Save the Universe From CERN!
March 30th, 2008
|
| Share |
CERN, the European organization for nuclear research is, as you might know, currently building what will soon be the world’s largest particle accelerator and one of the biggest and most expensive pure science projects in history. The aims of the project are lofty: to recreate the conditions that may have existed shortly after the big bang, to explore the nature of matter on a more fundamental level than ever before, to better understand the nature of dark energy and dark matter. Big accelerators have been built before with these goals in mind, such as the one at Fermilab, but the main accelerator facility (The Large Hadron Collider) operated by CERN is unprecidented in size. It employs 8000 scientists and engineers and sits on the border of Switzerland and France.
Now the problem:
Apparently some have claimed that the accelerator might destroy the world and indeed destroy the universe. The argument is that it could create a catastrophic black hole or even a black hole so powerful it would completely destroy the universe, sucking in not only nearby matter but compressing the fabric of spacetime down to a pinpoint. Needless to say, this would not bode well for the earth, and even a normal run of the mill blackhole within a few lightyears would be a big problem for this planet.
Scientists, of course, dismiss this idea as highly unlikely. Not only unlikely but so small the chances are effectively zero. However, here’s where there is something of a problem with the science mentality and the mentality of the general culture. To many people the idea that the destruction of the universe is “highly unlikely” is not good enough and that seems like it would have good reason given the consequences. However, despite the high confidence that it won’t happen, there’s an admission right away that CERN is working to understand forces and particles that we just don’t have a very good grasp on. Since the experiment is unprecedented, and strictly speaking, scientists might not want to say “impossible” with something like this.
And a Lawsuit to the rescue:
Wacky dude Walter L. Wagner has decided to save the universe in court and has filed a federal lawsuit in a court in Hawaii. Given that the lawsuit applies to a group outside the US, it seems like this would not be the logical place to go after the big universe-destroying accelerator, but there is definitely a US interest here, because despite what you may have heard the US is actually located in the same universe as most of Europe. Thus, there’s a national security concern right there.
The suit also names the US Department of Energy, Fermilab and the National Science Foundation, all US organizations. Apparently they had somehow contributed to the universe destroying power of CERN. It’s contended that they have failed to file the enviornmental impact statements which would state what impacts the project might have on the universe in general. These are similar charges to what the same parties had filed against the Brookhaven National Laboratory in 1999 and 2000. Brookhaven was at the time also building a very large (although not nearly as large) accelerator, the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. Not surprisingly, today the universe remains safe despite the fact that heavy ions are being accelerated at Brookhaven.
According to the article:
In an e-mail message, Mr. Wagner called the CERN safety review “fundamentally flawed” and said it had been initiated too late. The review process violates the European Commission’s standards for adhering to the “Precautionary Principle,” he wrote, “and has not been done by ‘arms length’ scientists.”
Oh no! Not “precautionary principle” again. Those two words have been used to justify just about every anti-scientific, totally unfounded, ridiculous opposition to nearly everything under the sun! But given the scientific data avaliable and the nature of the argument, it’s pretty clear this guy has about as much chance of winning the suit as the chances of the accelerator destroying all of reality as we know it.
It’s also worth noting that the accelerator being built is really quite a pea-shooter compared to the forces that exist due to supernova, black holes, gamma ray bursts, stars, cosmic rays and other processes in the universe. These events are constantly slamming particles around, bombarding matter with enormous amounts of energy and otherwise creating extreme conditions that make the particles in any earthly accelerator seem very tame. And yet… we are still here.
This entry was posted on Sunday, March 30th, 2008 at 1:44 pm and is filed under Bad Science, Culture, Not Even Wrong, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions
March 30th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
As The Bad Astronomer from Bad Astronomy Blog points out:
“[S]tudies done by CERN show that the energies generated will be too low to make black holes. Also, due to a weird effect called Hawking radiation, the tiny black holes would evaporate instantly. The two litigants, however, say that Hawking radiation is not an established fact, and therefore we should be more careful. While that’s technically true, they forgot something important: the same rules of quantum physics that make a black hole in a subatomic collision also indicate they would evaporate. So if you’re worried they won’t evaporate, then you shouldn’t be worried they’d be created in the first place.“
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Dammit, I wanted a jar of micro black holes for my collection! What do you mean this can’t make ‘em!? Kick it up another notch!
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
I would seriously like to see an explaination from one of these clowns as to how a manmade accelerator operating on this little pipsqueak planet is going to cause the formation of a black hole when all the particles constantly being flung through space and wacked around by things as mundane as the solar winds do not.
There are heavy ions shooting through space with energies we could never match and on occasion they hit something. It happens even on earth when the odd high energy cosmic ray happens to make it down to the surface and then hits something and causes a cascade of reactions.
Where are the black holes from this??
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
This is the ultimate “big science” project at the moment: Big project, many involved, expensive, very big goals. These are the kind of projects that aim at answering very fundamental questions which require such measures to examine and are deemed by enough to be worth all the effort put into it for what is gained.
Without this kind of thing certain questions in science are insurmountable because of what is needed. It’s the bread and butter of the deep questions and answers.
I sometimes wonder if the opposition to this kind of project is just a backlash against science in general or a belief that science and technology is more bad than good and should be opposed. There seems to be this underlying conspiracy theory of the evil scientist working for drug companies or the government or something to take over the world.
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Nobody should trust this page. I don’t know enough about this to think it would make black holes but that seems unlikely. Science is only good when used for good reason though. Science is bad when you use science for reasons to hurt the earth.
This site is all about hurting things with science and using it for wrong. So don’t trust it!
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Jason And Laurin said:
Having a world full of morons like you is a luxury people like us allow through our contributions in science and technology. The thanks we get from you is insults and a running attempt to get in our way motivated by nothing more than ignorance and your imaginations.
You should get down on your knees in thanks that some of us still care enough to tell the truth. Instead you spit in our face.
You really are pathetic.
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Jason And Laurin said:
I’m glad we got that cleared up. I was all about to think I should stop worrying about black holes and other silly nonsense. But apparently this page is crap and you’re the authority? I didn’t know that. Thanks!
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Jason And Laurin said:
You shouldn’t be selecting which information to believe on the basis of trust. You need to think about things rationally, and if you are able to, check out the numbers. Doc and a lot of technical, scientific folk here have run the numbers, and actually know what they’re talking about. Your call to shallow emotionalism is entirely symptomatic of the mindsey which is trying to reverse the achievements of science and technology. Should you ever succeed, you will discover too late the magnitude of your folly.
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Finrod said:
Yeah that’s basically the way I see it. If you honestly don’t think the article is correct you might be right and in that case I think that everyone here (drbuzz0 included) will be more than happy to look at your numbers. This is not about who to “trust” because it’s the message and not the messenger.
I look at this and it’s totally 100% reasonable to me. It links to articles that cite some scientific studies and I don’t see any fallacies in the conclusion. The information all looks on the money too.
Am I wrong? If so, please feel free to show me how. Really, I’ll admit it if you can give me a good reason why this is not the correct conclusion. I’m all ears
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
If people would take some interest in understanding cognitive bias and logical fallacy, we could save so much effort. As I read it, the litigants’ arguments are only compelling under one or more of the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-risk_bias
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neglect_of_probability
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focusing_effect
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Good reading. There’s never zero risk though. How do we know that if we build this it won’t cause a scientist to commute to work on a road where he will be hit by a meteor and killed before he had a chance to father the child who would later save the world from a horrible dictator who gains control of all of europe and Asia?
We don’t!
We also don’t know that operating the accelerator won’t cause a protest by anti-black-hole people and that one of them won’t fart and in doing so change the entire weather paterns of the world and lead to a massive super-storm that will turn into a total atmospheric doomsday event.
Obviously this project should be stopped. All projects should be stopped. if we do nothing is there less risk involved??
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
If we’re using the precautionary principle, we should take into account the possibility that extraterrestrials are watching us trying to determine if we’re a sophont species with rights or merely clever animals. If we stop the LHC on ridiculous grounds, they might classify us as “clever animals” and declare the Earth open for settlement.
They won’t exterminate all the human race of course. They’ll save a few for their zoos.
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Joseph Hertzlinger said:
Or as mindless, but useful slaves.
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Jason and Laurin; Please explain why ignorance of scientifically obtained data is a ‘good’ thing. Also, why is observation of naturally occurring phenomena ‘wrong’?
Tell you what; if the Large Hadron Collider destroys the world and universe when it is switched on, I personally will give you, or the institution of your choice, ten thousand dollars. My word on it. Payment will be due when proof of destruction is obtained and verified in a court of law by four independent witnesses. Good enough for you?
Quote Comment
March 30th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
If I understand the scientists here stand to make a lot of money so they have a real vested interest in putting out junk science on this. They are involved with a lot of big corporations.
You know how big corporations work: They only care about profit. If they destroy the universe and tear the very essence of reality to pieces, reversing the big bang and obliterating the cosmos, then that just plain does not matter to them as long as they line their pockets with the bloodmoney!
(sarcasm)
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 12:51 am
Biff Henderson said:
WHAT??? Destroy the universe? Or even just destroy earth?
They can’t do that! That’s where I keep all my stuff!
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 7:54 am
BaS said:
I’d say the bulk of the nonsense we deal with here has its roots in a misunderstanding of these things. The inability of population to grasp the fundamentals of probability and statistics in a culture that has become dependent on these sciences for making decisions is a real danger, and one that is not given enough attention. Innumeracy has become the new illiteracy, and we are in danger of destroying much of what was accomplished in the last century if it is not addressed.
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Yes definitely. Something I keep getting problems for is the fact that I have a very hard time (actually I generally flat out won’t do it) saying that any kind of engineered system is 100% failure proof and that it is impossible that an unforeseen event could lead to a catastrophic failure.
This is the thing with nuclear energy. I’m willing to say that a reactor won’t go Hiroshima because that violates the laws of physics. However, there was a big stink someone made at a rally I crashed when they pressed me on a three-mile-island type of event and I stated something like “There are a lot of measures in place since then but strictly speaking, if you want to ask could there be an internal compromise of fuel element integrity due to a failure of multiple systems: It’s impossible for me to rule that out completely. It’s highly unlikely and if it happened it would almost certainly be no worse than the zero casualty event at TMI”
Despite the fact that TMI could not happen exactly has it had happened, (and I see it as the system worked to stop an internal catastrophic failure from getting past the reactor vessel and certainly not the sump or containment structure), as you can imagine, this lead to a lot of panic from people.
I also can’t really say exactly what CERN will do because no accelerator like this has ever been built and the reason it was built was to observe particle interactions we’ve never been able to see on earth before. So I can’t tell you what’s going to be observed. Therefore, it seems very premature to say anything about the reactions generated with 100% confidence.
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 1:44 pm
I admit I know almost nothing about this kind of thing, but the idea that it would cause black holes or some kind of complete universe destruction? That just sounds ridiculous. I’m not going to worry about it and the man who brought this lawsuit has probably got way too much time on his hands and likely is a little nutty or maybe more than a little.
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 3:26 pm
This, it would seen is not a new issue. Back during the early days of the Manhattan Project, a number of scientists voiced their concern that the explosion might start a runaway chain-reaction by “igniting” the atmosphere. It was decided that the threat was very low and, as we all know, the United States went ahead and detonated the first bomb on July 16, 1945.
But for a brief moment 63 years ago, some concerned observers held their breath and nervously watched at the bomb lit-up the New Mexico sky.
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 4:09 pm
How exactly did they come to the belief that the atmosphere could be ignited and that from there it would burn? I suppose they were thinking you could somehow burn nitrogen into nitrous oxides and the two can be combined but not in any kind of sustaining combustion.
Was it the belief that if you got it hot enough or something? A nuclear bomb doesn’t actually produce any more heat than other things, like plasma arcs or lightning or meteorites in the atmosphere. It produces a lot more heat, yes, but really high temperatures can exist in tiny amounts of matter pretty easily.
Who the hell came up with that idea?
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 4:31 pm
It was Robert Oppenheimer that worried that the unprecedented heat might spark a fusion chain reaction in the atmosphere. Hans Bethe performed calculations proving the planet wouldn’t ignite, and the test went ahead.
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 4:43 pm
DV82XL said:
Well, I suppose then afterward everyone was relieved, except perhaps for Teller. I could see him being disappointed.
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Chem Geek Gregor said:
Now that’s funny!! :0
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Chem Geek Gregor said:
Actually you’re not too far off the mark. Edward Teller was about ten miles away from the blast. By later standards that’s pretty far for a bomb of that size. Many weapons of that size detonated in New Mexico, spectators and camera men were only five or less miles away from ground zero. Some as close as two miles or less on occasions for nominally small weapons.
I remember hearing somewhere about Teller saying that he was a bit disappointed in it and had been hoping for a better show. It’s kinda understandable given the distance it might not have been as awe-inspiring. However in later interviews he did say “I was impressed”
But one thing that is not disputed is that at the time of the blast as they did the countdown he took out some sun tan lotion and started rubbing it on his face. He said it was to stop any potential sunburn from the UV emissions, but apparently it unsettled some of his colleagues there and I’m almost certain that the real reason was just as much for that as for any protection (if not more).
Edward Teller was quite a character. He was alive until recently. He died well into his 90’s about three or four years ago. He also worked nearly full time doing peer review and advisory stuff. I believe he was still officially on the staff of the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory when he passed away. He was in a wheelchair but would reportedly get extremely angry when a younger person asked him if he thought he should completely retire or stop working on scientific papers and things.
Quote Comment
March 31st, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Yeah, actually I found this. It’s the last paper Dr. Teller was working on. He died before it was completed, but I believe it was mostly done when he died in 2003. It was released a year or so later by the Co-Author:
Thorium-Fueled Underground Power Plant Based on Molten Salt Technology
http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.jsp?osti_id=20840306
He had suffered a minor stroke and apparently stopped working on it at that point but intended to return. His condition didn’t improve much and he died about three weeks later. His age is officially listed as 95 but he was born outside the US and didn’t have a birth certificate. Some who knew him apparently said he was actually 98 or as old as 101. He very well may have been. He looked every day of it toward the end.
Also he published a bunch of papers in the 1990’s. At that point he walked with a cane, and from what I can tell of him, if you had suggested he stop working he probably would have hit you with it.
Quote Comment
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:10 am
DV82XL said:
The idea was raised that maybe it could do that, “igniting” the atmosphere – so some very good physicists went off and investigated it scientifically, and worked out the physics – and came back and said, no, it won’t incinerate the Earth.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/doe/lanl/docs1/00329010.pdf
And lo and behold, it didn’t.
The same thing applies to the LHC – the potential threats to Earth were postulated, so the physicists go off and study the problem in detail – and conclude that it’s not any significant risk or concern at all.
Quote Comment
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:57 am
Oh, man – I can just imagine the reaction if I ordered one of those so-darn-cool cloud chambers to help get my 13-year-old neice interested in physics.
The only question is would the cops turn up in Racal suits? And of course, if they did, who’d have their MP5 *under* it.
*sigh*
Quote Comment
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:57 am
Whoops. Wrong thread. Obviously I’m too close to a radio mast, and the WiFi rays are cooking my frontal lobes. Something Must Be Done!
Quote Comment