PROOF: LHC MORE Energy than Cosmic Ray Collisions
in [Physics]
|
Prev: PROOF: LHC MORE Energy than Cosmic Ray Collisions
Next: speed of light is likely to be more accurately that of 3.14159.. x 10^8 m/s; magnetic monopole Chapt 14 #185; ATOM TOTALITY
From: guskz on 23 Jun 2010 17:54 On Jun 21, 6:10 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 21, 2:14 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Here is PROOF that Europe's LHC proton collider is ***LYING*** when > > they compare the probability of creating a black hole to cosmic ray > > collisions: > > > Even if cosmic rays carry 10^20 eV, when they collide with the > > atmosphere which is a fixed target, the energy produced is: > > > #1) E= Square_root_of (10^20) = 10^10 eV > > Math error. > The equation is sqrt(2 * m_n * E_cr). You'll see it in the very page > you reference. > This is sqrt (2 * 10^9 * 10^20) eV = sqrt(20*10^28) = 4.5*10^14, which > is 450 times a TeV. > > > > > WHERE AS the collision between two moving targets as in LHC proton > > collider is: > > > #2) E= E1 + E2 = 10^12 eV > > > #2 is 100 fold higher than #1 and therefore more LIKELY than cosmic > > rays to produce a BLACK HOLE that destroys the Earth. > > > Equations at LHC's own web pages: > > >http://www.lhc-closer.es/php/index.php?i=1&s=4&p=3&e=0 > > Yes, you'll note in the page that you reference that the energy of the > proton in a fixed-target collision would have to be 10^17 eV to be > equivalent to the energies at LHC. But cosmic ray protons can be a > 1000 times larger energy. > Bravo, I seen it after but waited to see what Aunt Al would say, it proves she only Trolls the posts, if the equation was true she still doesn't care. And what do you understand of the density of intergalactic space, where they say it averages 1 proton per m^3. Can one use LHC's own probability of collision (or interaction) equation (and thus generating particles) to see the odds of a light beam to collide/interact with a proton as it travels from 10 billion light years away? It may also be the answer to dark matter, and to see how much the luminosity and red shift can be affected. Doesn't that make sense to you? > > > > > -------------------- > > > What is "truly" terrible, is those that said Cosmic Rays were more > > likely to produce black holes than LHC. > > > Yet they are shown they were wrong, but they still argue and claim to > > know more than THEIR MASTER. > > > 2010: Before Einstein,GUSKZ > >
From: PD on 24 Jun 2010 17:30 On Jun 23, 4:54 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 21, 6:10 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 21, 2:14 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > Here is PROOF that Europe's LHC proton collider is ***LYING*** when > > > they compare the probability of creating a black hole to cosmic ray > > > collisions: > > > > Even if cosmic rays carry 10^20 eV, when they collide with the > > > atmosphere which is a fixed target, the energy produced is: > > > > #1) E= Square_root_of (10^20) = 10^10 eV > > > Math error. > > The equation is sqrt(2 * m_n * E_cr). You'll see it in the very page > > you reference. > > This is sqrt (2 * 10^9 * 10^20) eV = sqrt(20*10^28) = 4.5*10^14, which > > is 450 times a TeV. > > > > WHERE AS the collision between two moving targets as in LHC proton > > > collider is: > > > > #2) E= E1 + E2 = 10^12 eV > > > > #2 is 100 fold higher than #1 and therefore more LIKELY than cosmic > > > rays to produce a BLACK HOLE that destroys the Earth. > > > > Equations at LHC's own web pages: > > > >http://www.lhc-closer.es/php/index.php?i=1&s=4&p=3&e=0 > > > Yes, you'll note in the page that you reference that the energy of the > > proton in a fixed-target collision would have to be 10^17 eV to be > > equivalent to the energies at LHC. But cosmic ray protons can be a > > 1000 times larger energy. > > Bravo, I seen it after but waited to see what Aunt Al would say, it > proves she only Trolls the posts, if the equation was true she still > doesn't care. Ah, good, then you admit that your post was a troll, and that you retract your "proof" based on crappy calculations. > > And what do you understand of the density of intergalactic space, > where they say it averages 1 proton per m^3. > > Can one use LHC's own probability of collision (or interaction) > equation (and thus generating particles) to see the odds of a light > beam to collide/interact with a proton as it travels from 10 billion > light years away? > > It may also be the answer to dark matter, and to see how much the > luminosity and red