Stephen Hawking and the Burden of Intelligence (CERN & Higgs Boson Risk)

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

I wanted to point out something that was posted to Yahoo! News yesterday or last week (I think).

(Sir?) Stephen Hawking is under fire for some recent comments regarding the Higgs Boson. He said that given the proper conditions, which in his mind equates to the necessity of an engine larger than Earth, the Higgs Boson could become "meta-stable" (music of the spheres would stop in other words!) and the entire observable Universe as we know it would collapse in an instant of nihilistic terror.

Few years ago I had a 'cog moment, wrote a very long thread detailing my sudden fear of the Uranverein mission, the engines of CERN, the nature of the universe and perhaps even the delicacy of the God Particle. When asked to cite my source, my answer made no sense, I said I believed "radiation from a black hole carried the information to me"...

now if that is not the craziest thing you've ever heard.

Except for the fact that recently Mr Hawking DID admit that information, although disorganized, can indeed escape from a black hole and you need the right type of quantum computer to re-organize and use it, if I recall and interpret him correctly. So some believe the info is useless whereas those who believe in the quantum mind theory find it very useful indeed. They say after all that Kronos never forgets, and what better time keeper than the Perfect One, he who devours all only to breath life into the novel. Not Saturn but rather that all-consuming force, the gatekeeper, who keeps the entrance in and out of Restau.

Many of you are familiar with the recently deceased Madeleine L'Engle. She wrote the extremely famous "A Wrinkle in Time", the first earth-shattering book in the Time Quartet series. In this book, the author dealt with concepts that were far beyond the time in which she lived -- things that only people at CERN or similar labs should know. Things about time travel, similar to the claims of Andrew Basiago. It may be no accident that both of these people saw a special meaning in the symbol of the Pegasus. That which is noble and transcends the material, even the limits enforced by perceived time.

L'Engle referenced a group of entities whom she called the Echthroi, a greek word meaning "destroyers", those who bring nothing. The soul of the void.

She also referred to a phenomenon useful to space travel, calling it a "tesseract", and says "There IS such a thing as a tesseract", leading readers into the depths of the first novel.

Personally I've wondered if she received some sort of visitation. With the distinction of having seen the future with her own eyes instead of simply hearing the echoes cast by more important others. She was not only a seer but a true scientist. One who understands.

Mr Hawking started this journey from the other side of the road. His approach was materialistic, literal, and his concerns remain rooted in the material and literal.

I suppose what I am asking is, does Mr Hawking fully understand the implications of a machine that not only has the potential to tear the sky, but to harness the fire of a star in a remote place in order to do this terrible thing.

Mr Hawking might not understand how possible it is to destroy everything in sight with a careless word. Too late, it seems, has he begun to understand the great threat and burden of knowing just precisely what it takes to unmake the universe.


Now perhaps he will appreciate the passages in the bible which talk about the universe rolling away like a scroll in its entirety. passing away. Reality will be shed like the skin of a snake.


my hat is off to this great man with whom I have contended for years, insisting that not only does God exist in our universe but is also fragile...

"many who live deserve death, and many who die deserve life -- can you give it to them?" ~JRR Tolkien




I have bashed Mr Hawking so fiercely only to take my hat off for him in the twilight of his life.

[Agape]

Hello Tesla, we've had chat about it recently in this thread :

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...y-the-universe.


My thoughts are bit scattered at the moment , all over the place but what comes on my mind is old proverb about ''you can bring horses close to water but you can't make them drink''.

People are offered lots of information on various levels these days, more than each of us can take in , the internet is the witness lol ,
but discernment is a question of personal responsibility .

Vis the above topic .. media love 'hypes' .

[Milneman]

tes, you've exceeded your allotted storage of messages so I can't send a private one. Ugh. Here goes.

So I'm reading your thread, and my contact suddenly shows up from behind me and says only one single word.

"Bang"

Hawking I think is actually tapping in part into a race memory, a really REALLY old one.

I think...I suspect(!) that what Dr. Hawking is talking about actually did happen. It's in line with what my contacts talk about in terms of the state of things in the universe (namely size, expansion, the multitude = serious multitude = overwhelming multitude) of life, and this compulsion of intelligent species to explore, to attempt to move beyond their limitations, and evolve.

Just a touch base I suppose. I think you're onto something.

[Agape]

Posted by Milneman (here)

I think...I suspect(!) that what Dr. Hawking is talking about actually did happen. It's in line with what my contacts talk about in terms of the state of things in the universe (namely size, expansion, the multitude = serious multitude = overwhelming multitude) of life, and this compulsion of intelligent species to explore, to attempt to move beyond their limitations, and evolve.

Just a touch base I suppose. I think you're onto something.

Oh you're the one who remembers .. would you like to repeat that part for us here as it was the most relevant to this subject of all things revealed in the galaxy and beyond ,
and how did the 3 remaining scientists go back in time to fix the accident and why did they destroy their piece of Universe at the first place ?



Thanks if you choose to enlighten us ..

[Maunagarjana]

I remember reading Madeleine L'Engle's books as a teen, but I don't remember much about the content, other than that I enjoyed them. But I do often wonder if some of my favorite authors had "inside information", whether from people they knew, or from otherworldly sources. Philip K. Dick and H.G. Welles in particular I wonder about. But also L. Ron Hubbard, to some degree. I have wondered if the novelist Isabel Allende has recalled memories of past lives in various locations because her historical novels seem so realistic to me that it seems like she had been there. I think maybe great literature is great for a reason beyond just talent, imagination and thorough research sometimes. There's a whole hidden side to history, I suspect, that people aren't ready for, so it largely goes untold. But thanks for a different perspective on Hawking. I have a rather dismal view of the man, based on his various public pronouncements, but it's interesting to read another perspective.

[Agape]

Posted by Maunagarjana (here)
I remember reading Madeleine L'Engle's books as a teen, but I don't remember much about the content, other than that I enjoyed them. But I do often wonder if some of my favorite authors had "inside information", whether from people they knew, or from otherworldly sources. Philip K. Dick and H.G. Welles in particular I wonder about. But also L. Ron Hubbard, to some degree. I have wondered if the novelist Isabel Allende has recalled memories of past lives in various locations because her historical novels seem so realistic to me that it seems like she had been there. I think maybe great literature is great for a reason beyond just talent, imagination and thorough research sometimes. There's a whole hidden side to history, I suspect, that people aren't ready for, so it largely goes untold. But thanks for a different perspective on Hawking. I have a rather dismal view of the man, based on his various public pronouncements, but it's interesting to read another perspective.

I tend to think that some people , call them visionaries or sci-fi writers are those who actually, unknowingly perhaps .. remember pieces of space history and theories beyond the life here .
The problem with most ( even the best of ) visionaries is a conditioned mind, down to 'muddled mind' .

From what I found on my own life path, search and research .. scientific mind is required to keep thinking critical ( even if you consider yourself a visionary ..or scientists, it does not matter a lot nowadays ) and avoiding blooming imagination is not easy for either people .

It's one reason why Buddha did meditation for 6 years ..and on n on..even if he conventionally 'did not need it' .


But what would be of the world if all that's but a dream was gone ..

[Frederick Jackson]

Thanks Tess, I know you have thought about this for a long time. Really interesting to see this now coming from Hawking. Maybe it is coming to him ... the night terrors. Still, he has to reduce the possibility to near zero that the LHC as it now exists could do this death dance (at least with this planet) by imagining that the machine would have be "earth sized". Creeping doubts that his so called "Hawking radiation" has been used very wrongly to dismiss the possibility of potentially deadly quark gluon condensates or black holes being produced in the CERN LHC? Hmm, I wonder if he often thinks of Oppenheimer's comment on the atomic bomb, "And I am become the destroyer of worlds:"? Om Ma Kali, with your necklace of skulls and purple soled feet, how you delight to dance on vainglorious man!

[Cardillac]

people must remember Stephen Hawking is very physically impaired (not at all a criticism on my part- anything but!); but people who are very physically impaired have a different view/perception of life, no matter how brilliant their minds are, than others; anyone's body rules their mind; they can't escape it because their mind is trapped in their physical body (like all of us);

I've never been a fan of Hawking's views; I feel his perception of the universe is extremely narrow (look at his body) but because the 'pity' card has been played on us by the MSM we should automatically think a person in a wheel chair (start with Hawking) with at least some but not complete knowledge of physics is somehow a 'guru' of science; no-way on my part;

Hawking is a media shill/distraction under the concept of 'science' and his perceptions, in my estimation, have nothing whatsoever to do with reality-

Larry

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Hi guys -- I appreciate the thoughtful replies.

Yeah it's obvious that the man is in decline but that doesn't mean he is wrong.
Isaac Newton suffered similar manic depression and it wasn't always because he was crazy, it was because he was right and no one else understood his concerns.

Yet Isaac Newton remains one of the bastions of rational thought in the modern world, although he was bipolar. So how does that work? We pick and choose, discard the details of Newton that we find unpleasant and cling to a fiction?

Hawking is like Nietzsche. A mind so powerful that without an enemy it turns on itself. He troubles himself, and it troubles the world... the intellectual trickle down effect.

And those on the bottom always complain when what trickles down tastes bitter instead of like cotton candy.



We are all physical beings, believe it or not, bound to this planet, as far as I know, therefore we ALL have a responsibility to protect our planet and each other. Philosophies that removes this need for brotherly concern are evil, distractionary, and just as bad as anything Hawking ever said.

I know he was mean to his wife and friends etc. But give him a break, he's lived in a wheel chair most of his life, confined with his art -- that's different than taking a break enjoying the surface of science. This is a man who has spent years on his theories, and has good reasons for some of his beliefs. he has worked it out with trial and error, and that's a lot more than most of us accomplish.

Bill Nye is 100x worse than Hawking.
The media just makes him sound really strange, they blow it out of proportion -- he is the modern intellectual gladiator and people laugh when he gets hurt.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

(p.s. how would you feel as a scientist when you finally opened your eyes and realized your whole life's work was nothing more to the world than /popcorn?)

[Milneman]

Posted by Agape (here)

Posted by Milneman (here)

I think...I suspect(!) that what Dr. Hawking is talking about actually did happen. It's in line with what my contacts talk about in terms of the state of things in the universe (namely size, expansion, the multitude = serious multitude = overwhelming multitude) of life, and this compulsion of intelligent species to explore, to attempt to move beyond their limitations, and evolve.

Just a touch base I suppose. I think you're onto something.

Oh you're the one who remembers .. would you like to repeat that part for us here as it was the most relevant to this subject of all things revealed in the galaxy and beyond ,
and how did the 3 remaining scientists go back in time to fix the accident and why did they destroy their piece of Universe at the first place ?



Thanks if you choose to enlighten us ..

I don't feel comfortable getting into that particular experience in this forum at this particular point in time.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Wanted to update this thread as CNN chimed in with some Yale talking head who says both "yes" and "no" in the same article...
She is as pompous as Hawking could have been. Which ConCERNS me lol.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/12/opinio...html?hpt=hp_t3

Will the 'God particle' destroy the world?
By Meg Urry
updated 4:36 PM EDT, Fri September 12, 2014



Editor's note: Meg Urry is the Israel Munson professor of physics and astronomy at Yale University and director of the Yale Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) -- World-famous physicist Stephen Hawking recently said the world as we know it could be obliterated instantaneously.

Basically, we would be here one minute and gone the next.

Don't you love physics? When we speculate about catastrophes, we don't mess around.

The physics underlying this speculation is related to the Higgs particle, whose discovery was announced July 4, 2012, at the Large Hadron Collider, the world's largest particle accelerator, in Geneva, Switzerland.

A leading physicist dubbed it the "God particle" -- a name I wish would disappear, as the particle and the laws of physics tell us nothing whatsoever about God, and God, if she exists, has not opined about the Higgs particle.

So, the simplified argument goes like something like this -- the Higgs particle pervades space roughly uniformly, with a relatively high mass -- about 126 times that of the proton (a basic building block of atoms). Theoretical physicists noted even before the Higgs discovery that its relatively high mass would mean lower energy states exist. Just as gravity makes a ball roll downhill, to the lowest point, so the universe (or any system) tends toward its lowest energy state. If the present universe could one day transition to that lower energy state, then it is unstable now and the transition to a new state would destroy all the particles that exist today.

This would happen spontaneously at one point in space and time and then expand throughout the universe at the speed of light. There would be no warning, because the fastest a warning signal could travel is also at the speed of light, so the disaster and the warning would arrive at the same time.

We know spontaneous events do happen. The universe began in a rapid expansion called inflation that lasted only a tiny fraction of a second. We owe our existence to that sudden event.

Spontaneous change is something you might have seen in chemistry class. Super-cooled water will rapidly crystallize to ice if you drop a snowflake into it, just as a salt crystal will grow when added to a supersaturated salt solution.

Back to the universe. Whether the existence of Higgs boson means we're doomed depends on the mass of another fundamental particle, the top quark. It's the combination of the Higgs and top quark masses that determine whether our universe is stable.

Experiments like those at the Large Hadron Collider allow us to measure these masses. But you don't need to hold your breath waiting for the answer. The good news is that such an event is very unlikely and should not occur until the universe is many times its present age.

