CERN, LHC. The End is soon.
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Fine Particle Physics and the Mathison-Trenite Life Energy Fluctuation Meter (LEF Meter) PART FOUR - {FPP 20090913-draft-V1.0-p4}
Next: JSH: So Crank.net really works?
From: BURT on 23 Nov 2009 22:10 On Nov 6, 6:40 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > Magnetic wrote: > > I wrote the letters to President of EU, to President of USA... > > Sniveling Snipped. > > Start by getting a better education. > > o The energy that can be supplied to a collision by the Large > Hadron Collider (LHC) is a piffle, compared to similar collision > (cosmic rays) taking place over your head right here right now. > Cosmic Ray energies range from five to ten orders of magnitude > greater than the maximum energy that can be pumped into a collision > in the LHC. > > o There is evidence that a black hole has been created in particle > accelerators in the past. Low mass black holes have an exceedingly > short lifetime. t = m^3/(1.194 x 10^16 kg^3/s) > > o There is no possibility to pump enough energy into a black hole > to have any substantial mass. > > o There is no way to create a black hole in a laboratory that can > sustain itself. How does the end of time and space move around Wormly? Mitch Raemsch
From: Raymond Yohros on 24 Nov 2009 10:47 On Nov 6, 12:15 am, Magnetic <magnetic.t...(a)yandex.ua> wrote: > I wrote the letters to President of EU, to President of USA... > the End, yes, end for stupidity and flat travel. end for lies, wrong views, selfishness and boycuttings the beginning of unification and the first light for spacetime travel r.y
From: Autymn D. C. on 24 Nov 2009 11:17 On Nov 17, 9:51 am, "n...(a)bid.nes" <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > (Sir Martin Rees): > > "Let me say that I dont see any conflict between science and > religion. I go to church as many other scientists do. I share with > most religious people a sense of mystery and wonder at the universe > and I want to participate in religious ritual and practices because > theyre something that all humans can share. > > Rees can't tell the difference between what can be and what scares > him. Can anyone explain why cretin God-believers/botherers always misspell "its"?
From: Autymn D. C. on 24 Nov 2009 11:44 On Nov 21, 4:41 pm, "n...(a)bid.nes" <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Do you really? So have I. > > Well, if it's a bad example, let's try 380 Volts. > > Let me know when you want to talk kilovolts. > > > BTW, it's not so much the voltage that kills, but rather the power > > (symbol I and measured in Amperes) that kills. > > I is "current", not "power". Power is P. That applies to the > conventions I learned; I don't know if it is taught differently where > you are. > > > So would you rather be submitted to 100A for a period of 1 second or > > 1A for a period of 100 seconds? > > Neither, if at all possible. The shocks I have suffered were all > accidental except for the times I tested the HV output of TV flyback > transformers with my fingertip (with the elbow of that arm grounded on > chassis to prevent fibrillation). How about the farmer who lived throuh seven lightning strikes? > I wrote: > >> There is no relevant difference between "cosmic rays and the LHC > >> collisions" in this context. Energy is energy, if the one were going > >> to create strangelets so would the other. > > You claim: > > > So, same energy but with quite a different result... > > What do you assert to be the relevant significant difference between > cosmic ray collisions (which do not produce strangelets) and the LHC > (which you apparently believe will)? They forgot about thermèsis, where either the body shall nonetheless fly out or shed its work as heat to warmth. A rest frame is still unlikely.
From: Autymn D. C. on 24 Nov 2009 12:59
Who would win, LHC or SSC? |