idiots with no understanding of the field jump up and spew nonsense?
    • ThinkBox, on 06/29/2008, -3/+11bu... bu.. but.... the Devil made me do it
      • sgiffy, on 06/29/2008, -0/+13You think he would have been too busy planting all those fossils and junk DNA.
      • Lavarock, on 06/29/2008, -0/+6Complete sidetrack here, but did you know that in the 1490's it was well understood that the Earth was round? In fact, the source of concern among crew and financiers was that without a landmass somewhere in between (such as America) Columbus would have rightly died at sea on his way to India. The size of the Earth itself was known to a reasonably accurate extent and sailing ships of the time could not have sailed that vast distance. The mission was thus close to suicidal.
    • FreeTalkLIve, on 06/29/2008, -1/+7If you sail to far out in the ocean, you will fall off of the edge.

    • koft, on 06/29/2008, -0/+15It's the media. 99.9% of people could agree on something and the media takes that .1% and puts it up with equal representation as the 99.9% then blabs on about "you decide".
    • sfacets, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2It's like the 'Y2K bug" crap spewed forth by the media.
    • chaoswings, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3Simple. It is natural for people to fear what they do not understand and fixate on worse case scenarios (it does not matter if the scenario is even possible just that it is frightening).
    • dafunkmonster, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Because that's what idiots do best!
    • jjmckay, on 06/29/2008, -2/+1asdfasdfasdfa
    • whatthefu, on 06/29/2008, -2/+1Because it forces the scientists to dig deepers to explain themselves and their theories and in the end betters the field as a whole.
      • sgiffy, on 06/29/2008, -0/+4No scientists do that themselves. Somebody spouting nonsense does nothing.
    • texxel, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Ask the people of Hiroshima, Frankenstein !
  • ThinkBox, on 06/29/2008, -5/+132http://digg.com/general_sciences/Safety_report_Lat ...
    745 Diggs - 4 days ago

    http://digg.com/general_sciences/3_Reasons_Why_the ...
    607 Diggs - 67 days ago

    http://digg.com/general_sciences/No_the_LHC_won_t_ ...
    1449 Diggs - 90 Days ago

    I think its been covered.
    • Viriatus2, on 06/29/2008, -29/+5dude, not everyone reads Digg everyday, so STFU
      • Mercedes383, on 06/29/2008, -3/+17So we should all repeat ourselves so your sorry arse won't miss it?

        So we should all repeat ourselves so your sorry arse won't miss it?

        So we should all repeat ourselves so your sorry arse won't miss it?

      • Alegoo92, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3No, this has definitely been overdone. I ***** get it: no danger, move on please?
      • Fozefy, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2Yes, but you can still check past articles, so YOU STFU.
      • PRlME, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1well if you like it or not its here. This is my first time seeing it-=)
    • Slade605, on 06/29/2008, -11/+6I never saw any of these..
      • sfacets, on 06/29/2008, -1/+6Well that's your problem. Obviously, judging by the number of Diggs, most people have. Why inflict it upon us again?
      • macweirdo42, on 06/29/2008, -4/+1@sfacets
        Well, if he hasn't seen them, he can hardly be blamed for inflicting it on you. Your logic there hurts my brain.
      • Modizzle, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2If you don't know this about LHC, you've apparently have been living under a rock and do not know about the existence of the LHC.
      • saltinekracka20, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2Geez, I haven't seen these, either. What a bunch of pricks you guys are.
    • xirtap, on 06/29/2008, -5/+2I've seen enough movies to know that this won't end well.
    • desuexmachina, on 06/29/2008, -1/+4Yes, I wasn't suspicious before but now I've been told "everything is going to be alright" enough times that now I'm getting scared.
    • Iztikeit, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0You are a Digg God
  • M724, on 06/29/2008, -3/+13This won't stop conspiracy theorists about how terrible this experiment will be. Even after August, when they realize we're still here, they'll cook up something else somewhere else to scare people into thinking the end of the world is just around the corner.
    • MrColdheart, on 06/29/2008, -0/+14It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye to a micro black hole.
      • danielttt, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3Well said....they need to listen to their mothers...
  • MrColdheart, on 06/29/2008, -2/+8And now for some odd facts about the LHC...