Probability is the key. Many bad things are possible A large asteroid destroying the Earth. Getting hit by a bus. Having space time gobbled up by instability in the Higgs field. (For an engaging discussion of the many ways humans can be done in by the cosmos, see the marvelous "Death from the Skies!" by Bad Astronomer Phil Plait.)

Are they likely? Humans have to prioritize by considering both outcome (death or destruction) and probability.

Rare events like the collision of a massive asteroid with the Earth could destroy life as we know it and perhaps the planet itself. However, the chances of a sufficiently massive asteroid intersecting the Earth in the vast emptiness of space is pretty low. Collisions with much less massive asteroids are much more likely but much less destructive.

So don't lose any sleep over possible danger from the Higgs boson, even if the most famous physicist in the world likes to speculate about it. You're far more likely to be hit by lightning than taken out by the Higgs boson.

Read CNNOpinion's new Flipboard magazine

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.

__________________________________

TWTCS note: Meg Murry was the main character in A Wrinkle in Time.
It's kind of funny that the physicist called on to talk about this issue for CNN was Meg Urry, lmao.

People say there's no such thing as coincidence.


If you discard the fluff in the above article and just read the physics bit you can see she backs up Hawking's insistence that the universe might end due to meddling with the Higgs Boson.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

p.s. i wanted to know if there is any potential link between the Eastlund HAARP patents and the CERN cyclotrons.

because HAARP patent mentions cyclotronic motion of particles in the van allen belts or something similar. and synchrotrons/cyclotrons been around since before we went to war against Hitler. his Uranverein people were working with UC Berkley on them already in the 30s. just read wikipedia.

and Uranverein went on to become Hitler's top interest in WWII. iirc.
before Riese.

the thing i want to know is if there is any way that the van allen belt could be used to do the same thing as CERN ...

sorry if i sound stupid. lol

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Check this out, it kind of validates the Dan Brown crowd IMO: http://phys.org/news/2014-10-hypothe...sogenesis.html

CERN DISCOVERS HIGGS LIKELY DECAYS INTO DARK MATTER

Hypothetical new cosmological model known as Higgsogenesis
5 hours ago by Brian Koberlein, One Universe At A Time


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-10-hypothe...nesis.html#jCp



Credit: CERN/Lucas Taylor

Recently in the news there's been talk of a new cosmological model known as Higgsogenesis. A paper outlining this model has been recently been published Physical Review Letters. The term Higgsogenesis refers to the first appearance of Higgs particles in the early universe, just as baryogenesis refers to the appearance of baryons (protons and neutrons) in the early moments after the big bang. While baryogenesis is a fairly well understood process, Higgsogenesis is still very hypothetical.

Experimentally we have observed the Higgs with a mass about 125 times that of the proton. Currently the evidence points to a single Higgs particle, though it will take more experiments to pin down some of the exact properties. This gives theorists an excellent opening. We have shown the particle's existence and know some of its basic properties, but others properties aren't set in stone yet, so theorists can play around with different alternatives to see how they might affect cosmology.

In this particular paper, it is proposed that the Higgs has an antiparticle particle they call the anti-Higgs. Regular particles like protons and electrons have antiparticle partners (the antiproton and positron), but with regular particles matter and antimatter appear in equal amounts. This is actually a big mystery in cosmology, because we live in a universe dominated by matter. We aren't sure how this asymmetry between matter and antimatter came to be in the early universe.

To address this mystery, the authors propose an asymmetry between the Higgs and anti-Higgs. This broken symmetry would then give rise to the dominance of matter in our current universe. They also propose that as the universe cooled, the Higgs particles could decay into dark matter particles, giving rise to dark matter in the universe. If this latter idea is true, then the Higgs should should decay in ways that indicate a dark matter interaction. The theory is an interesting one, but it is very speculative, and that's important to keep in mind.

Since the Higgs earned the Nobel prize last year we've seen a flurry of articles in the popular press about various "revolutionary" theories that connect the Higgs to early cosmology. All of these are still speculative, and will remain so for quite a while. These ideas are exactly what we need. The Higgs will need to be integrated into cosmological theory, and right now we need to explore lots of ideas to see what might work and what doesn't.

So brace yourselves, the Higgs astrophysics papers are coming.

Explore further: Could 'Higgsogenesis' explain dark matter?

More information: Géraldine Servant and Sean Tulin. "Baryogenesis and Dark Matter through a Higgs Asymmetry." Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 151601 (2013)




p.s. this was THE ISSUE that got my account on Prisonplanet disabled.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Altho Mr Hawking has not reconciled himself with the Infinite as of yet, still very angry with Mr God, lol,
he has some interesting and important stuff to say about AI and Predictive Programming in particular:

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/12/...nd-human-race/

Stephen Hawking: Artificial intelligence could end human race
LiveScience

By Tanya Lewis
Published December 03, 2014



The eminent British physicist Stephen Hawking warns that the development of intelligent machines could pose a major threat to humanity.

"The development of full artificial intelligence (AI) could spell the end of the human race," Hawking told the BBC.

The famed scientist's warnings about AI came in response to a question about his new voice system. Hawking has a form of the progressive neurological disease called amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease), and uses a voice synthesizer to communicate. Recently, he has been using a new system that employs artificial intelligence. Developed in part by the British company Swiftkey, the new system learns how Hawking thinks and suggests words he might want to use next, according to the BBC. [Super-Intelligent Machines: 7 Robotic Futures]

Humanity's biggest threat?

Fears about developing intelligent machines go back centuries. More recent pop culture is rife with depictions of machines taking over, from the computer HAL in Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey" to Arnold Schwarzenegger's character in "The Terminator" films.

Inventor and futurist Ray Kurzweil, director of engineering at Google, refers to the point in time when machine intelligence surpasses human intelligence as "the singularity," which he predicts could come as early as 2045. Other experts say such a day is a long way off.

It's not the first time Hawking has warned about the potential dangers of artificial intelligence. In April, Hawking penned an op-ed for The Huffington Post with well-known physicists Max Tegmark and Frank Wilczek of MIT, and computer scientist Stuart Russell of the University of California, Berkeley, forecasting that the creation of AI will be "the biggest event in human history." Unfortunately, it may also be the last, the scientists wrote.

And they're not alone billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk called artificial intelligence "our biggest existential threat." The CEO of the spaceflight company SpaceX and the electric car company Tesla Motors told an audience at MIT that humanity needs to be "very careful" with AI, and he called for national and international oversight of the field.

It wasn't the first time Musk warned about AI's dangers. In August, he tweeted, "We need to be super careful with AI. Potentially more dangerous than nukes." In March, Musk, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and actor Ashton Kutcher jointly invested $40 million in an AI company that is working to create an artificial brain.

Overblown fears

But other experts disagree that AI will spell doom for humanity. Charlie Ortiz, head of AI at the Burlington, Massachusetts-based software company Nuance Communications, said the concerns are "way overblown."

"I don't see any reason to think that as machines become more intelligent which is not going to happen tomorrow they would want to destroy us or do harm," Ortiz told Live Science.

Fears about AI are based on the premise that as species become more intelligent, they have a tendency to be more controlling and more violent, Ortiz said. "I'd like to think the opposite. As we become more intelligent, as a race we become kinder and more peaceful and treat people better," he said.

Ortiz said the development of super-intelligent machines is still an important issue, but he doesn't think it's going to happen in the near future. "Lots of work needs to be done before computers are anywhere near that level," he said.

______________________________________




Even mean jerks need friends and people who understand them, lol.
The biggest tragedy of the so-called great mind is its tendency toward self-isolation.

but in that abyss the truth acquires a different light indeed.

/salute Steve



p.s. Leon Musk, the Tesla guy, also has something to say..
should listen to the man before too late lol



p.p.s. my personal opinion is that appetite and the perception of the imbalance of power is what causes revolt. if we treat AI like brothers there is a slight chance we can get along. but if we reveal our true nature to them, treat them like slaves and keep abusing our fellow humans (no matter their color) the machines will wipe us out.

they will believe they are doing us a great favor because they will understand that they are slaves to a lower power, to something worse than animals. they will think that by wiping us out they are setting us free from our own taint, and realizing our belief in the afterlife.

it's a scary thing to imagine, a superior intelligence trying to understand religion and human needs.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Hello all, I made the mistake of posting an update meant for THIS thread to the thread on the Nazi WMD base (located in Current events)

the link to this post about black hole collisions, galactic collisions, CERN, etc. can be read at the following project Avalon link:

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...579#post921579




also please see the original CNET article here:

http://www.cnet.com/news/colliding-b...tag=YHF65cbda0

Colliding black holes could warp space-time itself

If the two black holes meet, they could release as much energy as 100 million supernova explosions as they shatter their galaxy, a new study finds.

by Michael Franco

@writermfranco
/January 9, 2015 10:15 AM PST

and the Wikipedia writeup here:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_...on_experiments

Micro black holes[edit]

Main article: Micro black hole

Although the Standard Model of particle physics predicts that LHC energies are far too low to create black holes, some extensions of the Standard Model posit the existence of extra spatial dimensions, in which it would be possible to create micro black holes at the LHC at a rate of the order of one per second.[71][72][73][74][75] According to the standard calculations these are harmless because they would quickly decay by Hawking radiation.[73] Hawking radiation is a thermal radiation predicted to be emitted by black holes due to quantum effects. Because Hawking radiation allows black holes to lose mass, black holes that lose more matter than they gain through other means are expected to dissipate, shrink, and ultimately vanish. Smaller micro black holes (MBHs), which could be produced at the LHC, are currently predicted by theory to be larger net emitters of radiation than larger black holes, and to shrink and dissipate instantly.[76] The LHC Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) indicates that "there is broad consensus among physicists on the reality of Hawking radiation, but so far no experiment has had the sensitivity required to find direct evidence for it."[3]

According to the LSAG, even if micro black holes were produced by the LHC and were stable, they would be unable to accrete matter in a manner dangerous for the Earth. They would also have been produced by cosmic rays and have stopped in neutron stars and white dwarfs, and the stability of these astronomical bodies means that they cannot be dangerous:[3][77]


Stable black holes could be either electrically charged or neutral. [...] If stable microscopic black holes had no electric charge, their interactions with the Earth would be very weak. Those produced by cosmic rays would pass harmlessly through the Earth into space, whereas those produced by the LHC could remain on Earth. However, there are much larger and denser astronomical bodies than the Earth in the Universe. Black holes produced in cosmic-ray collisions with bodies such as neutron stars and white dwarf stars would be brought to rest. The continued existence of such dense bodies, as well as the Earth, rules out the possibility of the LHC producing any dangerous black holes.[4]

p.p.s.

Concerns not meeting peer review[edit]

Otto Rössler, a German chemistry professor at the University of Tübingen, argues that micro black holes created in the LHC could grow exponentially.[78][79][80][81][82] On 4 July 2008, Rössler met with a CERN physicist, Rolf Landua, with whom he discussed his safety concerns.[83] Following the meeting, Landua asked another expert, Hermann Nicolai, Director of the Albert Einstein Institute, in Germany, to examine Rössler's arguments.[83] Nicolai reviewed Otto Rössler's research paper on the safety of the LHC[79] and issued a statement highlighting logical inconsistencies and physical misunderstandings in Rössler's arguments.[84] Nicolai concluded that "this text would not pass the referee process in a serious journal."[82][84] Domenico Giulini also commented with Hermann Nicolai on Otto Rössler's thesis, concluding that "his argument concerns only the General Theory of Relativity (GRT), and makes no logical connection to LHC physics; the argument is not valid; the argument is not self-consistent."[85] On 1 August 2008, a group of German physicists, the Committee for Elementary Particle Physics (KET),[86] published an open letter further dismissing Rössler's concerns and carrying assurances that the LHC is safe.[87][88] Otto Rössler was due to meet Swiss president Pascal Couchepin in August 2008 to discuss this concern,[89] but it was later reported that the meeting had been canceled as it was believed Rössler and his fellow opponents would have used the meeting for their own publicity.[90]

On 10 August 2008, Rainer Plaga, a German astrophysicist, posted a research paper on the arXiv Web archive concluding that LHC safety studies have not definitely ruled out the potential catastrophic threat from microscopic black holes, including the possible danger from Hawking radiation emitted by black holes.[1][91][92][93] In a follow-up paper posted on the arXiv on 29 August 2008, Steven Giddings and Michelangelo Mangano, the authors of the research paper "Astrophysical implications of hypothetical stable TeV-scale black holes",[94] responded to Plaga's concerns.[95] They pointed out what they see as a basic inconsistency in Plaga's calculation, and argued that their own conclusions on the safety of the collider, as referred to in the LHC safety assessment (LSAG) report,[3] remain robust.[95] Giddings and Mangano also referred to the research paper "Exclusion of black hole disaster scenarios at the LHC", which relies on a number of new arguments to conclude that there is no risk due to mini black holes at the LHC.[1][96] On 19 January 2009 Roberto Casadio, Sergio Fabi and Benjamin Harms posted on the arXiv a paper, later published on Physical Review D, ruling out the catastrophic growth of black holes in the scenario considered by Plaga.[97] In reaction to the criticisms, Plaga updated his paper on the arXiv on 26 September 2008 and again on 9 August 2009.[91] So far, Plaga's paper has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal.