Jump to content
Science Forums

Large Hadron Collider


Theory5
 Share

Recommended Posts

what would happen if something was in the vacume that would interfere with the particles??? or the LHC had a problem like a crack or something?? could a blackhole be created if the vacume was broken??? what would happen if a blackhole did possibly get created, what would they do and would it be contained in the vacume??????? would they have to figure out how to reverse a black whole while keeping it contianted O_O

 

 

of course this probably won't happen though considering the energy put into this project but you never know there is alot of human error in the world

 

Any black hole so created would evaporate within NS and only show up as a shower of particles in the detector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So far, according to some math i have started, any hole created by a collision of 2 beams would take 4.787 septillionth-septillionth-10 quadrillionth of a second (no si unit for 10 to the -62 power) to disintigrate

 

a few things to keep in mind, if you take into consideration that it hits the wall, the total collision energy is 1/2 of what was (not) used to come up with the above number, we are only talking 122kj, that's equivalent to a small bomb... nowhere enough to make a black hole.

 

Now, you may wonder what would happen if it hit one of the superconducting magnets, while those are powered up (immense amounts of energy 10GJ, is stored in the magnets... but thats still only equivalent to what, about 2.5 Tonns of tnt, somewhere around there (you can look up the numbers if interested)). That is something i'll have to look at, energies there are immense, but i still have to compute what the net mass gain for the in-chamber collision would be, and whether that could surpass the minimal mass needed to create a black hole...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree slightly, time machines can not physically possibly go backwards. Time is only a conception and not a physical existence, it is a virtual based measure of counting.

 

This is what my work is ultimately about.

 

Like most scientists I believe in something for a reason. In this case, call it a "hunch," but for any form of paranormal activity, such as a premonition, to occur, an image composed of a photon matrix had to be able to travel backwards in time. For that to happen, the future must already be there, developed around what we do in our current present that in turn was developed around what happened in our past. This means time does exist as more than an artificial means to do bookkeeping. It means absolute time exists in the form of frames. The frames must be connected by something just as the frames of a movie are connected by the clear celluloid film. A time machine must be able to vibrate at the frequency of the "celluloid" or what most who believe in it call flux.

 

Yes, I do have a number of concepts for creating such a device. It takes a lot of work to determine the right geometry, field structures and such. Build the wrong device and hop in, give it a whirl and it could be your last... anything.

 

Alexander,

 

Regarding the math, I'm waiting for some guide on the HTML structure as stated previously. I'd rather not do a botched up job of it and appear assinine, or as an eqinian glute. Other than that, I'm very busy for most of this month. Remember my response to "Jackson" in the intro thread about getting my house back? That will consume much of my time, but when I get a chance I'll do some serious refinement.

 

From what I can see you are doing rather well in running the numbers yourself. Remember also, there's still some question concerning the possibility of a naked singularity. I tend to agree with Penrose that a singularity must be contained within some mass, regardless of how rapidly it approaches zero.

 

A vacuum leak would very likely be detected and the collider would automatically shut down. This is one area that this thread is properly an engineering question. Nuclear reactors, as an example, are built with what are called "scram" mechanisms. These drop key control rods into place to stop the progress of neutrons in a few seconds. If the scram fails, the reactor could blow up and breach the containment building. Sudbury England had a bad containment breach like this in the early 70's. There were others as we learned that nuclear powerplants need be build with utmost care and many had not been so.

 

Catch you folks tomorrow or Monday...

 

Dr. C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your analogy of time is somehow true i do not understand, how physicly you would move time back ( or the reel in the analogy ). How would that be possible you would have to somehow alter the present so that it would be recreated as the past for example where i am right now will be exacly the same from any point in time now unless you somehow change it in that time period now if you somehow change it so it goes back..... in my opinion i think that is totally impossible.. yet i do think you can change to get to the future like a theory is things speed up when you are neer a black hole if you could possbly stand next to one lol. for example you are in space next to a black hole far away from earth and you somehow had a giant telescope that could see all the way down on earth in a city... you would see everything going really fast and also it does not speed up time it just slows you down or your preception you will still grow hair and age and everything.......... so i do not understand your analogy of time at all i would really like if you could help me understand your preception of this :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Limited time today and where the posting of math in this forum is concerned, I need some type (no pun intended) of guide to the html format that allows me to build an equation like Alexander has. I can do this readily at my own msn forum, but the character format here is different. Help me and I'll help you back.
I’ll help on this one, ‘cause it’s much easier than all this black hole physics! ;)

 

Hypography supports LaTeX’s math package. To use it, put a LaTeX expression inside a math begin and end tag. For example,

 

[math]\lambda = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/math]

 

will render as

 

[math]\lambda = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}[/math]

 

Some specifics and discussion about hypography’s LaTeX support can be found in 12086 and 6576. My favorite guide to the LaTeX math package is wikipedia’s “Help: Displaying a formula”. A neat little tutorial page is mimetextutorial.html. Neither provide much on LaTeX math's modest line drawing features, so if you want to use them, you'll have to dig for documentation on your own. :)

 

As with many markup languages, the best way to learn LaTeX math can be to, when you see something you like in a post, click its quote button, and take a look at the math code. To do this, you may need to set the “Message Editor Interface” on your Options page to Basic or Standard Editor – I think the “Full WYSIWYG” setting may hide tags from you. You can also hover your mouse pointer over a rendered formula for a quick glimpse of the code, but at the moment the neat feature that allowed you to click it to display it in a copy-able pop-up box is not working :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mimetex does not support lines, because it's a package written in c (compiled as cgi) that does some of the latex stuff, and we actually have it installed here but i highly don't recommend using it, it does not do caching. We use a plugin called VbLatex (infact not many people know it, but we basically pioneered it, and myself might be working with the original developer on a new version of this plugin)

 

VbLatex actually uses the latex engine to render the equations, thus it does support graphics (well, its not a math function, its an extension called graph or something like that)

 

Dr C, give it a shot, play around with some formulas, you can always use preview to see if you have made any mistakes (one feature i will work on, if i get to help the original developer, will be better syntax checking and an error pointing out module... perhaps even a simple error correction module... who knows)

 

btw latex is used extensively in paper publishing involving really anything, its such an awesome text publishing tool!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[math] V = 4[pi]r3[frac]3 [/math]

 

[math]V = 4\pir3\frac{3}[/math]

 

 

That's what I got so far.:(

 

Some of this is going to be tough to put online without the MIB's showing up(?) at my door (?)... I already receive error messages that amount to "we're watching you" before I can log on here at the library then again when logging on here.

 

Let's start with some opinions:

 

1. Do you believe neutrinos have mass? Photons? Gravitons? Gluons?

 

2. Are you open to the possibility that gravity may not be a force of [curl operator] attraction, but instead an inbound string dimensional particle?

 

My theory, of 40 years now, shows an emerging quality where neutrinos are potentially the outbound twin of the graviton. It begins at sub-c and develops super-c at the outer limits of the universe. It would spend some time in a convolute universal orbit, then return at super-c to our known universe where intersections with other similarly inelastsic particles will define its new trajectory. It may or may not return to the same atomic structure, still a graviton is a graviton is a graviton...

 

(running out of time and no sys-ops available to extend time...)

 

Buddyzen,

 

A time machine would need to vibrate outside the mechanism of gravity-time I just described. Once outside it could produce its own spacial dimension; i.e. its own separate universe. That universe will be malable and can be projected as you please. However, it would violate the cosmological constant (2.75) of this universe, thus hopping out of one frame, one would need to scavange the mass from another or make use of the vacuum energy of the void, that being absolutely infinite, to replace it. A frame should only be able to generate a minima-maxima of mass-energy normal to the gradient created by the vacuum (zero point) energy of the void.

 

This will be an integral relating to the spherical volume (I was attempting to build that simple formula at the top:()

 

The plans for the machine? I'm not at liberty to discuss such and it would potentially be more disasterous than this alleged "black hole" fear we are discussing. The machine should take no more power than would be required to lift its own weight. A small ship would probably need a couple HP...

 

Digest that for a bit...:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

let me help you with this:

 

V = 4[pi]r3[frac]3

 

in latex there are a few things to remember:

special symbols and functions start with a \

systems are defined with curly braces and are usually function delimiters {}

and square brackets are bad :) so from that

\textit{} would be the function for italic text

\pi would represent lower case, greek letter pi (just like \Pi would represent its capital version)

super set is defined with a carrot ( ^ )

sub set with an underscore ( _ )

fraction is the function \frac and takes to arguments \frac{top}{bottom}

 

thus rewriting your code above as

\textit{V}=\frac{4\pi^{3}}{3}

the curly braces around the three in \pi^{3} are not necessary as the first character after the ^ or _ function will be taken, but the brackets relieve confusion when you have something like \pi^21 and then wonder why it shows up as pi^2*1

(assuming that's what you wanted to try)

 

[math]\textit{V}=\frac{4\pi^{3}}{3}[/math]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

also Dr. C i desperately need your physicist oppinion in this thread... can not seem to figure it out with modest, at least to the point where it makes sense, so can you please look at this thread's latest developements? Please? i can teach you latex in return :evil:

 

http://hypography.com/forums/physics-and-mathematics/16080-woo-hoo-lhc-is-working.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moontanman,

 

(is that like a Golden Earring Moontan...?:))

 

Ever listened to an old Firesign Theater album about "Mark Time?" In the end the earth was consumed by a black hole and the computer says "Beep!... You are in black hole.... You are okay..."

 

 

Time travel machines are fascinating, but the T.A.R.D.I.S. is, IMO, the most gnarley of them all. I was thinking how could you make the interior larger than the outside. This could be done with a worm hole within a worm hole. The outer machine provides the actual time machine while the inner hole provides the luxurious space machine. When you step in through the police box doors you deflate, or "shrink." The outer machine is the specific time travel geometry.

 

Cool, huh?

 

 

Alexander,

 

Thanx. I'll give the LaTex a whirl next time. I'll spin into the other thread you requested.

 

Global warming is a concern I've been working on. That helium issue, you know... I have run some numbers and with livestock production alone since only 1850 it would have expanded our lower atmosphere by at least 300 meters... This would also expand the inner and outer radii of the inert gas layer. This fine tuned radius could affect life as we know it in many ways. As I mentioned in that other thread, a helium layer is a must for a star. That's my original doctorate thesis. Now the post doc work involves what's in the convection zone and the chromosphere. If I'm correct, the chromosphere is something akin to nanodots, only on a larger scale. This means stars are artificial...:doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like most scientists I believe in something for a reason. In this case, call it a "hunch," but for any form of paranormal activity, such as a premonition, to occur, an image composed of a photon matrix had to be able to travel backwards in time. For that to happen, the future must already be there, developed around what we do in our current present that in turn was developed around what happened in our past. This means time does exist as more than an artificial means to do bookkeeping. It means absolute time exists in the form of frames. The frames must be connected by something just as the frames of a movie are connected by the clear celluloid film. A time machine must be able to vibrate at the frequency of the "celluloid" or what most who believe in it call flux.
On first reading, I couldn’t articulate my intuitive discomfort of this “like film frames” idea (which we might neatly term “quantatized time”) into an objection I liked. Reading Lee Smolin’s 2007 pop physics book “The Trouble with Physics”, then rereading Dr. C’s post, it jumped out at me: using a term of which Smolin appears very fond, Dr. C’s theory is “background dependant”.

 

In short, naively described, the theory predicts that it should be possible to detect a preferred inertial frame, in violation the “no preferred frames” postulate of Special Relativity, as follows:

  1. Measure the frame rate
  2. Accelerate the lab
  3. Measure the frame rate again
  4. The frame rate, which is naively described as universal, should change when the lab’s velocity changes
  5. By measuring for different lab velocities, it should be possible to determines the preferred inertial frame of the “universal movie projector”. When the measured frame rate is minimized, the lab’s inertial frame coincides with the preferred frame

SR is an empirical, not a fundamental theory. Described quantum mechanically, the “unchanged laws of physics” described in its postulates can be considered to only involve the fundamental particles (eg: the speed of massless bosons, c, is constant), so a background-dependent theory doesn’t directly contradict it. However, as I’ve long intuited and Smolin states in his book, background-dependent theories are “aesthetically” unsettling, suggesting that they’re best avoided.

 

Nonetheless, that the theory appears experimentally testable is a good thing, even if it turns out to be wrong. A wrong theory is better than one that can’t be tested.

A vacuum leak would very likely be detected and the collider would automatically shut down.
Just to be clear, by vacuum leak, you mean a leak of outside atmosphere or other gases, such as cryogenic He, into the beam chambers, which are kept at a high vacuum?

 

The main consequence of this, according to this paper, would be loss of superconductivity in some of its magnets – magnet quench. I’m unable to determine clearly from the article if this would result in catastrophe, or merely result in a loss of performance, but suspect the latter.

 

Given all the talk of cosmic-scale disasters like triggering hyperinflation of space or earth-consuming mini black holes, a phrase like “vacuum leak” brings to mind something more exotic and dire.

My theory, of 40 years now, shows an emerging quality where neutrinos are potentially the outbound twin of the graviton. …
I don’t know the term “outbound twin”. Are they the same thing as superpartner? If so, what’s the difference between outbound and inbound?
Ever listened to an old Firesign Theater album about "Mark Time?" In the end the earth was consumed by a black hole and the computer says "Beep!... You are in black hole.... You are okay..."
I’ve not heard that Fireside Theatre episode, but must add that no list of super-physics-gone-horribly-wrong SF would be complete without a mention of Hogan’s “Thrice Upon a Time”, Egan’s “Schild's Ladder”, or a host of other’s I can’t bring to mind, or (perish the thought) haven’t read. I’m a big proponent of the philosophy of mingling science and SF as much as possible without becoming entirely demented.
Time travel machines are fascinating, but the T.A.R.D.I.S. is, IMO, the most gnarley of them all. I was thinking how could you make the interior larger than the outside.
No fan, even as peripheral a one as me, could fail to add to this that not only was the TARDIS depicted in the original series as room-size on the inside, but at least estate size, and possibly greater than planet or even infinite size. This was an under-exploited idea, developed only in some of the weirder and wilder episodes, which showed lots of rooms full of clothing at least one swimming pool, some formal gardens, and other stuff that only an over-the-edge fan would attempt to exhaustively catalog.
As I mentioned in that other thread, a helium layer is a must for a star. That's my original doctorate thesis. Now the post doc work involves what's in the convection zone and the chromosphere. If I'm correct, the chromosphere is something akin to nanodots, only on a larger scale. This means stars are artificial...:lol:
So, to get it strait, what you’re proposing is that simply amassing a sufficient concentration of hydrogen and letting it gravitationally collapse will not a star make? Or that some, but not all stars are artificial.

 

It’s an intriguing idea, and one I’ve not heard before. God-like super-space-engineers fiddling with the fundamental physical constants to make stars possible at all, I’ve heard of, dark matter animal life causing stars to collapse before their time, old hat, but quantum dotting to make a star is news to me. :) Thanks, Dr. C, for the mind candy! :hyper:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CraigD,

 

Just to be clear, by vacuum leak, you mean a leak of outside atmosphere or other gases, such as cryogenic He, into the beam chambers, which are kept at a high vacuum?

 

Yes. Technically the beam chambers are constructed to preclude this, but I'm of the mind that "the best laid plans of mice and men often go astray." Murphy's Law...

 

 

Consider that TARDIS concept applied to Noah's Ark... Also, what if the ark was effectively a time machine? Most don't consider that 1500 years went by between Adam (not truly the first man, but the second design (Cro Magnon?) intended to tend the Garden..) and Noah. There was an advanced race called the Nephelim as well. It is possible there was more technology than we think in those days. I believe it's in Isaiah that we are told the "end days" will be just like the days of Noah. Look around us at all the blatant ignorance we have to deal with. Technology is even assassinated before it sees the light of day. We are looking at nuclear war very soon perhaps. Somehow, some of us will survive. I know I will and there are some folks who are wanting me to build custom spacesuits for them. I tell them they are expensive, but I worked out a sort of "layaway" plan where they pay me 20 or 30 bucks a week and I get to work on the suit. It has to be paid for before it is delivered.

 

The other thing I'm exploring is adding helium to our atmosphere to reinforce the inert gas layer that, by my calculations, is MUCH thinner than it was 150 years ago. Perhaps dangerously thin. The problem is the shortage of the gas. We might be able to make more through fusion...

 

Gotta run,

 

Dr. C. (Mind candy R us...:sherlock:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...