Dark Matter - to be evoked(?) by CERN's Large Hadron Machine

[Bob]

Galaxies in our universe seem to be achieving an impossible feat.

They are rotating with such speed that the gravity generated by their observable matter could not possibly hold them together; they should have torn themselves apart long ago.

The same is true of galaxies in clusters, which leads scientists to believe that something we cannot see is at work.

They think something we have yet to detect directly is giving these galaxies extra mass, generating the extra gravity they need to stay intact. This strange and unknown matter was called “dark matter” since it is not visible.

Dark Matter Originates From Higgs Boson?

Dark matter

Unlike normal matter, dark matter does not interact with the electromagnetic force. This means it does not absorb, reflect or emit light, making it extremely hard to spot.

In fact, researchers have been able to infer the existence of dark matter only from the gravitational effect it seems to have on visible matter. Dark matter seems to outweigh visible matter roughly six to one, making up about 26% of all the matter in the universe.

Here's a sobering fact: The matter we know and that makes up all stars and galaxies only accounts for 4% of the content of the universe!

But what is dark matter? One idea is that it could contain "supersymmetric particles" – hypothesized particles that are partners to those already known in the Standard Model. Experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) may provide more direct clues about dark matter.

Experiments to create Dark Matter are scheduled to start-up with the LHC being ramped up to 13-14 TEV this March, 2015, with almost twice as much energy as previously explored.

Many theories say the dark matter particles would be light enough to be produced at the LHC. If they were to be created at the LHC, they would escape through the detectors unnoticed.

However, they would carry away energy and momentum, so physicists could infer their existence from the amount of energy and momentum “missing” after a collision.

Dark matter candidates arise frequently in theories that suggest physics beyond the Standard Model, such as supersymmetry and extra dimensions.

One theory suggests the existence of a “Hidden Valley”, a parallel world made of dark matter having very little in common with matter we know.

If one of these theories proved to be true, it could help scientists gain a better understanding of the composition of our universe and, in particular, how galaxies hold together.

Dark energy

Dark energy makes up approximately 70% of the universe and appears to be associated with the vacuum in space. It is distributed evenly throughout the universe, not only in space but also in time – in other words, its effect is not diluted as the universe expands.

The even distribution means that dark energy does not have any local gravitational effects, but rather a global effect on the universe as a whole.

This leads to a repulsive force, which tends to accelerate the expansion of the universe.

The rate of expansion and its acceleration can be measured by observations based on the Hubble law. These measurements, together with other scientific data, have confirmed the existence of dark energy and provide an estimate of just how much of this mysterious substance exists.

From CERN's officiel website home.web.cern.ch (Source)

When the Higgs Boson decays, it is expected (anticipated?) that a photon plus a dark matter particle will be liberated.

Supersymmetry verses the Standard Theory

The Higgs particle mediates the Higgs field, which endows all matter with mass.

The discovery of the Higgs boson at the LHC was the last “missing piece” of the Standard Model of physics. The Standard Model governs our understanding of the quantum world; it’s a recipe book of sorts that enables us to understand how subatomic particles and forces interact on the smallest of scales.

However, though the basic framework of the Standard Model works for most of our purposes, it is not an all-encompassing model. Most notably, the Standard Model does not incorporate gravity — obviously a very important omission.

Also, the Standard Model does not predict the source of mysterious dark matter — a fact that is growing more contentious by the day.

The Higgs boson may decay in an alternative way than what has been observed to date; a decay path that is governed by supersymmetry.

Supersymmetry predicts that there are more massive “super partners” of known particles that exist beyond the Standard Model framework.

One possible decay channel would be for the Higgs boson to decay to two dark matter WIMPs. (Weakly interacting massive particles).

The term “WIMP” is given to a dark matter particle that was produced by falling out of thermal equilibrium with the hot dense plasma of the early universe, although it is often used to refer to any dark matter candidate that interacts with standard particles via a force similar in strength to the weak nuclear force.

There is near consensus today among astronomers that most of the mass in the Universe is dark. (Source)

The makeup of the universe is assumed to be then: ~68% dark energy, ~27% dark matter, ~5% normal matter.

About 7.5 billion years ago, objects in the universe began flying apart at a faster rate. Astronomers theorize that the faster expansion rate is due to the dark force that is pulling (pushing?) galaxies apart.

Would a localized concentration of Dark Matter/Energy give rise to "anti-gravity" or new forms of Energy?

Scientists at CERN and around the world are eager to find out..

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Bob, I was wondering if you noticed also, the cosmologists and astronomers rarely give us an appropriately complicated diagram of this supposedly "for sure" event. I've never been super gung ho about questioning the Big Bang, even from a religious standpoint it just seemed stupid to care much (lol!), but I can tell you that the simplicity and naive depiction given in almost all of the available pictures (in books/magazines anyhow!) is troubling and in all my life I've never seen more information volunteered by any official source.

Stephen Hawking came close to offering some better pictures in some of his books, but he looked at such specific/petty things that he missed some of the bigger picture, i.e. what shape does our universe maintain, if that applies,
and is the umbrella shape in the diagram accurate?

I was wondering, given that some scientists believe in the multiverse theory, is it possible that there are multiple universes stacked up like a dividing egg, and due to what we interpret as "dark matter", we see some of the effect of these parallel universes but not necessarily their physicality... not phrasing this well;

it would be akin to being in a crowded room except full of ghosts, these people exist but like a video game are "phased out"; you might prickle, goosebump, feel as if you're bumping shoulders, but never actually touch


this would be super interesting to those new agey folks who believe in ascension, lol

But I think it's a side effect of the big bang or whatever that simple theory represents.
I think CERN is moving too fast with too much cash, what about you?


p.s. in this article http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/12/opinio...-god-particle/

they downplay the risks, but Bob we know someone occasionally wins the lottery, and in a pre-determined lottery, someone always wins unless the game is taken down...

@@ food for thought. game over?

[Bob]

Well, in Standard Theory, SuperSymmetry (strings), Multiverse theory.. they are picking a model to try to see is the function of energy (in electronvolts) during a proton | proton collision responsible for the darkmatter liberation.. Like why would the galaxies speed up after a certain distance (and energy level) and time from an arbitrary starting point. If there were no higher potential stress moments (a beginning), why would there be changes in rate of expansion for instance?

If a certain "energy value window level" is needed for certain particles to "appear", and that is a function of a necessity of "moments of a beginning", if the setup doesn't exist I suppose it would say the universe would remain static.. and not experience an acceleration/expansion.. just trying to logic this through..

I believe they are saying 14 TEV is one of those window levels.

I find this curious, looking in CERNS glossary at TERA ELECTRON VOLT definition, as to the amount of "energy" present (function of watt/seconds, particle mass, speed) that they are saying, 1 TEV is the equivalent amount of energy of motion of a flying mosquito. SO they are going for 14 flying mosquito's worth of energy in the particle/particle interaction.

So, that I assume is the singular proton | proton energy 14 mosquito's worth of umph at the splash point. HOW many of them then are colliding per second? During the lifetime of the experiment about 20-40 actual collisions will happen. That would seem the worry would be insignificant.

For an explanation website exploring the actual energy physics: http://www.lhc-closer.es/1/3/9/0 There are various subsections explaining particle interaction with a target, particle interaction with another accelerated particle, density of beam(s) and so forth..

A useful understanding of how accelerators work, and the need and use of these machines, explained for a physics student.. see here:

From this PDF, it is seen that to work with particles (split them apart), different energy levels are needed, to get into that window for the particle..

Although a lot of power, mass and immense support structure is needed to get the protons up to near light speed, the interaction energy equivalence is small.. Frequently mention is made that the energy in incoming proton gamma rays are many many magnitudes larger than the interaction in the LHC experiments.. and we're still here..

[Bob]

As to Stephen Hawking, here is one of his papers on Space-Time and Matter.. Time began when matter came in to existence is the summary.. supposing then that there was an event-zero.. and changes in spacing between particles (after they formed)..

Here in http://cms.web.cern.ch/content/story-universe - the description of particle formation, time formation, distance separation and energy density is discussed..

In the Hawking Paper, there is a brief discussion of a 2D entity, getting into some of the concepts behind the multi-verse or multi-dimensions concepts..

[WhiteLove]

In my understanding, creation is like an infinitely big rainbow light ball beyond space and time. It does not expand into anything, because it already is everything and will never be more or less, because it is stateless, infinite peace. The miracle of creation is hence infinitely ever more infinitely miraculous, which for us is a thought too big to comprehend.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Bob, did you know that CERN is studying Plack's "constant"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_...le_accelerator

Particle accelerator

The experimental measurement of the Planck constant in the Large Hadron Collider laboratory was carried out in 2011. The study called PCC using a giant particle accelerator helped to better understand the relationships between the Planck constant and measuring distances in space.[citation needed]

Exploiting Wave–particle duality

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2...y#Applications

Wave–particle duality

Applications

Although it is difficult to draw a line separating wave–particle duality from the rest of quantum mechanics, it is nevertheless possible to list some applications of this basic idea.

Wave–particle duality is exploited in electron microscopy, where the small wavelengths associated with the electron can be used to view objects much smaller than what is visible using visible light.
Similarly, neutron diffraction uses neutrons with a wavelength of about 0.1 nm, the typical spacing of atoms in a solid, to determine the structure of solids.

Butterfly Effect

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect

In chaos theory, the butterfly effect is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a later state. The name of the effect, coined by Edward Lorenz, is derived from the metaphorical example of the details of a hurricane (exact time of formation, exact path taken) being influenced by minor perturbations such as the flapping of the wings of a distant butterfly several weeks earlier. Lorenz discovered the effect when he observed that runs of his weather model with initial condition data that was rounded in a seemingly inconsequential manner would fail to reproduce the results of runs with the unrounded initial condition data. A very small change in initial conditions had created a significantly different outcome.

The butterfly effect is exhibited by very simple systems. For example, the randomness of the outcomes of throwing dice depends on this characteristic to amplify small differences in initial conditions—the precise direction, thrust, and orientation of the throw—into significantly different dice paths and outcomes, which makes it virtually impossible to throw dice exactly the same way twice.

Planck's Constant and Manipulating the Minimum Mass of a Black Hole:

Minimum mass of a black hole


In principle, a black hole can have any mass equal to or above the Planck mass (about 22 micrograms). To make a black hole, one must concentrate mass or energy sufficiently that the escape velocity from the region in which it is concentrated exceeds the speed of light. This condition gives the Schwarzschild radius, R = 2GM/c^2, where G is the gravitational constant and c is the speed of light, and M the mass of the black hole. On the other hand, the Compton wavelength, \lambda = h/Mc , where h is Planck's constant, represents a limit on the minimum size of the region in which a mass M at rest can be localized. For sufficiently small M, the reduced Compton wavelength (\scriptstyle{\lambda \; = \; \hbar/Mc} , where ħ is Reduced planck constant) exceeds half the Schwarzschild radius, and no black hole description exists. This smallest mass for a black hole is thus approximately the Planck mass.

Some extensions of present physics posit the existence of extra dimensions of space. In higher-dimensional spacetime, the strength of gravity increases more rapidly with decreasing distance than in three dimensions. With certain special configurations of the extra dimensions, this effect can lower the Planck scale to the TeV range. Examples of such extensions include large extra dimensions, special cases of the Randall–Sundrum model, and string theory configurations like the GKP solutions. In such scenarios, black hole production could possibly be an important and observable effect at the LHC.[1][2][3][4][5] It would also be a common natural phenomenon induced by the cosmic rays.

All this assumes that the theory of general relativity remains valid at these small distances. If it does not, then other, presently unknown, effects will limit the minimum size of a black hole.

Application to pre-existing measurements:

http://phys.org/news/2014-01-planck-...-kilogram.html

New value for the Planck constant may hasten electronic kilogram
Jan 15, 2014 by Stephan Schlamminger

upgraded LHC perhaps not even that useful:
http://profmattstrassler.com/2014/03...-nothing-else/

What if the Large Hadron Collider Finds Nothing Else?
Posted on March 7, 2014 | 83 Comments

What will it mean, for the 100 TeV collider project and more generally, if the LHC, having made possible the discovery of the Higgs particle, provides us with no more clues? Specifically, over the next few years, hundreds of tests of the Standard Model (the equations that govern the known particles and forces) will be carried out in measurements made by the ATLAS, CMS and LHCb experiments at the LHC. Suppose that, as it has so far, the Standard Model passes every test that the experiments carry out? In particular, suppose the Higgs particle discovered in 2012 appears, after a few more years of intensive study, to be, as far the LHC can reveal, a Standard Model Higgs — the simplest possible type of Higgs particle?

More risky than ever:

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/...ected-energies

Micro black holes could form at lower-than-expected energies
Mar 15, 2013 16 comments



New simulations of head-on collisions of particles travelling at nearly the speed of light show that black-hole formation can occur at lower collision energies than expected, according to a team of researchers in the US. The researchers attribute this to a "gravitational focusing effect" whereby the two colliding particles act like gravitational lenses, focusing the energy of the collision into two distinct light-trapping regions that eventually collapse into a single black hole. Although the work shows that black holes can form at lower collision energies than expected, the team says that the result has no impact on real particle collisions taking place at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN.

From 2008 onwards, when the LHC was first scheduled to be switched on, there were rumours about what the experiment might create – extra dimensions, sparticles and strangelets, vacuum bubbles and, of course, planet-destroying black holes. Although the experiment ran seamlessly from November 2009 for more than two years and scientists found no evidence whatsoever for the formation of micro black holes, the fascination with black-hole formation and evaporation continues – among researchers and the media.

Planck scales and beyond
Frans Pretorius and William East of Princeton University in the US want to better understand the dynamics of particle collisions at the super-Planck scale.

Planck units are a system of units comprised of the simplest algebraic combinations of the fundamental constants of nature – the speed of light c, Newton's constant G, Planck's constant h and so on. For example, a combination of the constants to form a unit of Planck energy (Ep) is about 2 × 109 J. Pretorius explains that a super-Planck-scale collision is a collision between two fundamental particles where the total energy (rest energy (Er) plus the kinetic energy) exceeds Ep. At the Planck scale, quantum-gravity effects are expected to start playing a role in the interaction. However, at energies greater than Ep (and no-one knows exactly how much greater), classical gravity dominates the interaction.

So the researchers wanted a completely classical calculation, and this, explains Pretorius, is the "crucial ingredient in the argument that super-Planck-scale collisions form black holes, regardless of any non-gravitational interactions between the particles". He goes on to explain that this is important, as currently we do not know exactly what quantum-gravity interactions occur at the Planck scale. According to Pretorius, the new results suggest that for energies sufficiently above the Planck scale it does not matter – a black hole will form around the interaction, hiding all quantum effects, at least temporarily.

As a layman I've found enough info in 5 minutes to concern anyone with sufficient reading ability.

The LHC is an expensive thing that many find unnecessary and even dangerous.



People could be fed with the money that goes into building and maintaining that thing, and they keep it running for what, just so weights and measures can be changed/enforced?

I wonder what people will think of that 100 years from now -- but considering they're also a large internet hub I doubt things will be recalled as they happened.





Too many people have been calling for more information/investigation regarding the compartmentalization at CERN for that to be dismissed.

Why the LHC?
September 11, 2008
Yesterday’s launch of Largon Hadron Collider (LHC) spawned a series of reports and articles in the media, most of which unfortunately either miss the point or contain simply wrong information. Being a particle physicist myself (I’m currently writing my masters thesis), allow me to explain what the LHC is about. Instead of the typical 30 second news report, I’ll try to go into a bit more detail. Don’t worry, it’s educational.

Rules rule
The great Richard Feynman once described the work of particle physicists as being spectators of a board game played by the gods. You can observe the board, see the pieces move and deduct the rules of the game that way. The longer you watch, the more you know about the game and the clearer the rules become. In particle physics, we strive for an ever smaller rule book by trying to look at Nature and figuring out symmetries and common elements.

[amor]

This all sounds very impressive, mostly because I do not understand a word of it. If you want to understand anything, you must start at the beginning and work outward. That is what I did. I started with two spinning pinwheels (arms like the galaxy) rotating in the same direction. However when moved close together the particles which flew out from the center or fulcrum of each wheel resulted in the energy of the wheel on the right traveling upward to meet the energy of the wheel on the left, coming downward. When these two meet (at an angle less than 90 degrees. Angle looks like pointed end of the Flower of Life) they follow the laws of vectors. The intersection closest to the vortex that sent it out is the strong force and will determine the rotation of the force (stage 1). After this point a dizzying, endless set of intersecting forces take place which can be tracked by a computer model connected to a three dimensional hologram. This computer requires parallel computing to keep up with the extrapolation and maintain the hologram. Basically what I see with my puny memory is a complexity of spirals of what was originally straight line energy when it exited the fulcrum of the wheels. These spirals produce wave forms which skip across spirals, perhaps to create the complexity of the vibrations of full spectrum light which, playing upon its own vibrations, eventually becomes the progenitors of the fundamental vibrations which we identify as particles (matter) when they intersect. This intersection is only for a split second and other interactions behind it promote the illusion that the particle is continuous and/or now you see it here, now you see it there, now you don't. Now our bodies are generated in the same way and so we feel vibrations which hit us at the same wave length and pass right through those with which we are out of phase and cannot therefore see. Intuition tells me that some where along this very long line there may be many loop backs to the original straight line energy where things are started all over again. This model, if pursued on hologram can possibly tell you all you want to know.

Now about CERN, some have said they are opening star gates on the Q.T. I recently read that they are producing electromagnetic fields 100 times greater than the earth's. Could they be preparing to FIGHT the Destroyer (Nebiru) which may flip the planet's poles without a fight??? They cannot tell us that so they give us the Higgs Bosun story. The God Particle is not a particle, it is a force called THOUGHT OF GOD. Read Genesis about God's mind moving on the waters (ideas in his mind). Then he creates LIGHT because he is going to use this complex set of VIBRATIONS to generate his creation. Now this God is not the Anunaki, but the God of all creation.
The Tibetan Monks create a mandala picture and then destroy it. In my opinion, this may be a sacred geometric plan of the Universe which returns to its formless state in cycles only to reform again, and again....

[amor]

Dear Bob: Please read my post below and think on it. You are obviously well educated in physics but big things begin with little things.

[Bob]

Staying focused on the thread topic, about DARK MATTER and CERN's LHC being fired back up this March to test a theory, can dark matter be coaxed out of TWO PROTONS..

Dark Matter - to be evoked(?) by CERN's Large Hadron Machine

Dark Matter and Dark Energy go hand in hand.

In the OP:

Dark energy makes up approximately 70% of the universe and appears to be associated with the vacuum in space. It is distributed evenly throughout the universe, not only in space but also in time – in other words, its effect is not diluted as the universe expands.

This leads to a repulsive force, which tends to accelerate the expansion of the universe.

Why is it important from let's say two interesting potentials..

1) Anti-gravity

2) Free energy

In 2 above, there is an effect called the Casmir effect, where two plates of sufficient density can be held at a certain distance (close to each other)..

and a difference in potential energy appears. The distances held apart are nano in size.

Any time a difference in potential energy happens, a "battery effect" is possible.

As for all intensive purposes, the "universe" will last a whole lot longer in time span than any local civilization, a civilization utilizing a vacuum extraction battery, has obtained perpetual energy, a "forever cell"..

In 1 above, to be able to create a concentration of dark energy and to focus it using dark matter, a potentially shaped anti-gravity field could be created, to nullify mass gravity wells of planets, or objects (how about that hover-board?).

An augmented "battery-drive-system" could potentially be created using nano-designed (and spaced), normal matter and dark matter plates, creating a perpetual source of energy and zero cost transport..

Lastly, the time-like quality of dark energy, offers a potential for actual time travel.

Is it worth experimenting with bumping two protons together for up to 40 times in 10 hours of operation to see if dark-matter/energy really is there?

Seems like a worthy exploration considering it could develop into the future breakthroughs needed for real star travel, or time exploration.

BTW, CERN is theorizing that 100 TEV could possibly yield even more exploration of newer particles.

The size of the ring accelerator would be about 100 km in size. And the "bump energy" would be about 100 mosquito's bumping together about 40 times in 10 hours.. Hardly a concern.

Now WHO would want to suppress exploration, or obtaining KNOWLEDGE, where the actual end result could be products, devices and systems which evoke:

• PERPETUAL FREE ZERO COST ENERGY
  
• TIME TRAVEL
  
• ANTI-GRAVITY and ZERO COST transportation

Anyone derailing these types of experiments out there? Who may that be?

What direction are we headed?

or

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

PA users are real people and you have Amor asking you questions, and you ignored my concerns too, which had real information from actual science sites on them --

There is no reason to rush the work at the LHC. What does it matter to humanity if we have free energy now or in 100 years?
If I thought experimenting on human beings was all right, I guess I'd be "educated" like you and participating.

Particle Beam Weapons Research:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle-beam_weapon

A particle-beam weapon uses a high-energy beam of atomic or subatomic particles to damage the target by disrupting its atomic and/or molecular structure. A particle-beam weapon is a type of directed-energy weapon, which directs energy in a particular and focused direction using particles with negligible mass. Some particle-beam weapons are real and have potential practical applications, e.g. as an anti-ballistic missile defense system for the United States and its Strategic Defense Initiative. The vast majority, however, are science fiction and are among the most common weapon types of the genre. They have been known by a myriad of names: phasers, particle accelerator guns, ion cannons, proton beams, lightning rays, ray guns etc.

The concept of particle-beam weapons comes from sound scientific principles and experiments currently underway around the world. One effective process to cause damage to or destroy a target is to simply overheat it until it is no longer operational.

Particle accelerators are a well-developed technology used in scientific research for decades. They use electromagnetic fields to accelerate and direct charged particles along a predetermined path, and electrostatic “lenses” to focus these streams for collisions. The Cathode Ray Tube in many televisions and computer monitors is a very simple type of particle accelerator. More powerful versions include tokamaks and cyclotrons used in nuclear research. A particle-beam weapon is a weaponized version of this technology. It accelerates charged particles (in most cases electrons, positrons, protons, or ionized atoms, but very advanced versions can use other particles) to near-light speed and then shoots them at a target. These particles have tremendous kinetic energy which they impart to matter in the target’s surface, inducing near-instantaneous and catastrophic superheating.

Oh yeah Cyclotrons are now my personal Jesus Christ, because they can blow holes through things at a distance...
Jee who needs God these days when our Doomsday weapons can accomplish disasters for him?

This ONE BLURB should be enough to shut CERN down forever, but the Military Industrial Complex won't let it die:

Cyclotron particle accelerators, linear particle accelerators, and Synchrotron particle accelerators can accelerate positively charged hydrogen ions until their velocity approaches the speed of light, and each individual ion has a kinetic energy range of 100 MeV to 1000 MeV or more. Then the resulting high energy protons can capture electrons from electron emitter electrodes, and be thus electrically neutralized. This creates an electrically neutral beam of high energy hydrogen atoms, that can proceed in a straight line at near the speed of light to smash into its target and damage it.

The pulsed particle beam emitted by such a weapon may contain 1 gigajoule of kinetic energy or more. The speed of a beam approaching that of light (299,792,458 m/s in a vacuum) in combination with the energy created by the weapon would negate any realistic means of defending a target against the beam. Target hardening through shielding or materials selection would be impractical or ineffective,[1] especially if the beam could be maintained at full power and precisely focused on the target.[2]

CERN - internet experts who know how to destroy anything, nothing can be protected or shielded from them
and soon they will not only have that, but also a fundamental, also magical understanding of the underpinnings of particle physics.

I don't think the human monkeys at CERN are any more qualified that other human monkeys to take our tax money and dictate to us on a global scale.

In fact pushing this issue here seems pretty odd -- what do you we stand to gain from the success of CERN?

Nostradamus controversy:

http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2...s-and-lhc.html

MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008

Nostradamus And The LHC




The man himself said they were doing dangerous **** and I believe the prophets.
You can call me a luddite fool all day I don't give a damn.


http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...lack-hole.html

Worst Case: Collider Spawns Planet-Devouring Black Hole
Anne Minard
for National Geographic News
Updated September 10, 2008
With the Large Hadron Collider firing up for the first time Wednesday, some critics have speculated that the world's biggest atom smasher could spawn a black hole that would devour Earth.

http://www.wired.com/2008/09/the-bosons-that/

Worst Case: Scientists inadvertently make a micro black hole, and the earth is quickly erased from existence. Just kidding: scientists at CERN and elsewhere have ruled out the possibility that the LHC will create any kind of doomsday scenario. The black holes that the LHC could theoretically create don’t even have enough energy to light up a light bulb. On the other hand, the U.K.’s Astronomer Royal put the odds of destroying the world at 1 in 50 million (which puts it in the realm of possibilities but still not as likely as hitting the lottery).

some idiot usually wins the lottery eventually,
the human tendency to avoid the truth of consequences is obvious to me,

CERN is sick with it and so is anyone who believes them.


p.s. Bob I noticed the picture of the Amish wagon... ? My mom lives near those people are they are good people -- MSM will hate but that's just the MSM..


edit: http://www.livescience.com/47737-ste...-doomsday.html

Stephen Hawking Says 'God Particle' Could Wipe Out the Universe
By Kelly Dickerson, Staff Writer | September 08, 2014 02:21pm ET

...

"Just like matter can exist as liquid or solid, so the Higgs field, the substance that fills all space-time, could exist in two states," Gian Giudice, a theoretical physicist at the CERN lab, where the Higgs boson was discovered, explained during a TED talk in October 2013.

Right now the Higgs field is in a minimum potential energy state — like a valley in a field of hills and valleys. The huge amount of energy required to change into another state is like chugging up a hill. If the Higgs field makes it over that energy hill, some physicists think the destruction of the universe is waiting on the other side.

But an unlucky quantum fluctuation, or a change in energy, could trigger a process called "quantum tunneling." Instead of having to climb the energy hill, quantum tunneling would make it possible for the Higgs field to "tunnel" through the hill into the next, even lower-energy valley. This quantum fluctuation will happen somewhere out in the empty vacuum of space between galaxies, and will create a "bubble," Lykken said.

Here's how Hawking describes this Higgs doomsday scenario in the new book: "The Higgs potential has the worrisome feature that it might become metastable at energies above 100 [billion] gigaelectronvolts (GeV). … This could mean that the universe could undergo catastrophic vacuum decay, with a bubble of the true vacuum expanding at the speed of light. This could happen at any time and we wouldn't see it coming." [10 Implications of Faster-Than-Light Travel]

Of course we could just ignore that bit, it's inconvenient to science.
Let's make a bet to see who is really ignoring what..
Stephen Hawking likes bets.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

P.s. who here knows what the Firmament was in the Bible?
How many of you know about the "Dark Fluid" model?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_fluid

In astronomy and cosmology, dark fluid is an alternative theory to both dark matter and dark energy and attempts to explain both phenomena in a single framework.[1]

Dark fluid proposes that dark matter and dark energy are not separate physical phenomena as previously thought, nor do they have separate origins, but that they are linked together and are really specific sub-effects of new extended laws of gravity at very large scales. Other alternative theories of extended gravity, such as Modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND), also show up as specific sub-effects. Our current laws of gravity modeled on observations within the scales of the Earth and the Solar System might be insufficient to explain gravity at these larger scales.

Genesis 1:6
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Genesis 1:7
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

Prove to me that the Bible scholar was not describing Dark Matter and normal matter in Genesis 1:6-7

And tell me why CERN wants to **** with the firmament if they aren't trying to destroy the work of God

http://www.space.com/27744-dark-matt...-galaxies.html

Dark Matter's New Wrinkle: It May Behave Like Wavy Fluid
by Charles Q. Choi, Space.com Contributor | November 12, 2014 12:32pm ET

The mysterious dark matter that makes up most of the matter in the universe may behave more like wavy fluids than solid particles, helping to explain the shapes of galaxies, a new study suggests.

Dark matter is one of the greatest mysteries in the cosmos. It is thought to be an invisible and mostly intangible substance that makes up five-sixths of all matter in the universe.

The scientific consensus is that dark matter is composed of a new type of particle, one that interacts very weakly with all the known forces of the universe and is mostly only detectable via the gravitational pull it exerts. However, what kind of particle dark matter consists of remains unknown. [Gallery: Dark Matter Throughout the Universe]

[Bob]

In the OP post #1, I mentioned the startup will be at 13 TEV, which results in a minuscule collision energy (as has been presented by the physicists who run the energy computation needed to evoke certain particle creations). Operation will be at 14 TEV which they are feeling is optimum for proton proton collisions..

The world didn't end, some magnets had problems, and alignment techniques had to be developed as the machine operated. It was observed that ramping up doubling the energy would be possible without any consequences.

Here is the data on why 13 TEV at startup, instead of running at optimum:

The collision energy at restart will be 13 TeV, a significant increase over the initial three-year LHC run, which began with a collision energy of 7 TeV, rising to 8 TeV. But the LHC was designed to run at a maximum collision energy of 14 TeV, so why has CERN decided to start the second run at a lower energy?

The decision to begin the LHC’s second run at 13 TeV has been taken in order to optimise the delivery of particle collisions for physics research, and thereby speed the route to potential new physics.

It is based on the properties of the 1232 superconducting dipole magnets that guide the beams around the LHC’s 27-kilometre ring.

The higher the beam energy, the higher the magnetic field needed to maintain a constant orbit, and the higher the electric current flowing in the magnet’s superconducting coils.

At LHC beam energies, the electric currents are extremely high, up to 12,000 Amperes, and superconducting cables have to be used. Superconductivity is a low-temperature phenomenon, so the coils have to be kept very cold, just 1.9 degrees above absolute zero to be precise, or about -271°C. Even a tiny amount of energy released into the magnet for any reason can warm the coils up, stopping them from superconducting.

When this happens, the current has to be safely extracted in a very short time.

This is called a quench, and just one millijoule – the energy deposited by a 1-centime euro coin falling from 5 cm – is enough to provoke one. Magnet protection in case of quenches is a crucial part of the design of the LHC’s magnetic system.

(This is the logistics required in the proper handling of the super-conducting magnets)..

When a new superconducting magnet is qualified for use, it needs to be trained.

That involves steadily increasing the current until the magnet quenches, then starting again.

At first, the quenches may occur at relatively low current, but over time, as the components of the magnet settle in, the current increases until the magnet can be operated routinely at its nominal current.

If a new training cycle is started after an extended period during which the magnet is warm, the magnet usually restarts training at a value that is higher than first quench in the first training cycle but lower than the maximum previously reached. In other words, the magnet’s ‘memory’ is usually less than 100%.

Before the LHC started operation, all of its magnets were trained up to a current equivalent to a collision energy of over 14 TeV.

Tests with individual magnets, along with hardware commissioning tests in 2008, have shown that for some dipole magnets the memory is slightly lower than expected, demanding a larger number of quenches to reach nominal field.

However, retraining these magnets to 13 TeV should require only a short period of time, whereas retraining to 14 TeV would take longer, taking time away from physics research.

That’s why the best way to get to new results quickly, at an energy considerably higher than ever achieved before, is to start operation at 13 TeV.

A decision on when to go higher will be taken at a later date in the LHC’s second run.

Reference: from the CERN website - http://home.web.cern.ch/about/engine...lhc-why-13-tev - "Why 13 TEV startup)

Superconduction phenomenon - http://home.web.cern.ch/about/engine...erconductivity

What is Dark Energy - http://cdms.berkeley.edu/press.html

DRIFT - The Directional Search for Dark Matter - http://driftdarkmatter.org/

Casmir-Dark Matter 'reactor' - http://article.sciencepublishinggrou...0150302.11.pdf

[Bob]

A few days ago was published an article in American Journal of Nano Research and Application

titled, On a Casimir-Dark Energy Nano Reactor
by Mohamed S. El Naschie
Dept. of Physics, University of Alexandria, Alexandria, Egypt

Here is the Paper -

In my post #9 above I mention the significance of the Casmir effect and working with Dark Matter/Energy..

Here is Mohamed's Abstract:

The paper is a general outline of the theoretical principle and basic design concepts of a proposed Casimir dark
energy nano reactor.

In a nutshell the theory and consequently the actual design depends crucially upon the equivalence
between the dark energy density of the cosmos and the faint local Casimir effect produced by two sides boundary condition
quantum waves.

This Casimir effect is then colossally amplified as a one sided quantum wave pushing from the inside against
the Möbius-like boundary with nothing balancing it from the non-existent outside.

In view of our theory, this is essentially what led to the observed accelerated expansion of the cosmos.

As in any reactor, the basic principle in the present design is to
produce a gradient so that the excess energy on one side flows to the other side.

Thus in principle we will restructure the local
topology of space using material nanoscience technology to create an artificial local high dimensionality with a Dvoretzky
theorem like volume measure concentration.

Without going into the intricate nonlinear dynamics and technological detail, it is
fair to say that this would be pure, clean, free energy obtained directly from the topology of spacetime.

Needless to say the
entire design is based completely on the theory of quantum wave dark energy proposed by the present author for the first time
in 2011 in a conference held in the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, Egypt and a little later in Shanghai, Republic of China.

As pointed out in post #9, asking a question of who would want to detract from a concept which would allow for infinite free energy to be practically possible is a valid thought exercise. This paper by Mohamed shows some of theory and some practical experiments needed in order to build on the dark-matter/energy concepts.

[Bob]

The Standard Model - or what has been taught about the understanding of how matter is put together.. (and stay together)


The Standard Model explains how the basic building blocks of matter interact, governed by four fundamental forces

The theories and discoveries of thousands of physicists since the 1930s have resulted in a remarkable insight into the fundamental structure of matter: everything in the universe is found to be made from a few basic building blocks called fundamental particles, governed by four fundamental forces.

Our best understanding of how these particles and three of the forces are related to each other is encapsulated in the Standard Model of particle physics.

Developed in the early 1970s, it has successfully explained almost all experimental results and precisely predicted a wide variety of phenomena.

Over time and through many experiments, the Standard Model has become established as a well-tested physics theory.

Matter particles

All matter around us is made of elementary particles, the building blocks of matter.

These particles occur in two basic types called quarks and leptons.

Each group consists of six particles, which are related in pairs, or “generations”.

The lightest and most stable particles make up the first generation, whereas the heavier and less stable particles belong to the second and third generations.

All stable matter in the universe is made from particles that belong to the first generation; any heavier particles quickly decay to the next most stable level.

The six quarks are paired in the three generations – the “up quark” and the “down quark” form the first generation, followed by the “charm quark” and “strange quark”, then the “top quark” and “bottom (or beauty) quark”.

Quarks also come in three different “colours” and only mix in such ways as to form colourless objects.

The six leptons are similarly arranged in three generations – the “electron” and the “electron neutrino”, the “muon” and the “muon neutrino”, and the “tau” and the “tau neutrino”.

The electron, the muon and the tau all have an electric charge and a sizeable mass, whereas the neutrinos are electrically neutral and have very little mass.

Forces and carrier particles

There are four fundamental forces at work in the universe: the strong force, the weak force, the electromagnetic force, and the gravitational force.

They work over different ranges and have different strengths.

Gravity is the weakest but it has an infinite range.

The electromagnetic force also has infinite range but it is many times stronger than gravity.

The weak and strong forces are effective only over a very short range and dominate only at the level of subatomic particles. Despite its name, the weak force is much stronger than gravity but it is indeed the weakest of the other three.

The strong force, as the name suggests, is the strongest of all four fundamental interactions.

Three of the fundamental forces result from the exchange of force-carrier particles, which belong to a broader group called “bosons”.

Particles of matter transfer discrete amounts of energy by exchanging bosons with each other.

Each fundamental force has its own corresponding boson – the strong force is carried by the “gluon”, the electromagnetic force is carried by the “photon”, and the “W and Z bosons” are responsible for the weak force.

Although not yet found, the “graviton” should be the corresponding force-carrying particle of gravity.

The Standard Model includes the electromagnetic, strong and weak forces and all their carrier particles, and explains well how these forces act on all of the matter particles.

However, the most familiar force in our everyday lives, gravity, is not part of the Standard Model, as fitting gravity comfortably into this framework has proved to be a difficult challenge.

The quantum theory used to describe the micro world, and the general theory of relativity used to describe the macro world, are difficult to fit into a single framework. No one has managed to make the two mathematically compatible in the context of the Standard Model.

But luckily for particle physics, when it comes to the minuscule scale of particles, the effect of gravity is so weak as to be negligible.

Only when matter is in bulk, at the scale of the human body or of the planets for example, does the effect of gravity dominate.

So the Standard Model still works well despite its reluctant exclusion of one of the fundamental forces.

So far so good, but...

...it is not time for physicists to call it a day just yet.

Even though the Standard Model is currently the best description there is of the subatomic world, it does not explain the complete picture.

The theory incorporates only three out of the four fundamental forces, omitting gravity.

There are also important questions that it does not answer, such as “What is dark matter?”, or “What happened to the antimatter after the big bang?”, “Why are there three generations of quarks and leptons with such a different mass scale?” and more.

Last but not least is a particle called the Higgs boson, an essential component of the Standard Model.

EXPERIMENTS

On 4 July 2012, the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN's Large Hadron Collider (LHC) announced they had each observed a new particle in the mass region around 126 GeV.

This particle is consistent with the Higgs boson but it will take further work to determine whether or not it is the Higgs boson predicted by the Standard Model.

The Higgs boson, as proposed within the Standard Model, is the simplest manifestation of the Brout-Englert-Higgs mechanism.

Other types of Higgs bosons are predicted by other theories that go beyond the Standard Model.

On 8 October 2013 the Nobel prize in physics was awarded jointly to François Englert and Peter Higgs "for the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and which recently was confirmed through the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN's Large Hadron Collider."

(The discovery through experiment, of the ORIGIN OF MASS is tantamount, and would not have happened without the LHC, fact and simple to understand. The world did not end, no catastrophic of earth fracturing or environmentally damaging event happened. A basic understanding tantamount to making life eventually easier with cleaner energy, pollution free transport (through anti-gravity technology) was reached by LHC. )

So although the Standard Model accurately describes the phenomena within its domain, it is still incomplete.

Perhaps it is only a part of a bigger picture that includes new physics hidden deep in the subatomic world or in the dark recesses of the universe.

New information from experiments at the LHC will help us to find more of these missing pieces.

reference source from CERN website: http://home.web.cern.ch/about/physics/standard-model

[TargeT]

Posted by Tesla_WTC_Solution (here)
Bob, did you know that CERN is studying Plack's "constant"?

Hmm.. Planks constant (the rate at which an electron changes orbits) is the key to many many things.... I think it's actively being suppressed or nudged to the "side line".

There is an older thread on this very forum that not only shows you how to mathematically prove Planks Constant but what you can do with it... I still feel it is one of the more important threads on this forum.

A New Era in Physics: Anti-Gravity / Cold Fusion Explained In Detail (video series)

[Bob]

In post #3 above, the physics paper for physics students, there is symbology used:

These symbols are also described in post #14 above.

Graphically in perspective a bit more, here:

The electron and the neutrino are members of a family of leptons.

Originally leptons meant "light particles", as opposed to baryons, or heavy particles, which referred initially to the proton and neutron.

The pion, or pi-meson, and another particle called the muon or mu-meson, were called mesons, or medium-weight particles, because their masses, a few hundred times heavier than the electron but six times lighter than a proton, were in the middle. But that distinction turned out not to be very useful. We now recognize the muon to be almost the same as an electron, and the leptons now consist of three "generations" of pairs of particles.

The leptons are distinguished from other particles called hadrons in that leptons do not participate in strong interactions.

The Large Hadron Collider then (LHC) is a machine then which would move around for instance PROTONS. Hadrons are strongly interacting particles. They are divided into baryons and mesons. The baryons are a class of fermions, including the proton and neutron, and other particles which in a decay always produce another baryon, and ultimately a proton.

Protons and neutrons are made of small particles called quarks.

In the Beginning of Particle Physics..

The first subatomic particle to be discovered was the electron, identified in 1897 by J. J. Thomson.

After the nucleus of the atom was discovered in 1911 by Ernest Rutherford, the nucleus of ordinary hydrogen was recognized to be a single proton.

In 1932 the neutron was discovered. An atom was seen to consist of a central nucleus containing protons and neutrons, surrounded by orbiting electrons.

However, other elementary particles not found in ordinary atoms immediately began to appear.

In 1928 the relativistic quantum theory of P. A. M. Dirac predicted the existence of a positively charged electron, or positron, which is the antiparticle of the electron.

It was first detected in 1932. Difficulties in explaining beta decay led to the prediction of the neutrino in 1930, and by 1934 the existence of the neutrino was firmly established in theory, although it was not actually detected until 1956.

Another particle was also added to the list, the photon, which had been first suggested by Einstein in 1905 as part of his quantum theory of the photoelectric effect.

By the early 1960s over 30 "fundamental particles" had been found.

references - Nobel Prize Institute - http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/physics/matter/ Structure of Matter

[Snowflower]

I don't understand any of it. But, I know my hackles went straight up when I heard they are restarting the CERN thing on March 15. Beware the ides of March. Whatever happens then, it feels freaky.

[Bob]

Posted by Snowflower (here)
I don't understand any of it. But, I know my hackles went straight up when I heard they are restarting the CERN thing on March 15. Beware the ides of March. Whatever happens then, it feels freaky.

There isn't enough energy in any particle collision being explored in LHC to be of any worry.

Considering the size of a proton... protons have a radius of about .84 × 10-15 meters, giving them a volume of about 2.5 × 10-45 cubic meters.

A virus is gargantuan in comparison ! This is so small it is ridiculous to even discuss the amount of energy present in one or two protons.. 40 proton collisions happen during the experimentation.. as posted earlier that amounts to a total energy expended by 14 mosquitoes bumping into each other 40 times over a 10 hour period.

Cern's LHC worked fine with no world shattering events, at 1/2 the power level.. zip, nada, nothing except that the key structure responsible for MASS (making things solid) was confirmed during experiment..

The reach for higher energy levels is to confirm a new and better theory of how matter is held together, or manufactured.. End result of such research is for instance holo-replication of matter could become a possibility, or teleportation.. Earlier it was mentioned that understanding dark energy ( the type of energy balancing the universe and keeping it from collapsing on itself), could very well get us into practical relatively zero cost infinitely perpetual motion batteries, or real free energy, with zero consumption of materials, zero waste, zero pollution, no magic catalysts and no exotic construction of weird coils and things.. simple simple simple.. and ultimately clean..

[Atlas]

Thank you for this very interesting thread Bob.

Here is a short video, inside CERN:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=UQI2RkWqC1s

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Posted by Bob (here)
well get us into practical relatively zero cost infinitely perpetual motion batteries, or real free energy, with zero consumption of materials, zero waste, zero pollution, no magic catalysts and no exotic construction of weird coils and things.. simple simple simple.. and ultimately clean..

Beyond disbelieving your assertion that the LHC is risk free,
I don't believe "advances" it provides will be available to common people.
Nor will benefits quickly outstrip the risks/cost others have enumerated.
The risks are not understood as the science is not understood by CERN.

This backward thinking of getting the answer to the risk problem after the fact is naive.
I'm surprised to hear it from a "scientist", and if David Icke or someone made an assertion like this,
that Hitler's leftovers (Please research Uranverein) were our salvation somehow, he'd be run out of town.
Guess that's why some people don't live in town.

There was nothing dirty or clunky about Tesla's technology, Bob,
he just didn't have the funding after Titanic sank to perfect it.

SO we have Nazi orgs like CERN thieving from what would have been a simple invention and making it impossibly large,
impossibly expensive,

and they get endless support from people who buy in.

The first key to saving money is learning how to spot a scam,
and I think CERN is a scam.


p.s. CERN didn't invent any of that stuff,
it was this man:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla



read some of it before attributing all hope and power/money to CERN