    It would take 20 minutes to drive the length of the LHC at about 50-60 miles per hour.
    (kinda like driving to work)

    The LHC with generate huge amounts of data annually.
    (so much data that a super computer will have to be invented to crunch it)

    This is the new Golden age of Science... or should I say the Crude Oil age of Science
    (which ever is worth more...)
    • sk11, on 06/29/2008, -0/+4Actually the number crunching is supposed be taken care of by grid computing: http://www.gridpp.ac.uk/about
    • fas2, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3330 terabytes a week, that is damn much.
      http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/ ...
    • wilhoitm, on 06/29/2008, -4/+3That is nothing!

      1 PETABYTE = 1000 TERABYTES! 1 PETABYTE is the amount id data processed by googles servers every 72 minutes.
      • acetv, on 06/29/2008, -0/+7I'd think this data would be a little harder to process than google's extremely efficient linear algebra.
      • Iztikeit, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0Don't even think about it.......You don't have to.
    • DukeMojo, on 06/29/2008, -1/+3"This is the new Golden Age of Science"

      There is no such thing. Science itself is a treasure for all of humanity. It is the most important thing that we do.
  • scooterbaga, on 06/29/2008, -3/+43I'm getting sick of seeing this same story rehashed. It's asinine for two reasons...

    One, they're going to do it, so shut up already. I'm really glad there's only about a month left.

    Two, no one could possibly know for certain what will happen... that's why they built it in the first place. If they knew exactly what would happen there would be no reason to build it. So you can argue either side all you want, but you don't ***** know until they turn it on.

    Three, I like chocolate chip cookies and milk.
    • hollyminkowski, on 06/29/2008, -3/+11Dugg enthusiastically for "chocolate chip cookies and milk." :-)
      • jackal42, on 06/29/2008, -1/+7Buried begrudgingly for "Dugg enthusiastically"
      • smokewater, on 06/29/2008, -0/+6Dugg enthusiastically for "buried begrudgingly"
      • macweirdo42, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3Unfortunately, diggs, like black holes, are "hairless." That is to say, information about their creation, such as the level of enthusiasm on the part of the digger, is lost. Thus, I cannot independently ascertain the veracity of your statement.
    • Blackthorne, on 06/29/2008, -0/+20Ridiculous. Where is the proof of your claim that you like chocolate chip cookies and milk? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, sir.
      • num3thod, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1Carl Sagan. Their called quotation marks. Use them.
    • DukeMojo, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Actually they have a couple of ideas of what could happen. The point of the LHC is to prove it.
      • scooterbaga, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1That's what I'm saying. It's all theoretical up until that point. At some point they're just going to have to role the dice and find out.
  • jawdog, on 06/29/2008, -6/+3For those about to rock, we salute you.....
    http://www.lhcountdown.com/
  • aftern9ne, on 06/29/2008, -2/+39Black Hole would be a pretty sweet way to go.
    • koft, on 06/29/2008, -6/+4Black hole sun, won't you come and wash away the rain
    • chubbybubba, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3unless it's in prison
  • StultusJuventus, on 06/29/2008, -1/+9honestly, I'm sure its all silly. However, the idea that all science by nature of being science will cause no harm is misguided. I think that it's simply a good idea to take a cautious approach to anything with a similar potential for destruction. That being said, I look forward to the discoveries.
    • macweirdo42, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2True dat - science gave us the polio vaccine, but it also gave us the nuclear bomb. It's all about what we do with the discoveries that really matters.
  • blurrie, on 06/29/2008, -4/+10man made black hole - fail
  • sockpuppets, on 06/29/2008, -2/+94Perhaps black holes never existed in the universe until intelligent civilizations developed their own colliders and switched them on.
    • Ryan166, on 06/29/2008, -1/+38I like your thinking.
    • danielttt, on 06/29/2008, -4/+6Brilliant!...and so simple....We've got to alert the masses. If we can just get Al Gore involved...
    • koft, on 06/29/2008, -0/+3The heechee live on the edges of 'em.
    • jinxplayer, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2But...we have colliders already..
    • Zaneris, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1That would certainly be an interesting twist.
    • Hollister, on 06/30/2008, -0/+2intelligent civilizations?..... whew, we're safe.
  • Wartyboskfapped, on 06/29/2008, -1/+5Well they *would* say that, wouldn't they?
  • 1ncu3us, on 06/29/2008, -5/+5They're trying really hard to figure out how this hologram of reality works.. guess what.. it's in your mind, always has been
    • Ramble, on 06/29/2008, -1/+4Then where is my mind, what reality is that in?
      What a stupid statement to make.
      • 1ncu3us, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1your mind is ultimately the same as my mind... we all created this reality and we all have the ability to change it .. you will find this out on your own eventually, hopefully sooner rather than later
      • Ramble, on 06/30/2008, -0/+1OR you'll stop watching the matrix and thinking it's real.
  • raydeen, on 06/29/2008, -2/+3I hope it's like the movie. I want to meet V.I.N.cent. Coolest lil' robot since R2D2.
    • hollyminkowski, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Cutest robot ever! with his southern drawl :-)
    • Rudegar, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0bob is cooler then vincent!
      bob is oldschool texan old cowboy seek robot! :P
  • svensksvamp, on 06/29/2008, -4/+8Scientists are awesome
    • danielttt, on 06/29/2008, -2/+1I always thought they were just mortals.
  • 3tcp, on 06/29/2008, -2/+27pfft, atoms? Can't it smash anything cool... like fruit?
    • Sniper, on 06/29/2008, -1/+12Fruit is made of atoms...
    • H1tchh1k3r, on 06/29/2008, -0/+5But will it blend?
    • fload, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2put a grape in there and make it a jolly rancher then ill be impressed
    • dafunkmonster, on 06/29/2008, -0/+10It's not the Gallagher Collider.
    • kentifer, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2When we were teleconferencing with CERN they gave us the analogy that smashing two atoms together to create energy was like smashing two apples and creating a fruit basket.
  • Prophetfxb, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1Just a bunch of anti-science people making radical theories up based on no information. People need to just let science be and understand how much it advances us as a society and how large ideas like this one always give birth to many other ones that we may be able to apply to everyday life.
    • KlogereEndGrim, on 06/29/2008, -0/+5*****, nothing is to just be left alone, everything is debateable.
      • Lavarock, on 06/29/2008, -0/+7Everything debatable as long as you have something solid backing up your side of the debate. Otherwise it's less like legitimate debate and more like naysaying and fabrication.
      • mnky9800n, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Well I disagree with letting science be. Science works because people don't let science be. However ideas like, Hollow Earth Reptillians, all black holes exist because advanced civilizations created them, nuclear reactions occurring naturally on Earth, etc. are not given the same time of day as The Big Bang Theory, Evolution, plate tectonics, General Relativity, etc. because the former are extraordinary claims presented with no evidence whatsoever. Whereas the latter all have evidence and provide with explanations on how to find more evidence supporting themselves.
    • DogBotherer, on 06/29/2008, -0/+4That's how people like Mengele are born. Stupid superstition aside, science needs ethics and public discussion.

      (...Oops, did I just Godwin the thread?)
    • mattmedwards, on 06/29/2008, -2/+0ALL HAIL SCIENCE!!!
  • NoZb2k, on 06/29/2008, -3/+14There I go again, reading it as Hardon...
  • trumpydumpy, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2Doesn't splitting (or smashing) atoms cause a gigantic release of energy? I could be wrong...
    • ExRe, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2Yes, gigantic compared to energy sources we currently use and for it's size, but when you are dealing with a handful of atoms it is practically 0.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%3Dmc2#Practical_exa ...

      1 gram of mass (for water, that is something like 3.34 x 10^16) = about (from wikipedia)
      89.9 terajoules
      24.9 million kilowatt-hours (≈25 GW·h)
      21.5 billion kilocalories (≈21 Tcal)
      21.5 kilotons of TNT-equivalent energy (≈21 kt)
      85.2 billion BTUs
  • mal1964, on 06/29/2008, -3/+2The person who posted this story and changed the title is a child.
  • fezzasus, on 06/29/2008, -4/+1no *****
  • danharlow, on 06/29/2008, -10/+7Too bad it won't create a black hole that will only suck up the conspiracy theory lovers and 9/11 truthers and religious zealots and Republicans and ... :)
  • SOTD666, on 06/29/2008, -8/+2One, not all people opposed to the Collider are anti-science ignorants. Some people genuinely believe, based on their research and theoretical data, that the RHIC will cause something really bad to happen. That being said, even if they are right it would be a cool ***** way to blow up a planet. More seriously though the scientific community at large is confident in the safety of the experiments and therefore so am I. This is not conformism, I simply know that alot of really smart people thought really hard about it and agree that things are gonna be okay.... good enough for me.

    Two, I want to know how big the Red Button is on that thing.
    • mnky9800n, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0Who believes based on their own research that something bad will happen.
  • FreeTalkLIve, on 06/29/2008, -5/+24This thing is going make the aliens cum.
    • wilhoitm, on 06/29/2008, -2/+3Yeah, because we are primitive beings screwing with the Universe and we do not know what we are doing!
  • monkbot1, on 06/29/2008, -4/+3if only the people who were so concerned with CERN destroying the planet made as much of an effort fighting global warming
    • danielttt, on 06/29/2008, -4/+1>>>if only the people who were so concerned with CERN destroying the planet made as much of an effort fighting global warming
  • jackal42, on 06/29/2008, -0/+13***** colliding. Blending is where it's at.
    • Alegoo92, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1Oh my GOD! It all makes sense! I've been reading "collinder" (thinking that was the right way to say 'colander') and have been wondering why something that smashes atoms would be named that!
  • Viriatus2, on 06/29/2008, -0/+5i think this dude didn't play Halflife...
    • TheZorch, on 06/29/2008, -0/+4Hell yeah, bring on the headcrab zombies! Time to clean my gun.
  • Rudegar, on 06/29/2008, -1/+5what a bunch of wuss's i doubledare them to make a black hole!
  • Rudegar, on 06/29/2008, -0/+11ATOM SMAAAASH!!
  • slapded, on 06/29/2008, -1/+3it would be ironic if gallagher worked there
  • regression, on 06/29/2008, -3/+1Jesus Christ, this again? *sigh*
  • Mercedes383, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1I reckon it will form a tear in the space time continuum and send them all back in time to WW2 just like that book Weapons of Choice: World War 2.1 by John Birmingham
  • KlogereEndGrim, on 06/29/2008, -1/+4To all the people who keep saying that "this would be a pretty cool way to end the world"

    You are scary.
  • geauxtig3rs, on 06/29/2008, -1/+0Please, no more of these articles....there are at least 3 of the exact same CERN related article each week. Just let the whole thing die.
  • Lavarock, on 06/29/2008, -0/+6All this is doing is creating an extremely common phenomenon at the exact place where we have installed sensors to detect this sort of thing. If it's daytime, particles are experiencing this degree of motion and creating the same reaction, right above your head at this very moment. The reason we need the collider is because there's no way to "catch" them and make any reading when it occurs miles and miles into the upper atmosphere.
  • epublicus, on 06/29/2008, -5/+1"if only the people who were so concerned with CERN destroying the planet made as much of an effort fighting global warming."

    And all this time I was under the impression they were the same folks. Same mindset.
  • koft, on 06/29/2008, -0/+11How many times do we have to go over this *****? Every second thousands of particles smack into the atmosphere with energies vastly greater than any machine we could ever build and we're still here. There are some ***** idiots out there.
    • TheZorch, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1I guess they all watched too many of those bad B sci-fi flix on the Sci-Fi Channel.
      • mnky9800n, on 06/29/2008, -0/+0Hey! I like those movies. They have nothing to do with reality, but that is ok with me.
  • TheZorch, on 06/29/2008, -0/+16As long as they have a guy working there named Gordon Freeman we'll be safe.
  • jfsimard79, on 06/29/2008, -1/+7Famous last words.
  • Pinmonkey555, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2I find it unsettling how many times the scientists in these articles every week say "predict" and "unknown" even though they say nothing can happen because they supposedly know everything about what they're doing, huh? Regardless in the slimmest possible chance ever that something actually happened it'd be instantaneous so who gives a *****. Now Headcrabs and the Combine, those you have to worry about. And pleeeeeease can we stop getting this same damn story.
  • Aliwalla, on 06/29/2008, -1/+3Has anyone ever considered that all the black holes floating around space are in fact the remnants of civilizations that reached the level we're going to reach in August? It's all possible :-)
    • Kristijan12, on 06/29/2008, -2/+2You should always say "maybe", and not being cocksure saying "in fact"!
    • mnky9800n, on 06/29/2008, -1/+1Please make more extraordinary claims that have no support whatsoever.
    • ElAmo, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1Or maybe they are just supernovas that had a mass more than 10 times that of our sun. That seems a bit more likely to me.
  • davidbrown2, on 06/29/2008, -0/+6Just please don't let Gordon Freeman flip the switch...
    • cheesenuggets1, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2But that's where his Phd. really shines!
  • jimminy, on 06/29/2008, -1/+6Maybe all black holes in space are actually sufficiently developed civilizations...
    • chrisfnet, on 06/29/2008, -1/+0Now, you know that can't be true. After all, we are the only civilization in the entire universe.
  • Kristijan12, on 06/29/2008, -1/+7"The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom."
    Isaac Asimov
  • MasterThief117, on 06/29/2008, -0/+10http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/8246/largehardo ...
  • JustinHopewell, on 06/29/2008, -2/+1Let me preface this by saying that I do not personally believe that the LHC will destroy the earth or create a micro-black hole that will eventually consume everything here... but, again, CERN will not let anyone else do a safety review besides their own people. They've admitted themselves that it might cause micro-black holes every few seconds, but they don't think these black holes will actually be anything to worry about. So if there's nothing to worry about, let someone else review the damn thing and tell us that!

    And to everyone who keeps bringing up how nuclear bombs didn't destroy the world, what good, exactly, has that technology brought the human species? Even if the LHC doesn't destroy us all, nuclear war is a good possibility. Bombs are not a good argument for your cause.
    • diggagent, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1I agree with JustinHopewell.
    • directrix13, on 06/29/2008, -1/+3Nuclear technology has brought us a convenient practical means of power. Unfortunately, people like you are so busy fear mongering that the technology never really gets to see the light of day.
      • JustinHopewell, on 07/13/2008, -0/+1I'm not fear-mongering. I'm bringing up that comparing the safety of this device to nuclear bombs was not a good way to support your opinion that it will not destroy the earth. I don't know for a fact, either, that nuclear bombs led to nuclear energy. I would be under the impression that it was the other way around. I could be wrong, though, and would readily admit it if proven otherwise.
    • willfe, on 06/29/2008, -1/+2"What good, exactly, has that technology brought the human species?" It ended World War II, preventing the potential death of millions of human beings. I call that a "win." The underlying principles involved also brought us a clean and safe method of power production (that has emitted far fewer contaminants and killed far fewer people than more traditional power generation systems).

      The portrayal of CERN as a pile of mad scientists building a new toy that they're going to switch on no matter what is nonsensical and insulting. You're implying here that they don't want to let anybody else look at it, out of a selfish "mine!" attitude; you're overlooking the simpler option: it's not actually a legitimate or valid concern in the first place. The fact that they don't want to waste time bringing in an external review panel every time they build something new doesn't indicate they're "hiding" something. It means they recognize any external review will just slow things down and reveal the same damned findings: "it won't destroy the universe."

      If a random person assures you that his car is perfectly safe, and won't destroy the universe, you'll take him at face value. If another person then walks up and insists "no! It could create an incredibly explosive condition inside its engine under the right circumstances and it'll kill us all! And he won't let anyone *else* look at it! He's hiding something!" you're going to giggle and move on.

      It's okay if you (or I) don't understand the inner workings of the LHC. You and I are not *qualified* to question its design, mechanical function, or theoretical impact on the world (or the universe). I'm okay with that -- this thing wasn't just randomly thrown together by a room full of laymen who thought "well, this should work!" It was designed and built over the course of many years by many well-educated people. The kind of FUD you're spreading here is the same kind that's always leveled against scientists and engineers, and what you're really saying is that you don't trust the education institutions, scientific principles, mathematics, and engineering talent that went into designing and assembling the machine. You're challenging the scientific community with a long-shot "what if?" proposition with no shred of evidence to support the idea. That's okay, too -- ideas aren't *automatically* excluded, but unless you can back it up with *something* apart from "but it might blow us all up!", it's an idea that *will* get dismissed quickly.

      What does it say about the integrity of CERN that it undertook this investigation anyway? The fact that they actually *listened* to the concerns and decided "y'know, maybe we should look into this before we flip the big switch" suggests they're not as wreckless as you're claiming they are. You can accuse them of confirmation bias -- ignoring any evidence that doesn't support their "it's safe" position while seeking evidence to support the "it's safe" position -- and it may or may not be true. It might also be true that the only reason no evidence suggesting the machine will be harmful is getting any consideration is that there *isn't any*.

      Fear isn't a legitimate reason to avoid trying something. Mistakes are made, lives are lost, and stuff blows up, but we learn from it. If we all stayed huddled in our caves when the rain gods started throwing their lightning bolts at the trees, we'd still be grunting instead of speaking, and we'd still be, well, stuck in the friggin' caves.
      • JustinHopewell, on 07/13/2008, -0/+1First off, thank you for the insightful reply. Honestly, its nice to see a well-thought opinion, so I dugg you up. I'd like a chance to counter some of your points, though.

        Your first paragraph outlines that nuclear bombs helped us win the war and that the underlying principals helped us create efficient energy sources. I never said anything about nuclear energy. I was talking about the specific technology to create a large explosive device meant to kill and obliterate human lives and decimate cities. Did the nuclear bomb help us win the war? Yes. Could we have found another way without killing a incredibly tragic amount of innocent people? Probably. I'm not the person who could tell you how, but I can say that I feel that act was a low point in American history.

        Your second and third paragraphs outline that the scientists building the machine are professionals who know their device well enough that they don't need an external review team to look over it. You compared the LHC to a car analogy. I don't think its a waste of time to have one external review team come in and take a look at the machine to at least appease the people with the perception that there is a chance, even in the slightest, that the machine could do some kind of massive damage to the planet. If they would take the time to do that, that would at least shut a lot of people up when its proven that everything will be okay. And as far as the car analogy goes, if someone told me that it would blow up the universe, I wouldn't take that so seriously, but if someone told me the engine might blow up under some strange circumstance, then yeah, I would take another look at things before getting into a possible death trap. The vehicle isn't going to create black holes.

        And speaking of black holes, how can you say there's absolutely no evidence that the machine will be harmful when they've admitted they think it will create many micro black holes, something which, to my knowledge, has never existed on this planet.

        Fear and caution are two different ideas, and I think that's where you've confused my ideas. I want to see this thing in action. I'd like us all to learn from it and hopefully benefit from it in some way in the future. Fear is the government shutting the project down with no basis either way, using only public perception. Caution is taking a moment to look things over, getting varied, unbiased opinions, then making a decision. I can accept that lives will be lost in the name of science, but we will learn nothing from it if we're not here because of it.
    • TheStrongForce, on 06/30/2008, -0/+2Nuclear technolgy has borught us great advanances in scientific probing machinary (neutron scattering), energy production, smoke dectectors, and profound cultural changes both international and national just to name a few.
      • JustinHopewell, on 07/13/2008, -0/+1Technology or bombs? Which came first and which is responsible for death of life and which is responsible for the items listed above?
  • jnava121, on 06/29/2008, -0/+8unforseen consequences, mr. freeman
  • hiscity, on 06/29/2008, -0/+2The LHC Theme Song... (aka Requiem for the Higgs Boson by Lexx)

    Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
    You gotta have somethin' if you wanna be with me

    I'm not tryin' to be your hero
    'Cause that zero is too cold for me, Brrr
    I'm not tryin' to be your highness
    'Cause that minus is too low to see, yeah

    Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
    And I'm not stuffin', believe you me
    Don't you remember I told ya
    I'm a soldier in the war on poverty, yeah
    Yes, I am

    Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin'
    You gotta have somethin' if you wanna be with me
    Spin it again...into the looking glass.
  • honeymonster, on 06/29/2008, -2/+4Science. It works, bitches.
  • hiscity, on 06/29/2008, -0/+1http://xkcd.com/401/
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.