Large Hadron Collider

I ducked that question didn't I [8D] We could talk about whether relativistic mass increase happens, and how to allow for it in ring design but that would still duck the issue.

The forces involved here scare the hell out of me. Bash in enough energy to pull a proton apart in and we can make a mini black hole. Do I trust the concept of Hawking radiation to destroy this thing? No way! Those tubes that hold the quark exchange particles, can they create matter, another quark forms where they break? In principle yes. Coud we simply be putting food out for that mini black hole? Could be []

Would I switch the thing on? No, I wouldn't want to take the responsibility but some know it all geek is going to.

I would just like they went ahead in the past when this issue was pondered as you are doing. Anyway, its not good sport to duck the mass issue and it is very important that its accounted for. IMO, the mass in not there in the input side of the process but thats just me and data would resolve my questions(if it was available). They say 1 few billion kev or however much energy is added to the particle during the pre-event so it is a mystery what happens to it if no mass comes out after the event.

Sloat, Yaknow all reactions require energy that seems to come out of nothing but that can't be right. There is a basic flaw in the theory that needs to be identified and corrected before any progress is made. Blackholes don't exist in the real universe so you won't be making any with the machines even if a unsmart person gets the job of running it.

Um, I got more than I bargained for when I posted this question. Too bad I can't make heads or tails out of 90% of it.

Emanuel

The upshot of saying that the internal energy of matter in motion decreases as we approach the speed of light, is that the more cohesive forces operating in the particle, the more efficient it is in accelerating to near light speed. The internal energy of the accelerator increases as the internal energy of the particle decreases.

For the gold atoms used, a higher percentage of the input power will be available for the crunch than with a stream of protons say. The machine is more efficient. It's still not a mass increase though.

To convert energy to mass requires certain very special conditions. I would say that the decay of a pi meson is a case where mass converts 100% to energy.

Jim, you raise an important moral question with regard to black holes. Suppose a bunch of kooks were trying to build one, with the intent of setting it off in the town square. I would throw them in jail and throw away the key. It would be a clear intent to murder, whether I believed black holes were possible would not be the issue. Their belief in them would be proof of intent.

On Hawking radiation. On either side of the event horizon of a black hole, pairs of virtual particles are constantly being created. They are opposites, so their energies add upto zero. The black hole whips them away from each other before they can cease to exist. The black hole loses energy. A mini black hole will cease to exist before it can do any harm. What if that's totally wrong?

Suppose someone in the pub told you his brother wanted to test the theory by making a black hole. This guy then says, "of course this would be highly dangerous but I don't believe that black holes can exist. So I'm not going to advice caution."

Another point is that this experiment is to create a transitional phase state of matter. All the matter in the universe could collapse into the vacuum state. It's not likely, as I've said earlier, that some casmic rays have the energy levels of the experiment. But, nobody has a clue as to what causes these high energy cosmic rays to exist.

I would like to see what constitutes the strong atomic force. It looks very much like a Le Sage set up. I would be far too timid though, to switch on this machine. When the Astronomer Royal expressed his concerns about this, he talked of an error spreading through the universe at the speed of light. Take solace fom the fact that it will be at the speed of gravity. We won't feel it hit.

Has anyone any thoughts on considering the strong force as a Le Sage set up? I think we should look at a meson first. Ony two quarks to consider, the quark and it anti quark. We have a force which is directly proportional to the radius. So how does it work?

Two spheres, very close together? Two hemispheres very close together? Two toroids close together, or a toroid that has been cut through like a bagel?

About fifteen tonnes of force holding the two together. The "shadows" here are very real things. The basis of string theory.

(Edited) A couple of thoughts here. If I say that a meson is a sphere, and contains no other "stuff." then I'm free to cut it in half anyway I like. An infinite number of possible cuts.

On the other hand, if I say that a meson is a toroid, then i can cut it in half only one way xz but an infinite number of ways yz.

(Edited) When talking in Joe Keller's thread, I mentioned that the "space" density of the earth falls of as an inverse fourth power. Thinking about quarks I looked up the Cassimer effect, seems pretty obvious that it might have a bearing here.
F = pi h c A / 480 L^4
A is the area and L the distance between plates. For 150 thousand newtons at a distance of about 10 to the minus twenty metres I get a radius for a hemisphere of about 2 times ten to the minus 25 metres. That's just a quick guestimate to see where the ball park might lie.

I did a google to look at supersymmetry. The supersym particle for the W exchange particle is called a wino
[][8D][8D]