wormhole’s posterous

Hank Roth, on the InterNUT since 1982  Past (post) Commander Jewish War Veterans  * Cryptologist and Voice Security in the White House and in the War Room for JCS at the Pentagon BIO [with pics] http://inyourface.info/bio/

 
(Addendum to "Doomsday or Bust" from TheCrypt - http://inyourface.info/crypt/)
 
What is the Matter with Strange Matter?
 
Michio Kaku who is at City College of New York and has a podcast and radio  program called Explorations on WBAI is a theoretical physicist who says there is nothing to worry about when the LHC is turned back on. As a qualification of that statement, I wish to remind everyone that opposing views also exist.
 
"...the real headline-grabber is
   the claim that the world's most powerful particle-smasher could create
   microscopic black holes that some fear would gobble up the planet..."
(Discovery Website)
 
The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) the SUPER atom-smasher located at the CERN  research center in France and Switzerland will continue the scientific  quest already underway at Fermilab (Illinois) and elsewhere to discover and identify the Higgs boson (the so-called "god-particle") and search for supersymmetry (supersymmetric particles) and for proof; that is, evidence for all those extra dimensions.
 
The debate continues. And to reiterate my own view as someone who is definitely interested in science but only has an amateur knowledge of
science; personally I don't care if this thing does "gobble up the planet" because I don't believe in an anthropic specialness as a great many others do.
 
As a human I think whether we survive or not is not so important and the only significance for me is the fact that I am an animal sharing this planet with other animals and I feel some sadness for other animals who may cease to exist because of us - (and have already).
 
Michio Kaku argues that the creation of a black hole which would swallow the planet is science fiction. Others, including at least one Nobel prize winner (in physics) argues otherwise.
 
Michio Kaku (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24556999/)
says:
 
   "About those black holes ...
   The black holes that may (or may not) be generated by the Large Hadron
   Collider would have theoretical rather than practical applications."
   (Kaku-MSNBC)
 
   "If the colliders detectors turn up evidence of black holes, that would suggest that gravity is stronger on a subatomic scale than it is
   on the distance scales scientists have been able to measure so far. That, in turn, would support the weird idea that we live in a 10- or
   11-dimensional universe, with some of the dimensions rolled up so tightly that they can't be perceived." (Kaku-MSNBC)
 
   "It will be extremely exciting if the LHC did produce black holes," CERN theoretical physicist John Ellis said. "OK, so some people are
   going to say, 'Black holes? Those big things eating up stars?' No. These are microscopic, tiny little black holes. And they're extremely
   unstable. They would disappear almost as soon as they were produced."  (MSNBC - see above link)
 
"Not everyone is convinced that the black holes would disappear. "It doesn't have to be that way," said Walter Wagner, a former radiation safety officer with a law degree who is one of the plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit. Despite a series of reassuring scientific studies, Wagner and   others insist that the black holes might not fizzle out, and they fear that the mini-singularities produced by the Large Hadron Collider will fall to the center of the earth, grow larger and swallow more and more of Earth's matter." (MSNBC)
 
   "Ellis, Kaku and a host of other physicists point out that cosmic rays
   in space are far more energetic than the collisions produced in the
   Large Hadron Collider, and do not produce the kinds of persistent
   black holes claimed by the critics. In the most recent report, CERN
   scientists rule out the globe-gobbling black holes and the other
   nightmares enumerated in the lawsuit, even under the most outlandish
   scenarios. Wagner remains unconvinced, however." (MSNBC)
 
   "I don't think the knowledge we are going to acquire by doing such an
   experiment outweighs the risk that we are taking, if we can't quantify
   that risk. ... We need to obtain other evidence," he said.
   (ibid-MSNBC)
 
--- SEE Boon or doom? Collider stirs debate - LHC- msnbc.com
   URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24556999/
 
How About Strangelets?
 
The Blogger-Commander-In-Chief at thebiglife.wordpress.com writes:
(http://thebiglife.wordpress.com/2008/05/14/3-doomsday-scenarios-involving-the-large-hadron-collider/)
 
"Gobbled by Strangelets. Strangelet, such a happy term, right? It's
short for "strange nugget," and, well, there's nothing happy about it.
A strangelet is a bit of strange matter, (yes, I'm still not making
that up!) that, upon contact with normal earth matter, turns the earth
matter into strange matter itself. Imagine if this strangelet was
stabilized, and, well, started turning the nuclei of nearby earth
matter into strange matter -- imagine this going on a thousand times
over, at a speed that can only match the number of earth matter that
comes into contact with the strangelet that's growing. Bam! Instantly
the earth will become nothing more than a huge ball of strange matter.
Or, alternate scenario, since strangelets are anti-matter candidates,
they may just blow up upon contact with Earth." (thebiglife)
 
"Devoured by a microscopic black hole. They say that a black hole
evaporates in time because of Hawking radiation -- and, well, say, for
your normal average sized-black hole, it will take lifetimes before
you ever see it happen. But a small, teensy, tiny microscopic black
hole? If, say, they do make a black hole in the facility -- it might
not disappear -- and since black holes are of such high density,
placed on the earth's surface, it'll slice it's way to the earth's
core like a hot knife through butter, after which, it'll oscillate
back, over and over, until it has consumed enough matter to slow down.
By that time, the earth might be gone, by the way." (ibid-thebiglife)
 
Science writer Alan Boyle (winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award,
the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A
Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council
for the Advancement of Science Writing is the science editor for MSNBC
where he writes the COSMIC LOG.
 