shift can be affected. > > Doesn't that make sense to you? > > > > > > > > -------------------- > > > > What is "truly" terrible, is those that said Cosmic Rays were more > > > likely to produce black holes than LHC. > > > > Yet they are shown they were wrong, but they still argue and claim to > > > know more than THEIR MASTER. > > > > 2010: Before Einstein,GUSKZ- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: guskz on 25 Jun 2010 03:12 On Jun 24, 5:30 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 4:54 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 21, 6:10 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 21, 2:14 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Here is PROOF that Europe's LHC proton collider is ***LYING*** when > > > > they compare the probability of creating a black hole to cosmic ray > > > > collisions: > > > > > Even if cosmic rays carry 10^20 eV, when they collide with the > > > > atmosphere which is a fixed target, the energy produced is: > > > > > #1) E= Square_root_of (10^20) = 10^10 eV > > > > Math error. > > > The equation is sqrt(2 * m_n * E_cr). You'll see it in the very page > > > you reference. > > > This is sqrt (2 * 10^9 * 10^20) eV = sqrt(20*10^28) = 4.5*10^14, which > > > is 450 times a TeV. > > > > > WHERE AS the collision between two moving targets as in LHC proton > > > > collider is: > > > > > #2) E= E1 + E2 = 10^12 eV > > > > > #2 is 100 fold higher than #1 and therefore more LIKELY than cosmic > > > > rays to produce a BLACK HOLE that destroys the Earth. > > > > > Equations at LHC's own web pages: > > > > >http://www.lhc-closer.es/php/index.php?i=1&s=4&p=3&e=0 > > > > Yes, you'll note in the page that you reference that the energy of the > > > proton in a fixed-target collision would have to be 10^17 eV to be > > > equivalent to the energies at LHC. But cosmic ray protons can be a > > > 1000 times larger energy. > > > Bravo, I seen it after but waited to see what Aunt Al would say, it > > proves she only Trolls the posts, if the equation was true she still > > doesn't care. > > Ah, good, then you admit that your post was a troll, and that you > retract your "proof" based on crappy calculations. > > No, it proves YOUR sentiment towards the matter and the lack luster wish to deny the testimony for what is written. > > > > > > > And what do you understand of the density of intergalactic space, > > where they say it averages 1 proton per m^3. > > > Can one use LHC's own probability of collision (or interaction) > > equation (and thus generating particles) to see the odds of a light > > beam to collide/interact with a proton as it travels from 10 billion > > light years away? > > > It may also be the answer to dark matter, and to see how much the > > luminosity and red shift can be affected. > > > Doesn't that make sense to you? > > > > > -------------------- > > > > > What is "truly" terrible, is those that said Cosmic Rays were more > > > > likely to produce black holes than LHC. > > > > > Yet they are shown they were wrong, but they still argue and claim to > > > > know more than THEIR MASTER. > > > > > 2010: Before Einstein,GUSKZ- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > >
From: guskz on 25 Jun 2010 03:14 On Jun 24, 5:30 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 23, 4:54 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 21, 6:10 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 21, 2:14 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Here is PROOF that Europe's LHC proton collider is ***LYING*** when > > > > they compare the probability of creating a black hole to cosmic ray > > > > collisions: > > > > > Even if cosmic rays carry 10^20 eV, when they collide with the > > > > atmosphere which is a fixed target, the energy produced is: > > > > > #1) E= Square_root_of (10^20) = 10^10 eV > > > > Math error. > > > The equation is sqrt(2 * m_n * E_cr). You'll see it in the very page > > > you reference. > > > This is sqrt (2 * 10^9 * 10^20) eV = sqrt(20*10^28) = 4.5*10^14, which > > > is 450 times a TeV. > > > > > WHERE AS the collision between two moving targets as in LHC proton > > > > collider is: > > > > > #2) E= E1 + E2 = 10^12 eV > > > > > #2 is 100 fold higher than #1 and therefore more LIKELY than cosmic > > > > rays to produce a BLACK HOLE that destroys the Earth. > > > > > Equations at LHC's own web pages: > > > > >http://www.lhc-closer.es/php/index.php?i=1&s=4&p=3&e=0 > > > > Yes, you'll note in the page that you reference that the energy of the > > > proton in a fixed-target collision would have to be 10^17 eV to be > > > equivalent to the energies at LHC. But cosmic ray protons can be a > > > 1000 times larger energy. > > > Bravo, I seen it after but waited to see what Aunt Al would say, it > > proves she only Trolls the posts, if the equation was true she still > > doesn't care. > > Ah, good, then you admit that your post was a troll, and that you > retract your "proof" based on crappy calculations. > > > > > > > > > And what do you understand of the density of intergalactic space, > > where they say it averages 1 proton per m^3. > > > Can one use LHC's own probability of collision (or interaction) > > equation (and thus generating particles) to see the odds of a light > > beam to collide/interact with a proton as it travels from 10 billion > > light years away? > > > It may also be the answer to dark matter, and to see how much the > > luminosity and red shift can be affected. > > > Doesn't that make sense to you? > > > > > -------------------- > > > > > What is "truly" terrible, is those that said Cosmic Rays were more > > > > likely to produce black holes than LHC. > > > > > Yet they are shown they were wrong, but they still argue and claim to > > > > know more than THEIR MASTER. > > > > > 2010: Before Einstein,GUSKZ- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Also the distance between protons is purposely equal to the square their size, but of course ye knew that, not me.
From: PD on 25 Jun 2010 10:51
On Jun 25, 2:12 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 24, 5:30 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 23, 4:54 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 21, 6:10 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 21, 2:14 am, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Here is PROOF that Europe's LHC proton collider is ***LYING*** when > > > > > they compare the probability of creating a black hole to cosmic ray > > > > > collisions: > > > > > > Even if cosmic rays carry 10^20 eV, when they collide with the > > > > > atmosphere which is a fixed target, the energy produced is: > > > > > > #1) E= Square_root_of (10^20) = 10^10 eV > > > > > Math error. > > > > The equation is sqrt(2 * m_n * E_cr). You'll see it in the very page > > > > you reference. > > > > This is sqrt (2 * 10^9 * 10^20) eV = sqrt(20*10^28) = 4.5*10^14, which > > > > is 450 times a TeV. > > > > > > WHERE AS the collision between two moving targets as in LHC proton > > > > > collider is: > > > > > > #2) E= E1 + E2 = 10^12 eV > > > > > > #2 is 100 fold higher than #1 and therefore more LIKELY than cosmic > > > > > rays to produce a BLACK HOLE that destroys the Earth. > > > > > > Equations at LHC's own web pages: > > > > > >http://www.lhc-closer.es/php/index.php?i=1&s=4&p=3&e=0 > > > > > Yes, you'll note in the page that you reference that the energy of the > > > > proton in a fixed-target collision would have to be 10^17 eV to be > > > > equivalent to the energies at LHC. But cosmic ray protons can be a > > > > 1000 times larger energy. > > > > Bravo, I seen it after but waited to see what Aunt Al would say, it > > > proves she only Trolls the posts, if the equation was true she still > > > doesn't care. > > > Ah, good, then you admit that your post was a troll, and that you > > retract your "proof" based on crappy calculations. > > No, it proves YOUR sentiment towards the matter and the lack luster > wish to deny the testimony for what is written. I didn't make the arithmetic error. You did. Once the error is corrected, then your cause of concern should vaporize. The fact that your fears do NOT vaporize is something you should wonder about. > > > > > > > > And what do you understand of the density of intergalactic space, > > > where they say it averages 1 proton per m^3. > > > > Can one use LHC's own probability of collision (or interaction) > > > equation (and thus generating particles) to see the odds of a light > > > beam to collide/interact with a proton as it travels from 10 billion > > > light years away? > > > > It may also be the answer to dark matter, and to see how much the > > > luminosity and red shift can be affected. > > > > Doesn't that make sense to you? > > > > > > -------------------- > > > > > > What is "truly" terrible, is those that said Cosmic Rays were more > > > > > likely to produce black holes than LHC. > > > > > > Yet they are shown they were wrong, but they still argue and claim to > > > > > know more than THEIR MASTER. > > > > > > 2010: Before Einstein,GUSKZ- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - |