backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 79 comment(s) - last by Dreifort.. on Sep 22 at 9:25 AM

Repairs for broken LHC transformer may have been costly

Despite protests and even death threats to the team scientists, CERN's Large Hadron Collector (LHC) went online last week without the world ending.  The world's largest particle accelerator zipped through warm-up tests firing proton beams.  Scientists were eager to start experiments as soon as the end of the month and start probing the universe's mysteries like Higgs bosons.

A setback put those plans on temporary hold.  The 30-ton transformer that provides cooling to the collider broke last Thursday, just a day after it was turned on.  The scientists with the European Organization for Nuclear Research reported the bad news. 

Fortunately, researchers were able to race to replace the faulty transformer.  They replaced it successfully this week and began to re-chill the 17 mile ring, which sits near the border between Swiss-French.  The ring is currently at close to absolute zero (0 Kelvin, -273.14 °C, -459.67 °F).  The closer to absolute zero the temperature is, the more productive the experiments will be.

The malfunctioned raised temperatures from 2 K, the typical operating temperature, to 4.5 K.  While 4.5 K is still extraordinarily cold for the Earth, it is too warm for the collider to operate. 

On September 10, the LHC had fired its first proton beam approaching the speed of light.  The first test fired clockwise, and then a second test was performed with a counterclockwise firing.  According to the team, "Several hundred orbits (were made)."

The next step was to tighten the proton beam with the ring's electromagnet equipment.  This readies the beam for collisions.  Just as this test began the transformer failed, so the test was canceled.  Now that its back running, researchers are ready to go back to where they left off, testing the tightening once more.

They hope to be running experiments within weeks.  The collisions of protons in the LHC will produce exotic particles, which the LHC's advance detectors such as the ATLAS detector will pick up, helping scientists to glean a better understanding about matter.  



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

World is destroyed
By GreenEnvt on 9/19/2008 9:31:45 AM , Rating: 2
They've blown up the world, but we just haven't realized it yet :)




RE: World is destroyed
By Bender 123 on 9/19/2008 9:43:19 AM , Rating: 2
According to the theory, with us as an outside observer, the LHC will forever remain in its current state, until we cross the event horizon...then we will be ripped up...


RE: World is destroyed
By therealnickdanger on 9/19/2008 9:56:32 AM , Rating: 3
To quote Randy Marsh:

"Nyo-my-Godt."


RE: World is destroyed
By Hellfire27 on 9/19/2008 10:24:23 AM , Rating: 3
I lost faith in the project when one of the lead scientists mis-quoted the "Where no man has gone before" line from Star Trek and stated it was from Star Wars. For any who watches the Colbert Report, his assessment was totally correct.


RE: World is destroyed
By Mitch101 on 9/19/2008 10:36:42 AM , Rating: 5
Cam feed of the LHC.

http://www.cyriak.co.uk/lhc/lhc-webcams.html

Pretty boring seeing people walking around but still pretty cool.


RE: World is destroyed
By SandmanWN on 9/19/08, Rating: -1
RE: World is destroyed
By Mitch101 on 9/19/2008 11:08:07 AM , Rating: 2
Cats out of the bag. Was hoping to freak a few people out.


RE: World is destroyed
By NaSnake on 9/19/2008 11:55:16 AM , Rating: 2
lol good one


RE: World is destroyed
By B3an on 9/20/2008 5:25:36 PM , Rating: 2
LOL i love Cyriak's work. Some great stuff on there.


RE: World is destroyed
By Vanners on 9/22/2008 12:29:20 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Pretty boring seeing people walking around but still pretty cool.


4.5 degrees K to be exact!


RE: World is destroyed
By ebakke on 9/19/2008 9:57:53 AM , Rating: 3
By the time we would've realized it, humans will have already killed themselves off (or destroyed the world trying to do it).


RE: World is destroyed
By Misty Dingos on 9/19/2008 9:59:21 AM , Rating: 3
Until they start colliding particles we are safe. When they start banging them together it is the end of the world.

Black holes + planet earth = slurp

I saw the video on the internet it has to be true then.


RE: World is destroyed
By Oregonian2 on 9/19/2008 8:03:09 PM , Rating: 5
Actually we may have already perished -- but fortunately we live in many parallel universes simultaneously in a simulcast-like environment and it's only one channel that got blown out by the black holes. Kind of like how a cat has nine lives. The actual number for the simulcast mechanism is still being debated by theoretical physicists so we can't be sure how many more blowouts our master pattern can survive.


RE: World is destroyed
By Inkjammer on 9/19/2008 10:30:44 AM , Rating: 5
Slowest. Apocalypse. EVER.


RE: World is destroyed
By BruceLeet on 9/19/2008 4:08:51 PM , Rating: 2
Luck. Runs. Out.


RE: World is destroyed
By omnicronx on 9/19/2008 1:53:34 PM , Rating: 2
All they have done is sent the beam clockwise and counterclockwise. It is not until they make the beams collide that these so called 'mini black holes' have possibility of forming. This really should be mentioned in the article as the dangerous part has yet to come.


RE: World is destroyed
By captainsparkle on 9/19/2008 2:59:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All they have done is sent the beam clockwise and counterclockwise. It is not until they make the beams collide that these so called 'mini black holes' have possibility of forming. This really should be mentioned in the article as the dangerous part has yet to come.


Except for the small matter that those actually involved with the experiment say there is no danger whatsoever :-)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/audio/2008/sep/1...

I'm guessing many a comment was in humor and or jest, but none the less, I worked on an early early early prototype of ATLAS (just as a lab monkey, I'm not that smart), and i like to set the record straight :-)


RE: World is destroyed
By Vanners on 9/22/2008 12:45:26 AM , Rating: 2
Of course we know there is no danger because we've done this all before... um...

No! we know this because our theories say so and we know our theories are correct because we've proved them!... or... we will do... in a couple of days...

Because our scientists can be trusted; they've never been wrong before!... Well, at least not these ones... at least not on this subject!... so far as we know...

There is a huge difference between fact and theory. A number of scientific laws have been proven wrong, and from one of my first science classes which discussed this subject laws were theories that were proven correct. So where does that leave us?

The best argument for us not going bang I have yet heard was a hypothesis that these sort of collisions happen every day in our ionosphere (however, again, that isn't exactly provable).

I'm not saying that the thing is going to blow up in humanity's face, but I think it is unmitigated gall of scientists to say "trust us on this" when they only have unproven theories to back themselves up! Throughout history science has been wrong a whole lot, and we still can't prove that we have got it right! That's what this experiment is trying to get to - so they roll humanities D20 and hope they make their save against ignorance.


RE: World is destroyed
By captainsparkle on 9/19/2008 3:01:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All they have done is sent the beam clockwise and counterclockwise. It is not until they make the beams collide that these so called 'mini black holes' have possibility of forming. This really should be mentioned in the article as the dangerous part has yet to come.


Except for the small matter that those actually involved with the experiment say there is no danger whatsoever :-)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/audio/2008/sep/1...

I'm guessing many a comment was in humor and or jest, but none the less, I worked on an early early early prototype of ATLAS (just as a lab monkey, I'm not that smart), and i like to set the record straight :-)


RE: World is destroyed
By snownpaint on 9/19/2008 3:24:35 PM , Rating: 2
Well at least all the concerns about global warming won't be an issue anymore.

Even if you made a super small black hole the size of a molecule, once the energy that is inputted is cut, the lack of input energy will collapse the hole, and probably revert back to energy and particles, possibly elemental particles that have been stripped to their core. It would not have the critical mass/matter/energy to punch its own hole and sustain itself without the aid of a few million kJ's of energy. Most black holes are the power plants of galaxies, gaining energy as stars and matter fall into them. A star has to get monstrously big before it can compress in on itself to create a black hole, that is allot of energy/matter. That's why black holes are found in the center of galaxies. You can fit a million earths into our stable sun and a million of our suns into a supergiant, and you still don't have enough to make a stable black hole. To think we can make that kind of power, when we are running at 90% demand on our power grids is funny.

Actually, I have a feeling we will find something so amazing with this device that it will revolutionize the world.. The only down side is this new energy/matter, will be so top secret that any chance of using it anytime soon to better the world will be so far off, we'll never see it in our lives. Or we will and it will be tested on Iran.


RE: World is destroyed
By Chamuel85 on 9/19/2008 3:54:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well actually supermassive black holes reside in the center of our galaxie and are on the magnitude of millions of our suns in masses. However, to create a smaller black hole takes the mass of a star that's I think at least 10x the size of our sun. Regardless, you're correct. There isn't enough energy or mass available to the human race within several light years to create a stable one. :)


LHC
By borismkv on 9/19/2008 9:42:23 AM , Rating: 5
I think I prefer the acronym...cause every time I read Large Hadron Collider, by brain reads it as Large Hardon Collider, which is something I really don't think anyone needs to spend billions of dollars on.




RE: LHC
By Bender 123 on 9/19/2008 9:45:12 AM , Rating: 2
Do we really need to bring this one back...Now I am thinking "Googles Gordon Freemans Hardon Collider" from the last LHC posting.


RE: LHC
By Proxes on 9/19/2008 10:05:04 AM , Rating: 4
Light's Hope Chapel.


RE: LHC
By Flunk on 9/19/2008 10:29:06 AM , Rating: 2
That sounds like some sort of Religious BS to me.


RE: LHC
By rudolphna on 9/19/2008 10:51:41 AM , Rating: 2
Its a small neutral outpost for Horde and Alliance in Eastern Plaugelands, in WoW. An argent dawn (anti scourge) camp


RE: LHC
By Sulphademus on 9/19/2008 2:33:19 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe theyre working on an LHC out at LHC which they will use to generate black holes with which to defeat Arthas?


RE: LHC
By rudolphna on 9/19/2008 3:28:05 PM , Rating: 2
lol yeah! they could send a black hole over to arthas castle and suck it into it! BAM! no more scourge!


RE: LHC
By Obujuwami on 9/19/2008 6:30:18 PM , Rating: 2
Only problem is you would destroy the rest of Azeroth...so everyone would have to live in Outlands...though i could live with that!


RE: LHC
By Ordr on 9/19/2008 6:18:55 PM , Rating: 2
The location of the final part of the Death Knight starting questline in Wrath of the Litch King.


RE: LHC
By MrBungle123 on 9/19/2008 11:31:16 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Large Hardon Collider


how long before this is the name of some black gay porno?


RE: LHC
By AE3Wolfman on 9/19/2008 1:20:30 PM , Rating: 2
ROFL


RE: LHC
By snownpaint on 9/19/2008 3:35:21 PM , Rating: 2
I think the erectile dysfunction market is a $5billion+ market, and Gay porn is a $5Billion+ industry.. So $10 billion seems about right for a Large HardOn Collider..


RE: LHC
By lagomorpha on 9/19/2008 6:27:45 PM , Rating: 2
"Large Hardon Collider, which is something I really don't think anyone needs to spend billions of dollars on."

And yet Pfizer stock continues to rise...


Re: Details
By sld on 9/19/2008 10:04:09 AM , Rating: 3
No offence, the article is too vague for the science-loving tech crowd.

It isn't as simple as a "The closer to absolute zero the temperature is, the more productive the experiments will be."

What happens is that the transformer has to be kept at or below 2K (that's -271.15 degrees Celsius) so that superconductivity can kick in. What's so important about the experiments that superconductivity is needed? Well, a superconducting conductor allows an obscene amount of 'current' (in reality, electrons flow, not positive 'current') to pass through it.

If I'm certain that a transformer is used for step-up/step-down, then I guess this allows for an equally large current at a different voltage to be generated.

A superconducting transformer doesn't merely choke and sputter and 'break down'. If the transformer goes above critical temperature, it regains its usual resistance. The large amount of current that still passes through it will then VERY rapidly generate an obscene amount of heat. This will proceed to flash-boil all surrounding coolant, which will then cause damage to the transformer, among other factors.

The extent of damage will most likely be dictated by the twitch response time needed by the operator to smash the EMERGENCY STOP button. Either that or a temperature monitoring system...




RE: Re: Details
By sld on 9/19/2008 10:11:44 AM , Rating: 2
The phenomenon is called quenching.


RE: Re: Details
By ElementZero on 9/19/2008 10:16:32 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The extent of damage will most likely be dictated by the twitch response time needed by the operator to smash the EMERGENCY STOP button. Either that or a temperature monitoring system...


Yeah I'm thinking that on something as expensive and delicate as this that there has to be a computer monitoring all of that and the computer would shut it down.


RE: Re: Details
By Spectator on 9/19/2008 11:02:37 AM , Rating: 2
What i find amusing is that 2k temp. just happens to be same temp as space. well 0+ background radiation = 2.7k?

Do you think one day. ppl will understand space as we call it is just a super conductor of an undiscovered field.

The "field" supports all we know to exist. and existance its self is the resistance on this super conductor. blhaa so on. Warning !! side effect may include gravity. lol


RE: Re: Details
By bobsmith1492 on 9/19/2008 12:12:40 PM , Rating: 2
Um... no. Being the same temperature does not mean it does the same thing.


RE: Re: Details
By joex444 on 9/19/2008 1:51:31 PM , Rating: 3
Superconductivity occurs at a wide range of about 0.4K to 115K (I might be missing some of the newest ones, I believe I heard of 123K or so a while back, not sure if it was confirmed). The mechanism of superconductivity, atleast in BCS theory, is the idea of Cooper pairs. That is electron-electron pairs at a large scale (relative to the lattice structure). If you're not aware of this, it should come as a surprise. Electrons "bond" to each other.

Background temperature of the Universe is 2.7K, but this is based on microwave radiation. This is from the expansion of the Universe since the Big Bang. That's it.

Trust me, these two "coincidences" [in so far as 2.7K is between 0.4K and 123K... an utterly meaningless link], are related to each other as much as capacitors and the double slit experiment.


RE: Re: Details
By phattyboombatty on 9/19/2008 12:46:29 PM , Rating: 3
You completely overthought all of that. The malfunctioning transformer is one of several hundred transformers used to cool parts of the collider. When it failed, it caused the temperature of the collider to go up a few degrees. The transformer was replaced, and now they are able to lower the temperature again.

The transformer doesn't need to be at near-absolute-zero to operate, it need to be operating so that the collider can be at near-absolute-zero. You had things reversed in your comment.


RE: Re: Details
By Ringold on 9/20/2008 3:49:09 PM , Rating: 2
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7626944....

Sounds to me like the magnets themselves warmed up 100C, about 100 of them.


RE: Re: Details
By Sandok on 9/20/2008 3:31:00 PM , Rating: 2
Dailytech isn't for the science-loving crowd... It's as the name implys, a tech site with brief articles.

If you want real science, there are much better sites out there!


I have a theory....
By rudolphna on 9/19/2008 10:59:51 AM , Rating: 2
This is a serious post, so please no crap. Thanks. :)
A black holes gravity is so intense that not even light can escape... When an object gets close to a black hole, since the gravity must exceed the pull of speed of light, wouldnt any object being pulled into it then be accelerated to the speed of Light, or beyond, which would then pull it into the past? According to einsteins theory, the closer you get to the speed of light, the slower time passes. AT the speed of light, time stops altogether. Beyond it, time starts going backward. So wouldnt it make sense that a black hole, really could be a portal to another time, not dimension, but time? It could potentially send you back in time would it not? Comments/thoughts please.




RE: I have a theory....
RE: I have a theory....
By rudolphna on 9/19/2008 1:50:18 PM , Rating: 2
as unrealistic as that sounds, it makes for a very interesting and intriuging story doesnt it?


RE: I have a theory....
By Spectator on 9/19/2008 12:21:27 PM , Rating: 2
To be different.

Its not that things cant escape a Black hole. its more like.

The "super magic un-named field" that supports the BH existance is being drained so quickly. like a whirlpool. everything bobbing about near this imbalance is drawn in until. it eventually dies. the radiation spat out is just the left overs. that the BH does not need to exist.

Or. if you wanted to make Sci-fi films. the BH is infact just a cool Planet size Particle Accellerator rapped around outside of the planet.. and the Vorgons live happily inside thier cool defence system. Chukkle


RE: I have a theory....
By joex444 on 9/19/2008 2:22:57 PM , Rating: 3
The speed of light is not a "pull."

We use the word "pull" to denote a force attracting two objects. For example, the Earth pulls on the moon, and the moon pulls on the Earth. What is different with light compared to the Earth is that the Earth is clearly made of baryons, among other particles. Baryons have the nice property of having mass. Light, on the other hand, is nothing but photons, which have 0 mass. I do not mean "nearly zero" or "a very insignificant amount of" mass. I mean, truly 0.000000000000 ad infinitum mass, in any unit of your choice (eV/c^2, kg, ounces, whatever).

I'll assume you're aware that F=ma. Therefore, no mass = no force. No force means there is no acceleration, which means that light cannot accelerate or decelerate. However, as hopefully some of us are aware, light DOES BEND. What you have is the DeBroglie relationship which assigns a momentum to a photon, based on its wavelength. Now, the other definition of a force is dp/dt, p is the momentum. However, when light bends it keeps the same speed but changes momentum. The obvious implication is that momentum is a vector, whereas speed is a scalar (velocity is a vector), which essentially means you have photons which begin to orbit a massive object. For most interactions, the eccentricity of the orbit is much greater than 1. This means it has a hyperbolic path, which means the massive object will simply bend the light but not pull it in. At an eccentricity of exactly 1, it will slingshot around, and at an eccentricity of less than 1, it will orbit (eccentricities of all the planets and the Sun are under 0.21 [approximately the value for Mars]).

Now, why did I bother? In your 'theory' (it's just a hypothesis, and the wording you used lends itself to obvious methods of disproving it; in sciences a theory is analogous to a law -- it is extremely naive to believe that something is less important if it is called a theory as opposed to a law... Pythagorean theory for example cannot be ignored because it's "just a theory."), you said that the "gravity must exceed the pull of speed of light." This would only occur with a force, but there is no such force.

In your very next sentence, where an object is pulled into it and accelerated to the speed of light (or beyond), that is a very impossible statement. You can get arbitrarily close to the speed of light. You cannot exceed it, however. Just go look at what the formula is, you'll see to do that requires the value to be infinity (it is 1/ sqrt(c^2-c^2), up to factors). It would take more energy than there exists in the entire Universe to accelerate even one electron to the speed of light. You obviously cannot go beyond the speed of light (hereafter "c") without firsting going to exactly c. As such, travel above c is nonphysical for objects which are currently going less than c. Theoretically, there could be particles which travel above c but can not go below c (see: Tachyons). As such, there are obvious problems with detecting them and they remain unobserved. I say theoretically here, since there is a mathematical way to show they could exist. It is not a true theory in the sense of Pythagorean theory, however.

You are indeed correct that time slows down for relativistic objects. This is just the twin paradox. I would say that assuming you could enter a black hole and not be immediately turned into a very hot dense particle soup along with every other object that entered the black hole, you would begin to accelerate and you could "live" in the blackhole for hundreds of thousands of years (to an Earth observer). You would "die" according to your body at a normal age, approx 70, assuming you could find some blackhole food and water. Nobody would know where you were, and you would not know anything about the outside. You would not be able to sneak out the backdoor and stop your mother from getting pregnant with you, or any of the other weird paradoxes that may be logically true but physically irrelevant.

BTW, I'm not giving you 'crap.' I'm being serious too. I've essentially completed the bachelor's in physics, and as such I feel obligated to help out others who are not exactly sure what Physics is or does. The vast majority of the public is completely lost in the field of Physics with no real sense of what we do, or even why they should care if we do anything or not. Many of the members of the non-Scientific community have few ideas about how science works, and sadly most of their information comes from stereotypes which are blatantly offbase. The limit of Physics which most people will have been taught is generally high school kinematics. It is very mysterious to them, then, how we would be able to come up with these theories on things which are actually quite complicated when they have only seen basic kinematics and energy conservation problems (bullet hits a block on a pendulum being one of the most complete problems). Heck, we can't even describe *exactly* where a pendulum is because we need to substitue sin(theta) = theta and invoke the small angle approximation, which breaks down at around 42degrees [the approximation is done in radians].


RE: I have a theory....
By Ben on 9/20/2008 2:42:04 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the clarification.

Some of these posts tend to head towards Sci-fi land on subjects like these.


RE: I have a theory....
By masaauk on 9/20/2008 4:01:50 AM , Rating: 2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_force
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relat...
no mass = no force?
I think some people might disagree with you on that.


RE: I have a theory....
By Josett on 9/20/2008 3:47:13 PM , Rating: 2
joex444:

The formula is rather 1/sqrt(c^2 - v^2), even if v^2 = c^2.

Just a 'picky' correction.

Also, the photon has a null [rest] mass; it's energy varies according to E=hc/L, translated into eV units. To cut a long story short, light is not only bent by massive bodies; it can be (and is) attracted gravitationally towards the body's centre of mass (redshifted, therefore, loosing energy to the gravitational field).

Cheers!


RE: I have a theory....
By Yawgm0th on 9/21/2008 2:24:18 PM , Rating: 1
It's actually called the Pythagorean Theorem. Theorem != theory, and the distinction is very important. Additionally, the Pythagorean Theorem is used in trigonometry, not science or physics. I don't think the analogy works in this case. However, I do not disagree with the point you are making.


Luminosity...
By Josett on 9/19/2008 9:53:08 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
On September 10, the LHC had fired its first proton beam at the speed of light."

Well, not quote... er... i mean not quite. Close to but not 'at'.

quote:
The next step was to tighten the proton beam with the ring's electromagnet equipment.

This 'tightening' of the beams, luminosity, is one of the most fundamental improvements on any hadron collider; it's luminosity which allows it to achieve the 2 x 7.0 Tev+ at the collision point, its centre of mass.




RE: Luminosity...
By rudolphna on 9/19/2008 10:54:39 AM , Rating: 2
if it was "at" the speed of light, it would have dissappeared into the present, which would become the past while still being the present, thus creating a paradox which will distupt the space-time continuum and destroy the universe. :)


RE: Luminosity...
By geddarkstorm on 9/19/2008 1:01:02 PM , Rating: 2
Considering we still exist, and ever existed, tells me that can't happen ;3


Mistake
By imperator3733 on 9/19/2008 10:19:09 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
which sits near the border between Swiss-French

That should be either "which sits on the Swiss-French border" or "which sits near the border between Switzerland and France".




RE: Mistake
By bobsmith1492 on 9/19/2008 12:14:58 PM , Rating: 1
Or " which sits near the border between Swiss and French territory"


RE: Mistake
By nugundam93 on 9/21/2008 9:41:41 PM , Rating: 2
i hate getting OC on grammar but...

"The malfunctioned raised temperatures from 2 K..."

that should've read "The malfunction..."


By ShaolinSoccer on 9/20/2008 7:29:30 AM , Rating: 2
There is no way I can even compare my job experience with what is going on at the LHC but I will tell you this. I have worked on MANY huge successful industrial projects as an electrician. And every single one of them always had problems starting up. The people behind the LHC are being optimistic. But I'm sure they realize there will be problems. I'm just as excited and just as worried about this project as anyone. But to be worried "right now" is not logical and won't be until they tell the public "we are now ready to start smashing particles". I don't claim to know anything about what they are trying to do, but I do hope that scientists in the future will be smart enough to not do an experiment on Earth that may "possibly" destroy the planet. It's bad enough that we don't hear from any alien life in our galaxy. Maybe it's because all scientific species on any world always attempt an experiment that destroys their home planet before they can become a species to populate other worlds? We're all trying to become the "masters of reality" but is destroying your home planet worth the price?




By captainsparkle on 9/20/2008 2:46:27 PM , Rating: 2
Not meaning to be beating a dead horse, but there actually is ZERO chance of the LHC destroying the planet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/audio/2008/sep/1...

The reports that it could have been by people with convincing titles and a penchant to call their local newspapers, but not by anybody associated with the project.
While i can't get the source, some commentators have compared it to the nuclear bombs in World War 2, whereby press reports thought that "second chain reaction" meant the bombs were so powerful as to cause the destruction of the planet--when really the scientists were just wondering if the second bomb would work, or if the test was a fluke. :-)
As for your experience in construction-- I have to agree with you (not that i have such experience, but the concept). This has been touted as the largest machine ever created. The fact that it had gone so smoothly to this point should be a source of praise.


By Josett on 9/20/2008 3:14:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"masters of reality"


Not really.
Perhaps the first time humanity had to deal with such kind of 'scary outcomes of the scientific intelligentsia', was with the tamed fission process.
The probabilities of such a miscalculated event at the LHC are minute, but still not null. Genetics might become a much more serious candidate to unpredictable side-effects.
Other than that, counting out natural catastrophes and intentional global anihilation, like joex444 addressed, scientific & technological matters are poorly understood enough by the laymen (with a lot of responsability from the scientic community, I must concede), in order to create such fears & insecurity, and even, uneducated drastic conclusions.


Obscure HL reference
By FaceMaster on 9/19/2008 10:21:56 AM , Rating: 2
'Don't worry, trained military personnel are being dropped into the base now to 'clear up' what is going on...'




RE: Obscure HL reference
By archcommus on 9/19/2008 11:15:26 AM , Rating: 2
Yes.
Half-Life = good.


Anyone see groundhog day? Great movie.......
By Rob94hawk on 9/19/08, Rating: 0
By bobsmith1492 on 9/19/2008 12:15:31 PM , Rating: 3
No I did not see groundhog day. Dumb movie.......

No I did not see groundhog day. Dumb movie.......

No I did not see groundhog day. Dumb movie.......

No I did not see groundhog day. Dumb movie.......


By Camikazi on 9/19/2008 5:13:17 PM , Rating: 1
If you didn't see it how can you say it was a dumb movie?


LHC - finally
By JLF on 9/19/2008 12:17:01 PM , Rating: 2
I will be glad when the LHC creates a black hole and swallows the earth. It will happily destroy all those who fear the LHC will create a black hole and swallow... You know the rest. Just think - no more global warming and no more hand wringers proclaiming the end of the world!




RE: LHC - finally
By djc208 on 9/19/2008 2:30:42 PM , Rating: 2
At least they'll all get a chance to say "I told you so" before we die.


LHS Accelerator experiment
By Benko on 9/19/2008 10:29:18 PM , Rating: 2
To get a perspective on how powerful the LHS really is, how many times more powerful is the LHS than the Fermilab accelerator in Chicago, Illinois?




RE: LHS Accelerator experiment
By Apoxie on 9/20/2008 5:02:24 AM , Rating: 2
About 7 times!

quote:
As of 2008, the Tevatron is no longer the highest energy collider in the world. In September of 2008 CERN made its Large Hadron Collider operational. It is expected that the initial center-of-mass of 10 TeV, with full energy to follow in 2009. This particle accelerator has a 27km circumference, and will accelerate particles to a total collision energy of 14 TeV, 7 times the energy at Fermilab. Although Fermilab will continue to play an important role in the future of physics, as of 2008 it lost its prestigious title of the world's highest energy collider.


Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermilab


Sounds worse at BBC
By Ringold on 9/20/2008 3:54:24 PM , Rating: 2
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7626944....

Over there, it sounds much worse, and more interesting, than described here. Huge failure, large temperature gain, and a ton of liquid helium squirting all over the place, and some number of multiple months required to restart. Maybe it's just me, but when things fail, I prefer spectacular failures!




RE: Sounds worse at BBC
By Dreifort on 9/22/2008 9:25:33 AM , Rating: 2
they stole that plot line from Stargate SG1.


Is is bad?
By TheFace on 9/19/2008 10:55:57 AM , Rating: 2
So I heard the world was going to end, so I've taken up smoking... and drinking heavily.. and heroin... and unprotected sex... with animals.. and eating bacon that I deep fry and then smother in mayonnaise..

How much time before the world is over? My meth has to get here quick, as I'm getting impatient from all this coke I've been snorting.




RE: Is is bad?
By bodar on 9/20/2008 6:07:49 AM , Rating: 1
You know what I'm gonna do?
I'm gonna get myself a 1967 Cadillac El Dorado convertible
Hot pink, with whale skin hubcaps
And all leather cow interior
And big brown baby seal eyes for head lights (yeah)
And I'm gonna drive in that baby at 115 miles per hour
Gettin' 1 mile per gallon,
Sucking down Quarter Pounder cheeseburgers from McDonald's
In the old fashioned, non-biodegradable, styrofoam containers
And when I'm done sucking down those greaseball burgers
I'm gonna wipe my mouth with the American flag
And then I'm gonna toss the Styrofoam containers right out the side
And there ain't a goddamn thing anybody can do about it
You know why, because we've got the bombs, that's why
2 words, nuclear fucking weapons, OK?!
Russia, Germany, Romania, they can have all the democracy they want
They can have a big democracy cakewalk
right through the middle of Tienanmen Square
and it wont make a lick of difference
Because we've got the bombs, OK?!
John Wayne's not dead, he's frozen, and as soon as we find a cure for cancer
We're gonna thaw out The Duke and he's gonna be pretty pissed off
You know why?
Have you ever taken a cold shower?
Well multiply that by 15 million times
That's how pissed off The Duke's gonna be!
I'm gonna get The Duke, and John Cassavetes,
and Lee Marvin, and Sam Peckinpah, and a case of whiskey,
and drive down to Texas and say.....


If we could put it on a backpack
By Smartless on 9/19/2008 2:29:20 PM , Rating: 1
Ghostbusters! I ain't afraid of no ghost.




RE: If we could put it on a backpack
By Ordr on 9/19/2008 6:20:23 PM , Rating: 2
-Tell him about the twinkie.

-....what about the twinkie?


By kylegtheassman on 9/21/2008 3:31:25 AM , Rating: 2
The world is not going to end just watch and see that everything is going to be fine.
They have did smaller tests before and do you see the world end no.
most of every buddy is a noob that does not know anything so stop saying the world is going to end, if it does who cares are you afraid to die be a man and take your death like a man. lololol




Get a crowbar...
By V3ctorPT on 9/21/2008 5:43:31 AM , Rating: 2
This experience remembers me of something... Oh!!

It was how Half-life began!!




it all starts so innocently...
By Dreifort on 9/22/2008 9:23:58 AM , Rating: 2
Some scientists debate whether the big bang was instantaneous or if it was something that took millions of years in itself?

I was watching the live web cam, I could have sworn I saw Al Gore with a pipe wrench walk by...

"Muuhaahahaha!"

(If he can't blame our weather on global warming, he'll blame our CO2s for any black holes that may develope.)




"People Don't Respect Confidentiality in This Industry" -- Sony Computer Entertainment of America President and CEO Jack Tretton














botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki