I'm a Physicist at CERN We've Done Something We Shouldn't Have Done

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: UnBreakable

You can't no one has seen it hence being called "unseen".

Well, there's five senses. Then there are four other ways to demonstrate evidence.

originally posted by: khnum
Unstable God particle,destroy the universe etc yes they have

Really.

So when two black holes, each weight magnitudes more than our own star, collide and create gravitational waves which ripple out at the speed of light to the point that we can detect them billions of light years away, generating and creating so much energy on a scale we can barely comprehend....

...and when the LHC at CERN, running one of its experiments at energy levels infinitesimally smaller than what I stated above, you believe it will 'destroy the universe'?

a reply to: khnum

You would need a particle accelerator larger than the earth to even get close to maybe "destroying the universe"

Maybe that is what you've gotten mixed up?

originally posted by: khnum
Yes google it its hilarious and yes man is just the species for the job

I personally do not think so.

Not only do we lack the technical knowledge or the ability to generate/create/use energy on a scale to do anything like you postulate - I think the universe is a bit more 'robust' than that.

I think it would take a lot more than a few lab-coat mammals, some copper wire and a few volts to 'destroy the universe'.

If colliding black holes don't do it - I seriously doubt we would.

originally posted by: khnum

Yes google it its hilarious and yes man is just the species for the job

You talking about this:

How the Higgs Boson Might Spell Doom for the Universe?

They are talking about an age of possibly trillions of years:

But assuming that everything is known about the Standard Model and no new particles and forces will be found in the future, then the universe might be in the gray region where it is long-lived but somewhat unstable and therefore might disappear a few billions of eons from now. "And maybe not even billions of years, but billions of eons or billions of billions" of eons, Strassler stresses. "This is not something that keeps me awake."

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Or this maybe...

The Higgs potential has the worrisome feature that it might become metastable at energies above 100bn gigaelectronvolts (GeV).This could mean that the universe could undergo catastrophic vacuum decay, with a bubble of the true vacuum expanding at the speed of light. This could happen at any time and we wouldn’t see it coming.

But the physicist adds that there’s no need to worry in the at-all foreseeable future:

“A particle accelerator that reaches 100bn GeV would be larger than Earth, and is unlikely to be funded in the present economic climate.”

www.quora.com...

Unlikely to be built. Ever. More like it.

a reply to: Chadwickus

But it is fun for some people to put their panic pants on obviously.

originally posted by: Chadwickus
Unlikely to be built. Ever. More like it.

Unless of course a statement to the contrary is read by a synthesised voice on Youtube. That becomes evidence and subsequently becomes FACT.

originally posted by: noonebutme

originally posted by: BO XIAN
Not that real facts would bother the frothing fingers folks.

But what 'real facts'? None of your posts ever -- EVER, offer real facts. Only what someone claims to have heard or seen. Or a robotic voice spewing out a load of nonsense. Incidentally, if you want your post to be taken as a complete joke, keep doing that - a link to a cheesy robotic voice claiming to be the words of someone genuine.

7. OF COURSE, it could be a hoax; a delusion of grandeur; a game by a bright young adult etc. etc. etc.

. . .

9. So, let us PRETEND that it IS exactly as stated.

Welllllllllllllllll, Omniscient one,

Was I WRONG when I said

--It could be a hoax?
--A delusion of grandeur?
--A game by a bright young adult?
--etc. etc. etc.?

Given that it was sounding so much like y'all had read someone else's OP, I decided to go back and read my own OP.

The lines above neutralize all your blather.

Y'all got your panties in a wad when I stated in the BEGINNING that it could be a hoax etc.

I confess that, except for the very personal personhood mean-spirited vicious ASSAULTS, I get some perverse kick out of watching y'all's frothing at the fingers out of such extreme arrogance, ignorance, mis-guided assumptions, banty-rooster strutting . . . and the like.

And, I confess that often enough, SOME of my assumptions AND SPECULATIONS about things are out-right WRONG.

I probably am ALSO consigned--RIGHTLY or WRONGLY--to the ATS WRONG PENALTY BOX by the pack of wild wolf naysayers virtually 24/7/365. So being WRONG . . . &/or . . . being wrongly SEEN AS WRONG is a VERY ROUTINE experience of mine in these parts.

Though I rarely lose any sleep over it.

ONE of my several goals is undoubtedly to provide enough emotionally laden assertions that lodge in folks' noggins sufficiently that

WHEN

a lot of this starts falling off the shelves into the laps of the general populace and on the nightly news . . .

folks WILL RECALL my blathering

and have YET ANOTHER CHANCE to adjust their sensibilities and understandings toward life and eternal life and away from death and eternal isolation from God.

It is virtually certain that I could write an OP about the likelihood of the sun coming up tomorrow, water running down hill, the tides coming in and out, the weather changing . . . and at least some of the wolves would find some major part of my OP to screech, whine and wail about. That's just a given.

So, y'all's screaming about how right y'all are and how wrong I am just doesn't move me much. I've been screamed at for my typically very unique views on reality most of my near 70 years. Nevertheless, one of the more annoying aspects of that over all those years . . . has been how my hypotheses have been rather routinely confirmed so repeatedly.

Or, in George Kelly Role Construct Theory terms . . .

webgrid.uvic.ca...

My grids have persistently come out solidly functional in terms of predicting life around me. My constructs and their connections have persistently come out quite accurately useful in anticipating events and relationships around me and in the life I observe. So, I doubt I'll be changing much THAT significantly going forward.

Of course, the grid is sensitive enough that any significant life experience will be reflected in it. Yet, it's validity and reliability are tops of all the paper/pencil instruments.

Now, certainly, a lot of my threads--at least the ones I tend to enjoy being tweaky about--are on topics that currently appear to be very much on the fringe or well over the line into deep fringe stuff. That's normal, for me. Some of that relates to my notions regarding Bible prophecy, END TIMES, globalism etc. And some of it is just curiosity stuff, off-the-wall-fun stuff.

The Bible prophecy, END TIMES, globalism stuff is the stuff I play for keeps with. And, THAT is the stuff that riles up the inner and outer demonic forces so much that the naysayers seem to bounce off of and reverberate with so much. That's predictable. OF COURSE it would--because it deals with ULTIMATE--ETERNAL ISSUES, WORLD VIEWS. And WORLD VIEWS influence everything--particularly behavior, comfort zones, sleeping at night, etc.

All this is not very new to me. I've occasionally had counseling clients and close friends get real upset with me over one or more issues. Some have even broken the relationship because they were sooooo upset at what I had to say to them.

I've lost track of how many of those have connected with me again 5-20 years later and voluntarily noted to me how angry and really upset they were--but how what I'd said to them kept coming true in their lives even though they did NOT want to believe it. But that as they faced the truths I'd shared with them, it brought them life, growth and a much more fulfilling, meaningful, peaceful and joy-filled life.

That's very gratifying and worth tons of rage-a-holism ranting and screaming at what a horribly wrong idiot I am.

IN TERMS OF THE PRESENT OP . . . yeah, by the time I got to the end of it . . . I realized it would all be some variation of a farcical pile of assertions . . . or maybe not . . . even if it were written as fiction or a hoax.

As my extremely brilliant Dissertation Chairman noted . . . "LIFE is soooooooooo COMPLEX, just about any cock-a-may-mee explanation will do." I disagreed with him in terms of theology but I still think he made a good point.

Probably every single screeching naysayer that rages at me DEMONSTRATES horrendous levels of RAD--Attachment Disorder. Without it, they would simply share their views MUCH differently with a MUCH DIFFERENT ATTITUDE. That much is OBVIOUS.

I could write extensively about that and the implications, factors, origins of that but not for this thread.

Over against the raging of the RAD afflicted naysayers, I have a 100% conviction that our era is going to get MUCH MORE CONVOLUTED, CHAOTIC, UTTERLY INSANELY CRAZY ETC.

People WILL be falling over dead routinely from sheer fear of what is falling in the laps of the general populace day in and day out with INCREASING absurdities and insanities.

OF COURSE, the world and universe are not going to end any time soon and certainly not for at least a thousand years and likely many hundreds of thousands of years. At some point, yes, God will wrap this all up and start over--He said so. But that's no concern of ours, presently.

WHEN the fabric of our social life; infrastructure AND of REALITY ITSELF literally is fracturing right and left in a list of ways . . . my crazy threads and statements will come to mind annoyingly often--if and when there are some quiet moments to reflect. And THEN at least a few folks will go . . .

Hmmmm IF the crazy Bo was this right about this much, maybe he was right about God. Maybe I'd better reconsider before it's REALLLLY TOOOO LATE.

And all the even rank mean-spirited assaults will have been worth it to the max.

Of course, there are some screeching naysayers who are soooo mean-spirited and disagreeable that I'm increasingly inclined to ignore them totally. I may occasionally respond to content worth some discussing with others but I don't have a compulsive need to joust with folks who have a jousting lance only 4 microns long and an ego a thousand ...

I address this to Bo and Phage. Here is a summary of the physics of CERN .

home.cern...

there are multiple magnetic fields, 8.4 tesla is mentioned. and a circular field 27 km long that is generated by the circulating particles.. but it is limited, the rest mass is tiny, lt milligrams. in addition, synchotron radiation increases as the 40 tev mentioned in the OP increases, putting a lid on power levels.

SO how do these fields produce a gateway between universes????? You cannot just say, a gateway was opened without providing even a speculation as to the relation between circular electromagnetic fields and gateways...but also, Phage, because you do not know of this relation does not prove it doesnt exist....

My view: I need evidence to decide. The op contains evidence if you believe it...the observed change of state in the control room as power levels increased... but there is no other confirmation i know of. unless, maybe, some recent postings of odd cloud formations above CERN, but this is all maybe stuff.

a reply to: Phage

I am stealing that line.

a reply to: raymundoko

He stole it from me.

I forget who I 'stole' it from decades ago.

I remember now--it was the wonderful Pastor that I had as a teenager.

I think it's a humorous riot that the presumed "super-rationalist" --hostile to spirituality-- Phage copied something from my PASTOR. LOLOL.

a reply to: darkstar57

THANKS.

I believe it is foolishness to think that any of us from this distance know much of anything about what is going on with CERN.

There is ample evidence to believe that THE STANDARD MODEL has long ago been superseded by at least a wholesale adjusted standard model--if not a wholesale NEW standard model, period.

So, what % of even well trained physicists would be INCLUDED in the more secret model stuff? 1%? 5%? 15%? 20%? I doubt it would be more than 5% and probably not more than 1%. And maybe not more than 0.01% . . . or even 0.001%??? I don't know how many physicists there are. I would imagine that world wide . . . those truly in the know are less than 50 and certainly less than 100.

My B.A. program physics prof was not one of the 1% but he was connected to at least one of his profs that evidently was. And my prof alluded to plenty that was OUTSIDE the normal limits of what was considered kosher scientific FACT at the time. And that was in 1967 or so.

So, when a lot of the naysayers screech about what OBVIOUSLY IS AND ISN'T TRUE "scientifically," I have to laugh. They don't have any more clue about that than a lot of the much better trained scientists do.

Last I heard, even Hawking is having to re-evaluate his conclusions about God as he understands more of the precisely tuned facts of reality.

Certainly the scientists MORE in the know than average have already tossed evolution or origins assumptions because of such finely tuned complexities. But the average scientist and man in the street are still carrying around the old dead chicken of evolution and beating folks over the head with it as though it were the last word on origins--which, it obviously, is NOT.

ANYTHING even ostensibly THAT SECRET (hyper secret CERN stuff) would be under layers of screens, obfuscations, fronts, distracting projects etc.

The ONLY sorts of stuff that would leak out would be whistle blower stuff, "truth-via-fiction" stuff etc.

So, we ALL, ALWAYS take our chances between a false positive error vs a false negative error.

There are few to no other options/possibilities.

And, Phage has yet to admit the

AUTOMATIC SCIENTIFIC TENSION

between risking a false positive error vs a false negative error.

But he HAS to deal with that reality one way or another, sooner or later, whether he acknowledges it to the man in his mirror, or not.

It is simply a solid scientific fact that

WHEN one leans toooo far away from risking a false positive error, one

MAKES VIRTUALLY CERTAIN that one will be victimized by a false negative error.

And Phage seems to exalt in swimming in a deep pool of risking false negative errors all the time.

And he pontificates as though that's rational, scientific--when IN SCIENTIFIC FACT, THAT'S A GREAT DISTANCE FROM

THE TRUTH.

a reply to: Nyiah

How convenient of you to miss or ignore this sentence of mine in the OP:

7. OF COURSE, it could be a hoax; a delusion of grandeur; a game by a bright young adult etc. etc. etc.

a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

How convenient of you to miss or ignore this sentence of mine in the OP:

7. OF COURSE, it could be a hoax; a delusion of grandeur; a game by a bright young adult etc. etc. etc.

a reply to: StargateSG7

There is an obscure verse in the Bible . . . something giving the impression of

God sustaining the fabric of reality, the multiverse

by HIS WILL

. . . constantly . . .

. . . that if He altered His will in the matter even slightly, it would all fall apart.

I have read where some physicists believe that the fabric of reality is . . . not only finely tuned but . . . finely, precisely balanced . . . that while it is incredibly durable on the one hand . . . it wouldn't take but changing one significant feature for it to fall apart. I don't know. Sounded plausible, to me.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Except that . . . my interests were in teasing out the

hypothetical therefore what's

if we PRETENDED that the story was true.

Sorry you weren't up to that challenge.

a reply to: dragonridr

My understanding is that physicists have determined that there are

14 other dimensions.

Perhaps you are behind the times.

And . . .

How convenient of you to miss or ignore this sentence of mine in the OP:

7. OF COURSE, it could be a hoax; a delusion of grandeur; a game by a bright young adult etc. etc. etc.

the OP source is :

almost certainly not a physicist , nor working at CERN

and what it has done that is " shouldnt have " is attempt such a pathetic doom porn hoax

a reply to: BO XIAN

Well said!