Alan writes about the fears of doomsday and the LHC (March 17, 2008):
 
"...Could the collider create mini-black holes that
last long enough and get big enough to turn into a matter-sucking
maelstrom? Could exotic particles known as magnetic monopoles throw
atomic nuclei out of whack? Could quarks recombine into "strangelets"
that would turn the whole Earth into one big lump of exotic matter?
(Cosmic Log)
 
A former nuclear safety officer Walter Wagner along with Luis Sancho filed
a lawsuit against CERN to shut down the collider. He raises some
interesting issues and scenarios as iterated in the lawsuit and herein
described by Alan Boyle in Cosmic Log:
 
(QUOTE)
 
   * 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."
 
   * Magnetic monopoles: One theory suggests that high-energy particle
   collisions might give rise to massive particles that have only one
   magnetic pole - only north, or only south, but not the north-south
   magnetism that dominates nature. Sancho and Wagner worry that such
   particles could be created in the LHC and start a runaway reaction
   that converts atoms into other forms of matter. But physicists
   have seen no evidence of such reactions, which should have
   occurred already as the result of more energetic cosmic-ray
   collisions in Earth's upper atmosphere.
 
(END QUOTE)
 
My additional thoughts about this is to suggest - if it matters at all -
that we might be more prudent to try to figure out the cosmos and how the
universe really works before we open up this Pandora's Box. No one is
absolutely sure what will happen and everyone here knows what is not
expected to happen very often does. I forgot the general rule for that,
but doesn't Murphys Law also suggest if something bad is going to happen
it very often does happen.
 
   I never had a slice of bread,
   Particularly large and wide,
   That did not fall upon the floor,
   And always on the buttered side.
 
 
Hank Roth
 
 
Links:
 
(1) http://www.lhcountdown.com/
(2) http://inyourface.info/ArT/Sci/EnD.shtml
(3) http://inyourface.info/ArT/Sci/Doomsday.shtml
(4) http://inyourface.info/crypt/
(5) http://thebiglife.wordpress.com/
(6) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/
 
 
 
===============================================
* To subscribe to wormhole, send mail to
ecartis@inyourface.info and on the subject line
(without quotes) write: "subscribe wormhole" -
To unsubscribe, do the same in reverse; send
"unsubscribe wormhole" on the subject line
to ecartis@inyourface.info -- Hank Roth
http://inyourface.info/
================================================

Hank Roth, on the InterNUT since 1982
Past (post) Commander Jewish War Veterans
* Cryptologist and Voice Security in the White House
and in the War Room for JCS at the Pentagon
  BIO [with pics] http://inyourface.info/bio/

 --------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
Permalink: http://inyourface.info/ArT/Sci.Doomsday.shtml

   -- The Earth Could Shrink to a Centimeter in 50 Months -

 Doomsday or Bust!

 "There are many theories as to what will result from these
collisions...but what's for sure is that a brave new world of physics will
emerge from the new accelerator..." CERN-LHC - http://www.cern.ch/Lhc

 The Large Hadron Collider was only turned on momentarily when it failed
due to technical difficulties. Those problems were addressed and the
technical problems are being resolved. The LHC will be turned on again
soon. Perhaps it is on now as you read this. Energy will be increased as
the testing begins. They have decided to start it at HALF power.

 Professor Dr. Otto E. Rssler suggests a black hole, if it does not
evaporate (evaporation of black holes is just a "theory" proposed by
Steven Hawkings which has never been tested) could shrink Earth to a
centimeter in 50 months.

 While Sir Martin Rees does not think this is the risk which will destroy
the planet, there are other risks which will. His book has been mentioned
here in the article previously posted "End of Time" - Rees is knighted and
a member of the Royal Academy. He is Britain's Astronomer Royal and
suggests more risks, i.e. an impact event (asteroid, or the gray goo
problem of nanotech, global warming, etc.) than most imagine which could
cause Homo sapiens to become extinct and believes that risk is at least
50% by the end of this century. We will likely not survive 2009 according
to Sir Martin Rees.

 Will the LHC swallow us? Rossler thinks the probability is high that it
might. Consider atoms in you carry ONLY about one-fortieth of an electron
volt of energy. The LHC, on the other hand, at full power, will operate at
7 trillion electron volts (TeV) of energy.

 Two protons traveling around the 17 mile collider will smash proton beams
at 100,000 TeV into each other producing a tiny ball of very dense, hot
"plasma" of protons, quarks and gluons. The temperature of the plasma will
be over a billion degrees Celsius with the power to rip the fabric of
space.

 I'm not a scientist, but I read a lot of science - enough to know
scientists know far less than we think they do and many theories are
proved wrong. Newton was not always right. Einstein was not always right.
There is a building of knowledge which has moved us forward but no one has
ever truly explained the anthropic principle and the idea that perhaps we
are alone in the universe can't be ruled out with absolute certainty and
it has even been suggested our little region of space is all that exists
that where we can live; that only 4% of the entire possibly infinite
universe contains matter that we can interact with and for 96% of it we
don't have a clue what it is.

 Are the scientists at CERN being irresponsible because of their need to
see the "god particle" also known as the Higgs particle? Are they willing
to sacrifice our lives for this?

 The LHC should be able to create one micro black hold every second it is
on. If they are wrong about "Hawking radiation" and they don't evaporate
the results could be catastrophic.

 And if not a black hole, what about an ice-9 type transition? (From
SaneScience.Org) - As written in The New Yorker, Physicist Frank
Wilczek..."dismissed the idea of mini black holes devouring the earth, but
went on to raise a new possibility: the collider could produce
strangelets, a form of matter that some think might exist at the center of
neutron stars. In that case, he observed, "one might be concerned about an
`ice-9'-type transition," - and "all surrounding matter could be converted
into strangelets and the world as we know it would vanish." From 'The New
Yorker'

 The CERN website announced it will run the LHC initially 2009-2010 at 3.5
TeV before going to full power. It will be started in November. All
electrical connections and repairs have been completed and tested now.

 Otto Rssler, a German biochemist was born on 20th of May, 1940 in Berlin.
He was a radio ham with call letters DR9KF.

 (My call letters were K4EVY and I lived in Florida. I was licensed when I
was 15 years old.)

 Otto Rssler specialized in immunology and received his MD in 1966. "Rssler
then began his post doc at the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral
Psychology, in Bavaria. In 1969, he started a visiting appointment at the
Center for Theoretical Biology at SUNY-Buffalo. Later that year, he became
Professor for Theoretical Biochemistry at the University of Tbingen. In
1976, he became a tenured University Docent. In 1994, he became Professor
of Chemistry by decree...Rssler has held visiting positions at the
University of Guelph (Mathematics) in Canada, the Center for Nonlinear
Studies of the University of California at Los Alamos, the University of
Virginia (Chemical Engineering), the Technical University of Denmark
(Theoretical Physics), and the Santa Fe Institute (Complexity Research) in
New Mexico." (Wikipedia)

 "In June 2008 Rssler emerged in the public eye with an open letter[1] as
one of the strongest critics of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) proton
collision experiment supervised by the European Organization for Nuclear
Research in Geneva, trying to raise awareness of the possibility of
creating human-made uncontrollable mini black holes with assumed
exponential growth which might get trapped in Earth's gravity due to their
slowness of movement compared to the natural phenomenon of proton
collisions with cosmic rays." (ibid-Wikipedia)

 Professor Otto Rssler has questioned the claim of Hawking radiation which
would lead to the decay of micro black holes. There are NO experiments
which have proven the theory of evaporation from black holes by Hawking
radiation.

 "Rssler has authored around 300 scientific papers in fields as
wide-ranging as biogenesis, the origin of language, differentiable
automata, chaotic attractors, endophysics, micro relativity, artificial
universes, the hypertext encyclopedia, and world-changing technology."
(ibid-Wikipedia)

 The following is from an interview with Dr Rssler by journalist (Canadian
photographer, journalist and novelist) Alan Gillis.
INTERVIEW

 Gillis: How did you arrive at the idea that mBH, if produced at the Large
Hadron Collider, could accrete matter?

 Early on, the idea that the LHC could be dangerous did not arrive in my
brain. A Relativist friend of mine who was correcting this paper on my new
interpretation of the Schwarzschild metric, asked me just as a joke if
this wouldn't have repercussions on the LHC. I didn't know what the LHC
was. It forced me to think whether this was a good question or a joke.
Then it might mean that black holes or mini black holes cannot evaporate.
The mathematics are the same. I tried to falsify (disprove) it, but I
couldn't.

 Another thing that occurred to me is that we can now predict the existence
of non-point shaped black holes using El Naschie's Fractal theory. Once we
know they are string-shaped then we can ask what is their size. It
occurred to me only a few days ago that we might use El Naschie's theory
to calculate their size.

 Gillis: So you think that String theory is basically correct?

 Yes. I never believed in String theory until quite recently, when I found
this result. That electrons cannot be essentially point-shaped. For if
they were, they would necessarily be little black holes at the same time,
which indeed no one else finds objectionable. But black holes are
uncharged according to my new reading of the Schwarzschild metric. Strings
then must already exist in front of our eyes -- in the form of electrons.
This makes string-shaped mini black holes much more likely.

 Gillis: Are you suggesting that you think electrons are actually
elementary black holes?

 No, it is everybody else who implicitly thinks so. They could of course
also be clouds of smaller charged particles, in principle, although I
doubt it. This would only reiterate the problem.

 Gillis: Then you agree that like all particles in String theory, electrons
are string-shaped and not point-shaped in real space?

 That is too hard a question for me to answer definitively. In real space,
there would only be a size increase, I guess. But so perhaps, more or less
the same one for all mini particles, from neutrinos to mini black holes?

 Gillis: There are still no experimental confirmations of String theory,
not from collider data or any other experiments. CERN is hoping to find
evidence of Strings at the much higher energies of the LHC.

 Yes, it is one of the two big goals, besides the Higgs.

 Gillis: There are a lot of String theorists at CERN. Given that String
theory supports the formation of mBH at much lower energies than what you
would need to produce a Planck mass size Black Hole, perhaps within reach
of LHC collision energies, then why isn't CERN taking this seriously? They
did earlier, with their "Micro Black Hole Factory". Now the recent safety
assessment by CERN, the LSAG report, discounts them, quoting Einstein's
Relativity, that they are an impossibility.

 They're less enthusiastic than they were before. The String theorists
don't believe in String theory anymore. That was my impression when I met
Dr Landua at CERN, but maybe I misunderstood him. They don't talk about
black holes anymore since I started saying they are dangerous. They even
abandoned String theory just to say they don't believe in them anymore.

 Gillis: What do you think the probabilities are of mBH being produced at
the LHC with proton to proton collisions at 10 TeV, before winter this
year?

 I would almost say something like 10%. Maybe 16% or 16.6%. Russian
Roulette has 6 probabilities.

 Gillis: If they load the collider 6 times with protons? But seriously, at
14 TeV ordinary operating energies next year, and then much higher energy
collisions planned for lead ions at 1,150 TeV, then the probability would
be higher?

 No, not in the second stage. Because quark-quark collision energies will
still be low in that case.

 Gillis: You wrote to Stephen Hawking recently on this subject, asking him
to contact CERN, if he agreed there was room for doubt about black hole
evaporation through Hawking radiation, and so some risk with mBH produced
at the LHC. Did you get a response?

 Not that I know of. I sent him the tape, actually on CD, of my long talk
on this problem on January 31st in Berlin at the Transmediale, a big
conference, an art conference. It was from the keynote address I gave. He
asked his secretary to send a reply card which she did. I also asked
several people to make contact with him. It's a pity, really. I'm a big
fan of his.

 Gillis: You mentioned Dr Rolf Landua earlier. You had an interview with
him at CERN this July 4th about your black hole theories. What happened?

 It was an amiable meeting. When I arrived at the airport there were two
ladies from Zurich expecting me. In order for me not to be alone. They
were LHC activists. They accompanied me to CERN. When Landua came, he
offered all three of us a ride to the ATLAS Detector. So there were four
of us at the meeting later in the CERN cafeteria, with the view of Mount
Blanc. He promised, since he couldn't disprove my Relativity argument,
that he knew several famous people in Relativity working at CERN that
would talk to me. I was happy that there would be another discussion.
Before we left, I reminded Landua of our next meeting with the
Relativists. He didn't recall suggesting one, that it wasn't necessary. He
said he would send my paper along to an expert. The matter is still
pending. If I am wrong, I want at least to know where I am wrong.

 Gillis: Did you have time to counter CERN's main safety arguments?

 A little bit. We came to discussing neutron stars, the hardest conundrum.
According to CERN, neutron stars should not exist if there were natural
analogs to the LHC mini black holes. Neutron stars, consumed at first by
mini black holes, would be black holes themselves. The CERN argument looks
like a good one, but it is demonstrably wrong. I had brought this to
CERN's attention in May. Mini black holes can exist. In the most
susceptible stars to mini black holes, the neutron stars, they are so
dense there is no hope at first sight that any fast particle can pass
through without getting stuck. This is CERN's safety net argument. Or was.

 Gillis: Then how do these super dense neutron stars survive attack by
natural mBH? What is your theory?

 Neutron stars are in a macroscopic quantum state called superfluidity. And
this state protects them because it makes them transparent to fast
particles.

 Gillis: Because these stars are in a strange quantum state, like a
Bose-Einstein Condensate?

 Yes.

 Gillis: Did Landua accept your argument?

 I think so, after I had told him that my counter-argument had been
accepted by a famous Nobel Laureate in the field: That neutron stars,
which alone are susceptible to this CERN argument in the last instance,
are protected due to their superfluidity, by being transparent to the
stipulated fast mini black holes. And then, Dr. Landua realized that this
stipulated new quantum effect was just the opposite to the famous
Mossbauer rigidity -- which insight greatly impressed me. Then he and I
suddenly saw that the predicted new transparency could actually be tested
at CERN, in a separate experiment. For they have the largest amounts of a
superfluid anywhere on the planet, in the form of their coolant, Helium
II. Thus, fast mini particles -- I thought of neutrinos -- could for
comparison, be shot through a long pipe of this superfluid and through an
analogous pipe containing ordinary fluid helium. To see whether there is a
difference in the cross section. But then, we both realized that this
would probably take years to accomplish.

 Gillis: Dr. Landua agrees with you, that this experiment is important?
That it could show that superfluidity protects neutron stars from mBH?

 On this point it seems. But unfortunately, superfluidity will not protect
this planet from artificial sufficiently slow mini black holes, likely or
possibly produced at the LHC.

 Gillis: Did the subject of a possible bosenova implosion and explosion
come up in your discussions? Superfluid Helium II is a quantum superfluid
with strange properties, and generally considered to be a Bose-Einstein
Condensate.

 Yes, but the question of this superfluid being dangerous as such, because
of the risk of bosenova formation at the LHC, I did learn only from you
today: It did not occur to us. This is an important point, and should also
be tested experimentally by CERN, I feel. They will of course be
accidentally testing it when they switch on the LHC. This local
catastrophe if occurring would inadvertently protect the planet at large.

 Gillis: That a bosenova could destroy the LHC? You're not joking?

 Not at all. My friend Artur Schmidt told me about the historical rule that
whenever there is a technology jump by a factor of ten -- the LHC's energy
will be by 8 times higher than ever before achieved, so it qualifies --
always major accidents happen owing to humanity's built-in lack of
clairvoyance.

 Gillis: Then you support my idea that a possible bosenova explosion could
threaten the LHC and Geneva? And a safety test should be performed by CERN
on both superfluid heliums? Recently I learned that Helium I is also used
at the LHC, to cool both beam cryostats, in the main ring. I published an
article recently on my findings, in ScientificBlogging, Superfluids, BECs
and Bosenovas: The Ultimate Experiment.

 Would I not have to say yes here? The problem is the BEC bosenova
mechanism is still unknown. CERN should be reminded of this.

 Gillis: Considering you are one of the leading critics in science of the
safety of mBH, and CERN wasn't prepared for the meeting you had to discuss
your theories, will CERN invite you back?

 This has not yet happened. Perhaps the answer is implicit in what a Nobel
Laureate in physics, told me a few weeks ago. He told me I should go on
with my fight against CERN. Because CERN needs the publicity.

 Gillis: But why isn't CERN taking you seriously? Are physicists there or
elsewhere afraid of rocking the boat? With their reputations and jobs on
the line?

 No, I think there are other reasons as well. People nowadays no longer
believe in originality of single people and small groups. Everybody
believes in the big group and in the joint power. We have a Maoism in
science. Let flowers grow. It's no longer likely to happen. Everybody
believes the ideology that it's no longer possible to be a Poincar or an
Einstein. But we also live in the Age of everybody believing in the Big
Bang, which is the greatest nonsense of all, if my co-workers are right.
And yet it's impossible to get rid of it. We live in a dogmatic age.
People want to derive certainty from common opinions. They don't believe
it's possible to find something really original. It's a pity for our young
people. They're not allowed to believe in themselves anymore.

 Gillis: I think you hit it on the nose. In a way, this is all about
proving the Big Bang theory?

 The younger physicists know it doesn't exist. Many people knew it's
nonsense including Hubble himself. He was denied the Nobel Prize because
of not believing in what everybody believed. Very strange.

 Gillis: Hubble discovered the redshift as proportional to distance, which
physicists think indicates the Universe is expanding, confirming the Big
Bang theory.

 He stopped believing in this. He said there is a non ad-hoc reason why
light gets tired on its way through long distances. But no one found the
reason for a long time. Until some 6 years ago when my group found the
reason. I published it, but no one has any interest in it. The paper was
published last year in Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. In August. It has a
nice title actually. Hubble Expansion without Space Expansion. But you
shouldn't tell anyone I don't believe in the Big Bang. Then they won't
believe anything I say, Professor Rssler laughs.

 Gillis: But there is no other real alternative theory to the Big Bang?

 There are many who know it must be nonsense, but no one has found the key.
I had the good fortune to talk to a young American-Iranian physicist who
worked in Switzerland. And he gave me the key paper by Chandrasekhar of
1943, which gives the mechanism, but no one saw it including the author
himself. But he got a Nobel Prize later for Black Holes. It's a very old
theory, and I just found a more general simpler explanation of
Chandrasekhar's result. It applies not just to big stars, as he thought,
moving faster than the rest. But any potentially gravitationally attracted
fast body gets slowed down in a whirling cloud of heavier attracting
bodies like galaxies, and light gets red-shifted in proportion. That's a
very simple law of physics, of classical physics essentially. But it was
overlooked since 1865. This older paper was by the discoverer of
Statistical Mechanics, Rudolf Clausius, who didn't have a high school
diploma. It was the ETH, the Swiss Polytechnic which saved him. You could
pass an exam and be allowed to study there. The only (such) university in
Europe and the world probably. It saved him and it saved Einstein 30 years
later.

 Gillis: On that score CERN would show Einstein the door today. Is that why
you're appealing to the public and politicians? In mid-August you'll be
seeing the President of Switzerland, Pascal Couchepin. What do you hope to
achieve?

 I'm trying to get a friendly contact with him, so he understands how I
think. And that I'm not an enemy of CERN, which probably everybody
believes. I'm the only friend of CERN I see around. Everybody else is
trying to destroy it. Including themselves. They have this nice argument.
We all have children. Would we do this experiment if we didn't believe we
were safe? But if they are ready to sacrifice their families, they are
still not allowed to do it with the planet. CERN still hasn't answered my
questions, or refuted my papers, though they are publicly available on the
Internet.
END INTERVIEW

 Dr Rssler's unanswered questions from his Seven Reasons for Demanding an
LHC Safety Conference with minor revisions by Dr Rssler, original paper
(pdf) which will be updated soon, as below.

 This paper was recently presented by Dr Rssler to more than two hundred
participants of the 20th International Conference on Systems Research,
Informatics and Cybernetics, July 24-30, 2008, in Baden-Baden, hosted by
the IIAS, the International Institute for Advanced Studies. The conference
participants and the IIAS publicly endorsed Dr Rssler's call for an LHC
Safety Conference as soon as possible.
Seven Reasons for Demanding an LHC Safety Conference

    1. Black holes cannot evaporate because their horizon is effectively
infinitely far away in spacetime according to my new interpretation of the
Schwarzschild metric [1].
   2. Black holes are effectively uncharged [1]. Therefore, charged
elementary particles cannot at the same time be black holes (or
point-shaped). Hence non-point-shaped mini objects exist already. This
makes mini black holes much more likely.
   3. Mini black holes grow exponentially rather than linearly inside the
earth: "mini-quasar principle" [2]. Hence the time needed by a resident
mini black hole to eat the earth is maximally shortened - perhaps down to
"50 months". This contrasts with the "50 million Years" obtained assuming
linear growth by BBC Horizon [3] and CERN's analogous "5 billion years"
[4].
   4. CERN [4, 5] counters that if the hoped-for mini black holes are
stable as claimed [1], equal stable particles must arise naturally by
ultra-fast cosmic-ray protons colliding with planet bound protons. This is
correct. However, there remains a fundamental difference: Only the
man-made ones are "symmetrically generated" and hence dangerous. For they
alone are slow enough with respect to the earth that one of them (at less
than 11 km/sec) can take residence - in contrast to the almost luminal
speeds of their natural cousins.
   5. CERN`s counter argument could still hold true for more compact
celestial bodies than the earth - such that their lifetimes would be
drastically reduced in defiance of observation if mini black holes exist.
A quantitative bound can be derived from this argument: Take white dwarfs
first. They are 10^5 times denser than earth while being the same size.
Hence their cross-section for a mini black hole passing-through is by a
factor of 10^5 greater than earth's. They remain safe if no more than 10^4
eating-type collisions with a quark await a fast natural mini black hole
entering them (so it can pass through).

 Why? Because the planned energy of 14 TeV pumped into two colliding
protons at CERN is 14,000 times the rest mass of a proton (1 MeV).
Therefore a mini black hole born of two quarks (one from each proton)
likewise has about 14,000 times the rest mass of a quark. Hence by
momentum conservation, only about 14,000 collisions with a resident quark
can be survived by a fast natural mini black hole of LHC energy, without
losing its almost luminal speed. If this bound is to be heeded by nature
in white dwarfs, then no more than about 0.1 collisions must await a CERN
mini black hole on its first passage through the earth. This estimate
appears plausible -- so that the continued existence of white dwarfs
cannot be construed as a counter-argument against the dangerousness of
man-made slow mini black holes.

 6) This number presupposes that the nonlinear growth process in point (3)
above, is inapplicable if very dense matter is passed through at almost
luminal speeds. The shorter collision intervals, by many orders of
magnitude, allow this prediction.

 7) Finally, neutron stars have by another factor of 10^9, greater density
than white dwarfs. Since they are a thousand times smaller, they are a
million times more susceptible. But they are protected by quantum
coherence effects of the superfluidity type: so mini black holes can pass
without being braked. The superfluidity extends to the "inner crust" [6].
This prediction, if confirmed, renders natural mini black holes if they
exist, non-dangerous. Hence, their man-made ultra-slow cousins on earth or
spreading to the sun, can indeed have dreaded dangerous consequences that
everybody prefers not to believe in.

 In order to exclude the possibility that human-made mini black holes will
endanger the earth, it will be necessary to disprove the first of these 7
points, or if this is not possible, the second, and so forth. Until this
has been accomplished, no one can give the "green light" to the LHC
crossing the 2 TeV barrier, as is currently planned within a few weeks.

 It appears that only an immediate safety conference can save the LHC
experiment from disaster.
References

 [1] O.E. Rssler, "Abraham-like return to constant c in general relativity:
-theorem derived in Schwarzschild metric". Chaos, Solitons and Fractals
(publication pending) Preprint available (pdf) (a revision of section 5 is
forthcoming)
[2] O.E. Rssler, "Abraham-solution to Schwarzschild metric implies that
CERN mini black holes pose a planetary risk" (submitted on September 27,
2007). Also found on the above URL.
[3] BBC Horizon documentary, "The Six Billion Dollar Experiment"
[4] M. Mangano, in an interview with Michael Liebe (in German) at (html)
[5] R. Landua, in an interview with Andreas Sch, pm-magazin.de (in German)
(video)
[6] G. Col, "A microscopic quantal calculation of the superfluidity of the
inner crust of neutron stars" (Abstract) (txt)
END QUOTES
Hank Roth

 See the following websites for additional information:

 www.inyourface.info/
www.lhcconcerns.com
www.lhcdefense.org
www.global-risk-sig.org
www.angelsanddemons.cern.ch/
wikipedia.org
www.mathematik
www.scientificblogging.com

 Comments: (1) | Trackbacks

 All quoting per the Fair Use Doctrine
for educational and discussion purposes pursuant to
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, Copyright Law.

 AddThis

 Permalink: http://inyourface.info/ArT/Sci.Doomsday.shtml

 Today is Wednesday August 26, 2009
G 0 l e m D e s i g n s
Hank Roth (on the Internet since 1982)
Worm Hole (Home) - The Crypt - Hank Roth (Bio)
[viewed 1001 times]

 ===============================================
* To subscribe to wormhole, send mail to
ecartis@inyourface.info and on the subject line
(without quotes) write: "subscribe wormhole" -
To unsubscribe, do the same in reverse; send
"unsubscribe wormhole" on the subject line
to ecartis@inyourface.info -- Hank Roth
http://inyourface.info/ - http://pnews.org/
================================================

"The world is not only queerer than we suppose, it is queerer than we can suppose." -- J.B.S. Haldane
 
Worlds within Worlds within Worlds
 
Quantum Gravity, Parallel Universes, Three Dimensional Sinkholes, Curved Space-time and Black Holes
 
In his famous general theory of relativity, Albert Einstein turned physics on its head. He showed that physics is not intuitive and common-sense assumptions no longer work. He demonstrated that the concept of space and the concept of time are integrated.
 
Relative to an observer space stretches and time moves slower as it approaches the speed of light. He established that nothing can exceed the speed of light, which is 670 million miles per hour (186,000 miles sec). And a decade on in his Theory of General Relativity he further described gravity as the warping of space-time and the existence of black holes.
 
We know now that there are fewer atoms in the universe than we would suppose, and most of them - the most common of them are hydrogen and we are mostly composed of hydrogen. We don't know much about the rest, the dark matter and dark energy and cannot detect them directly, but they have noticeable effects on energy and matter.
 
It is postulated that dark energy is the mysterious force that no one completely understands with any degree of certitude but is the source of the energy which is causing the universe to expand or stretch faster and faster.
 
"Frankly, we just dont understand it," says Craig Hogan, an astronomer at the University of Washington at Seattle. "We know what its effects are," Hogan says, but as to the details of dark energy, "Were completely clueless about that. And everybodys clueless about it." (Andrew Chaikin, editor of Space & Science, Jan 15, 2002)
 
Dark energy was discovered in 1998 during a survey of supernovas in distant galaxies. The supernovas were dimmer than what was expected indicating that they were further away than expected. Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation has confirmed the universe to be 13.7 billion years old. The survey of exploding stars or supernova seemed to indicate that a mysterious repulsive force as been noticeably affecting the gravitational force galaxies exert on each other since about 5 billion years ago.
 
The expansion of the universe in the form of a "negative pressure" was first proposed by Einstein in the theory of general relativity.
 
"If you think in terms of the universe as a very large balloon," she says, "when the balloon expands, that makes the local density of the [dark energy] smaller, and so the balloon expands some more . because it exerts negative pressure. While its inside the balloon its trying to pull the balloon back together again, and the lower the density of it there is, the less it can pull back, and the more it expands. This is what happens in the expanding universe." (Virginia Trimble of the University of Southern California at Irvine - Space & Science, Jan 15, 2002)
 
We live in a multidimensional universe - perhaps a multiverse of universes. "Like quarks or dark matter and dark energy, whose existence we only indirectly ascertain, extra dimensions will not appear to us directly. Nonetheless, signatures of extra dimensions, even when indirect, could ultimately reveal their existence." (Warped Passages, Unraveling the Mysteries of the Universe's Hidden Dimensions - Lisa Randall - Harper 2006)
 
Time also has no absolute meaning except as a measure of change. In space there is no time. Time is only relative to the observer. We age, therefore we are aware of our chronology because it is relative to how we change.
 
If there is no air resistance we are ALSO not aware of our falling. All bodies are in free fall along warps and curves in space. The moon is falling around the Earth and the Earth is falling around the Sun. And in a spacecraft we think we are flying but when we are orbiting the earth we are not aware of our falling around the earth. Falling is not an observable phenomena.
 
"Neither space nor time has any existence outside the system of evolving relationships that comprises the universe..." (Three Roads to Quantum Gravity, Lee Smolin)
 
We cannot see the entire universe. We can only see it from our local area where we are and that region which extends around us is approximately 14 billion light years - and pursuant to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, we know also that nothing can move faster than the speed of light.
 
"At this very moment, our galaxy is hurtling toward the Virgo cluster of galaxies at a couple of hundred kilometers a second, faster literally than a speeding bullet. Virgo is pulling us into its gravitational field. At the same time, our galaxy continues to rotate sedately: The invisible hand of gravity ties together the 100 billion stars that make up the galaxy..." (Einstein's Universe, Gravity At Work and Play, by A. Zee - Oxford U Press - 2001)
 
Space and time are integrated into space-time, based on Einstein's theory of general relativity; Space and time are geometrically integrated into a space-time fabric warped, distorted and curved by matter and energy.
 
I don't know if we shall ever fully understand the universe. The world we live in is just the dimension of it we see or have some sense of, but how real is it? We are worlds within worlds. 90% of the cells in our bodies are not our own and at the micro, the smallest scale - the Plank scale of Quantum Physics there are no absolutes; only probabilities. And at the macro scale of galaxies and star systems, the size is so huge we can't ever get to most of what we can imagine is there.
 
  "Earth is no more a rock with some life on it than you are a skeleton infested with cells." -- Dorian Sagan
 
But what I imagine is there are worlds within worlds. Multiverses and many more dimensions than we can now suppose there are - and yet to be discovered, if we ever do. The hint of this is what we already know about ourselves. We are not significant in the way we once thought ourselves to be. Gods and religion may be the glue that holds many of us together but it hardly explains what is out there.
 
What is out there is a microcosmic world or worlds and we are currently exploring the small worlds which exist down to the level of loops and strings and branes.
 
"By now you should be convinced that our universe may have additional curled-up spatial dimensions,; certainly so long as they are small enough nothing rules them out. But extra dimensions may strike you as an artifice. Our inability to probe distances smaller than a billionth of a billionth of a meter permits not only extra tiny dimensions but all manner of whimsical possibilities as well---even a microscopic civilization populated by even tinier green people." (Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe - 1999)
 
Well what if there are also larger dimensions of all manner which we can only imagine might be populated by very BIG green people - or some other organisms? What if their natural motion is very close to the speed of light? In which case our lives, to them, if they were even aware of them, would take place in instants - maybe too quick to even be imagined. Sort of like electrons popping into existence in dark matter and being instantly annihilated by positron-s and the doing it all over again. They exist but in a space-time that we are only now learning to measure and consider. What if we are a tiny conglomeration of organisms which live in worlds within worlds within worlds?
 
  " I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine." -- J.B.S. Haldane
 
Hank Roth
 
  * Home - http://inyourface.info/
  * Articles - http://inyourface.info/crypt/
  * Who am I? - http://inyourface.info/bio/
 
All quotes are pursuant to the Fair Use Doctrine
for educational and discussion purposes per
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, Copyright Law.
 
Permalink: http://inyourface.info/ArT/Sci/Worlds.shtml

Fever
 
How long does it take when the Earth gets too hot for life to return to "normal" meaning conditions conducive for life as we know it? About 55 million years ago a geological situation released more than a TERRATON of gaseous carbon and there was a warming where temperatures in the arctic and temperate regions were elevated 8 degrees C. In the tropical regions the rise was only around 5 degrees C. To return to suitable; that is conducive temperatures took over a hundred thousand years. Another-words, it doesn't take much to push the Earth into a temperature zone where (most) life can no longer sustain itself.
 
That same crisis state is again predictable with much certainty due to global warming. Over half as much carbon as that which caused those conditions 55 million years ago has been put into the atmosphere.
 
Earth has also been changed and unable to HEAL as it once could due to the extensive land taken for agriculture to feed and shelter the billions of people which are now inhabiting the planet and the sun has become hotter so conditions are even less fit for life. As the planet warms MOST life will die.
 
My contention is we have too many people; we have used up too much of the land altering the natural cycle of oxygen and carbon dioxide production and all the other chemicals it takes to keep the planet in balance. We have unbalanced the Earth. The Earth has a fever.
 
The Earth must be balanced for life in order to regulate itself and maintain conditions necessary for life. We have already depleted 40% the Earth - reducing the Earth's capability to self-heal (to regulate itself).
 
What I say now will confound some of you. It is contrary to what you have read and heard and probably believe. By reducing pollution; that is, smoke and aerosols and other particulates we are making the fever worse and causing fast global warming. My point is these particulates are actually helpful in reducing global warming - but not so good for respiration, alergies, etc.
 
How is that possible? Because dust, smoke and some other pollution actually reduces global warming by reflecting sunlight back into space. This is called `global dimming' but it is transient and if there is a less particulate pollution there is faster global warming. Volcanic eruptions actually produce the kind of pollution which increases global dimming and reduces global warming.
 
Our overuse of fossil fuels is leading to a quicker heating and the many mechanisms for this has already been discussed and written about. Many who doubted it are coming around to the world community's position and there is a recognition that something must be done quickly.
 
I don't think that will help. Even if we now reduce fossil fuels, it won't do anything about the population problem. It won't do anything about changing our life styles. That doesn't mean we must not try, but until we address the carrying capacity of the Earth and do something about reducing the strain on the Earth's ability to self-regulate by reducing the population of the Earth, we cannot fix the problem of extinction AND life more complex than bacteria will not survive.

Beginning Again
 
The theory of Panspermia was first proposed by Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe in 1974 that life was seeded from space. The suggestion was not well received but that is not unusual and has happened often with a hypothesis that begins on the fringe of ideas which eventually does become mainstream. The theory of Panspermia is becoming more acceptable since evidence that some life on earth could stand the extreme rigors of outer space and may very well have arrived on earth on meteorites, comets or asteroids.
 
The Martian discovery of microbes was exciting enough for scientists to look at this proposal by professor Wickramsinghe again that primitive life can travel through space and still be fertile.
 
Analogy: After-all, plant seeds are often carried in the wind or by birds or in the feces of other animals. They are dropped in the soil and they become volunteers. We have plants or vegetables where we didn't have them before and nobody had to plant them.
 
There is also another not so desirable analogy: - Seeds carried from place to place and just like the birds on Earth can even cause genetically modified plants to invade an established farm of organic vegetables where these GM seeds overrun other fields and organic vegetables become GM vegetables - no longer what they were intended to be - and the effects are undesirable.
 
It is possible; I think very probable, that proeukaryote life; bacteria and archaia originated somewhere in the cosmos and they were carried here to seed planet Earth which eventually, due to the melding of archaia and bacteria resulted in mitochrondria, the fuel cell of complex life, which gave rise to eukaryotic multicellular organisms with a nucleus and the capability of becoming us.
 
And for whatever the reason or no reason at all except our greed and selfishness to spoil the planet - it is all going to come to an end. It is just a matter of time. The Earth is changing back to a previous state where most living things will die - except the extremophiles, like the seeds which became us. Maybe that is a message to us that Gaia and Homo sapiens, those of us who are the stewards for the planet have not had a suitable marriage and it is time for the seeds to re-fertilize the planet and begin again.
 
It is impossible to tell how many times this has happened before. If it (life-reproduction-death) keeps on going and life really is a repetition of what came before, perhaps purposeless evolution with random mutations and reproduction will be something more than an end in itself and life will eventually get it right - whatever that is?
 
###
 
  Hank Roth
 
Excerpts provided here are pursuant to the Fair Use Doctrine
for educational and discussion purposes per
Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, Copyright Law.
 
Permalink: http://inyourface.info/ArT/Xi/Fever.shtml