Notices
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: risk and experiment

  1. #1 risk and experiment 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Is there any risk associated with creating near big-bang conditions in an experiment?

    If anyone found out I was trying to create a near "big-bang" condition, they would report me to the anti-terrorism authorities.

    Why do the French get off so easily? They actually don't know what they are doing. They state that "many theories" exist for what could happen by their CERN Hadron research adventures. Little scary, right? Near "big bang" conditions?

    The "big bang", as the theory goes, was a chain reaction. What's to say these giants of opinion aren't trying to start a chain reaction that won't stop?

    If they succeed, according to their theories of space-time, there would be a momentary state of pure energy followed by the resolution of the known laws of space-time. But that momentary state of pure energy could technically be enough to "zap" everything, which, well, if you are a ghost, that could be fun........


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: risk and experiment 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    You'll notice that all the people with actual training in physics think that it's safe, while all the people who think it's unsafe don't have any training in physics. Why so you think that is?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    And, as explained many times before, considerably larger amounts of energy are reacting in the space around our planet, yet we are still here after billions of years. Of course though, you could say that (besides those caused by religion) one of the massive population bottlenecks in our history was caused by a high energy particle reaction in the atmosphere.
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: risk and experiment 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee
    You'll notice that all the people with actual training in physics think that it's safe, while all the people who think it's unsafe don't have any training in physics. Why so you think that is?

    The only thing scary is that, there was no big bang. Bangs take things apart.

    I do not know, what kind of experiment they are doing or the equipment or supplies they have on site. However a well equipped lab or industrial test center would probably have liquefied gases in quantity.

    There is no chain reaction unless you feed a very hot radio active source, a continuous supply of certain chemicals. It would be very hard to do even with the combined efforts of all. You cannot breath in these fumes to long.
    But you could easily poison earths atmosphere, and setup a condition where a secondary explosion in a radio active cloud wiped out earth.

    They could easily create an electrical pulse that could wipe out, most of the equipment on earth. Or egg shape the earth. That was always a concern when liquefied gases are involved. Especially in the presence of extreme magnetic/radio fields.

    That is why I believe all of our law makers should be put to sleep, for hiding the senselessness of radio active isotopes to make power. All the accidents were foretold before they happened. We have all the power anyone can ever dream of.




    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: risk and experiment 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    My Computer
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    That is why I believe all of our law makers should be put to sleep, for hiding the senselessness of radio active isotopes to make power. All the accidents were foretold before they happened. We have all the power anyone can ever dream of.
    I thought you said isotopes did not exist?
    ~Edd
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    "They could easily create an electrical pulse that could wipe out, most of the equipment on earth. Or egg shape the earth."

    Did you seriously just say that? Egg shape the earth? Please tell me that is a phrase I am not familiar with and it should not be taken literally.
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor serpicojr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    JRZ
    Posts
    1,069
    Watch out, Billy might just egg shape your face!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: risk and experiment 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    That is why I believe all of our law makers should be put to sleep, for hiding the senselessness of radio active isotopes to make power. All the accidents were foretold before they happened. We have all the power anyone can ever dream of.
    I thought you said isotopes did not exist?

    I defined what they were, with a link. And really what they still are.



    When you get radiation from lower elements, they are just contaminated with these higher radioactive isotopes.

    How did you come to the conclusion that I said isotopes do not exist?

    I have noticed that a lot of individuals on this forum have a problem comprehending what they read. It is the definitions. They are very poor today. Not really the individuals fault.
    The individual was built as a perfect calculating instrument. Poor input is the only thing that can cause a fault.

    However I have also noticed that most do not even bother to check the definitions of particles and theories, that they back with their dignity and good name. If they did, particle science might just be that funny time, much like when some of my generation took mushrooms and defecated all over themselves.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Cold Fusion
    "They could easily create an electrical pulse that could wipe out, most of the equipment on earth. Or egg shape the earth."

    Did you seriously just say that? Egg shape the earth? Please tell me that is a phrase I am not familiar with and it should not be taken literally.
    That is what I was taught, by the best in multiple fields. From local defense plant experts, and from Universal Scientists.
    And I have done some of my own testing. Which makes an outstanding case for this.
    It has to do with liquid nitrogen and its Siamese bond. That causes one atom of nitrogen to take on some of the properties of carbon. Liquid carbon can polarize so fast that it can have severe effects. And can distort the earths stability.
    Stability and continuing creation, that is caused by the ambient radiation, exteriorly. At least according to my teachings and learnings.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Instow, Devon, UK
    Posts
    99
    You claimed that isotopes did not exist in a previous thread and that they were merely contaminants which we have 'lost the skill to isolate and remove'.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11 Re: risk and experiment 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Quote Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee
    You'll notice that all the people with actual training in physics think that it's safe, while all the people who think it's unsafe don't have any training in physics. Why so you think that is?
    Is that why CERN have watered down their promotion of the Hadron experiment?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Tenacity
    You claimed that isotopes did not exist in a previous thread and that they were merely contaminants which we have 'lost the skill to isolate and remove'.
    I stated that lower elements, being referred to as radio active isotopes, because they are radio active. Do not exist.
    The lower elements are not radio active isotopes, they are not variations of lower elements. They just have contaminants of large radio active isotopes, in them.

    However as radio active isotopes were originally found and documented, they were only the higher larger radio active elements. Not any lower element.
    I am glad actually I was not understood. This is good for me. I see now there is some communication barrier present. That I am not aware of.

    That is how Argon is formed from potassium with radio active contaminants. The radiation destroys the potassium and creates an atom of argon. Electrons are released and leave the container or area.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    My Computer
    Posts
    52
    Just out of interest William, what do you think the difference between alpha beta and gamma decay? or if you just think its all one type.

    ~Edd
    ~Edd
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund
    Just out of interest William, what do you think the difference between alpha beta and gamma decay? or if you just think its all one type.

    ~Edd
    I myself believe with total conviction that all radiation is electrons. I believe that the patterns, velocity, the intensity, is different. However all electrons.

    The devices we measure them with, use pretty much the same mechanisms. Basically electron radiation detectors. They measure electrons, in the x-ray velocity. Because they do tend to penetrate objects.

    One thing though even weak radio will also penetrate objects to some extent.



    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Putting thie nonsensical personal chit-chat aside, and in going back to the subject, it appears that the science community finds "no risk" at all with their Higgs-particle experiment at CERN, creating "near-big-bang" conditions. No risk. I am not trying to be the breeze blowing up their skirt, here, but its fascinating to hear that there is no "risk" at all involved in creating near big-bang conditions.

    The strange thing is that they don't know what results they will get regarding the Higgs-particle, but they are telling the media they know exactly what "energy" results they will expect, what "chain reaction" results they will expect, but they have no idea what to expect regarding the HIggs-particle. Does that suggest already that the Higgs-particle has nothing to do with energy equations? I beg to differ though. You see, the problem is that the Higgs-particle is a proposed particle that gives the other particles their "reality" so to speak, their "mass". To suggest then that the Higgs-particle is not associated to energy equations would require a very abstract holistic view of what indeed the scienctists conducting these experiments are trying to achieve.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by theQuestIsNotOver
    Putting thie nonsensical personal chit-chat aside, and in going back to the subject, it appears that the science community finds "no risk" at all with their Higgs-particle experiment at CERN, creating "near-big-bang" conditions. No risk. I am not trying to be the breeze blowing up their skirt, here, but its fascinating to hear that there is no "risk" at all involved in creating near big-bang conditions.

    The strange thing is that they don't know what results they will get regarding the Higgs-particle, but they are telling the media they know exactly what "energy" results they will expect, what "chain reaction" results they will expect, but they have no idea what to expect regarding the HIggs-particle. Does that suggest already that the Higgs-particle has nothing to do with energy equations? I beg to differ though. You see, the problem is that the Higgs-particle is a proposed particle that gives the other particles their "reality" so to speak, their "mass". To suggest then that the Higgs-particle is not associated to energy equations would require a very abstract holistic view of what indeed the scienctists conducting these experiments are trying to achieve.
    You may honestly believe it is just chit chat, or you may be very resentful, that you were not trusted with science, or were afraid to find out what it was.

    Every time these multi particle nuts do something you have to watch it like a hawk. In most cases all you can do is say, No, don't, its electrons. It will release electrons. Electron radiation will be emitted.

    They won't listen, because if reality is not what millions of others believe, they would have to become a minority and have individual thoughts. And be responsible for those individual thoughts.

    That is scary even to me. But it is worth the risk.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Quote Originally Posted by William McCormick
    Quote Originally Posted by theQuestIsNotOver
    Putting thie nonsensical personal chit-chat aside, and in going back to the subject, it appears that the science community finds "no risk" at all with their Higgs-particle experiment at CERN, creating "near-big-bang" conditions. No risk. I am not trying to be the breeze blowing up their skirt, here, but its fascinating to hear that there is no "risk" at all involved in creating near big-bang conditions.

    The strange thing is that they don't know what results they will get regarding the Higgs-particle, but they are telling the media they know exactly what "energy" results they will expect, what "chain reaction" results they will expect, but they have no idea what to expect regarding the HIggs-particle. Does that suggest already that the Higgs-particle has nothing to do with energy equations? I beg to differ though. You see, the problem is that the Higgs-particle is a proposed particle that gives the other particles their "reality" so to speak, their "mass". To suggest then that the Higgs-particle is not associated to energy equations would require a very abstract holistic view of what indeed the scienctists conducting these experiments are trying to achieve.
    You may honestly believe it is just chit chat, or you may be very resentful, that you were not trusted with science, or were afraid to find out what it was.

    Every time these multi particle nuts do something you have to watch it like a hawk. In most cases all you can do is say, No, don't, its electrons. It will release electrons. Electron radiation will be emitted.

    They won't listen, because if reality is not what millions of others believe, they would have to become a minority and have individual thoughts. And be responsible for those individual thoughts.

    That is scary even to me. But it is worth the risk.

    Sincerely,


    William McCormick

    William, cut the letter-writing crap: do you end all face to face communications or anything similar as conversations with "sincerely"? Do you end your SMS's with "sincerely"? I sincerely hope not. You actually come across as someone's sock-puppet, because your style of presentation appears to be deliberately fetched into the realm of the nonsensical. But, if you are for real, and wish to continue with your letter writing style, please address me as "Dear" (it allows your address to be more complete, and people trust addresses to others that are the full-quid, so to speak).

    Now, when you said "that you were not trusted with science", tell me how you have been trusted with science for you to show pony your level above what you think mine is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Dear William,

    I have to say that the Moderators like you, like a sock puppet. I presented a very clearly worded concept, you came along, sapped the idea to your own bullshit, and then had the subject moved. I give you 5star Moderator awareness.



    Sincerely,

    (do the math)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    theQuestisNot Over, this has been your most lucid set of posts in any thread, under this or any other poster name. I genuinely congratulate you on it. Hoewever, when two of the of the most - let me be polite - avant garde theorists who post in The Science Forum exchange blows there is likely to be only one outcome.

    I share with you - to a minor degree - some of the concerns over the LHC. However, as was noted by another in an earlier post, the same energy levels are routinely generated by the impact of incoming cosmic rays on the upper atmosphere. The same kind of concerns were expressed when one of the US accelerators was about to be brought on line - nothing untoward happened then. This will likely be the same. (I'm not sanguine about GM crops, but that is another matter. )
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    grail search
    Posts
    811
    Yes.

    Mmm.

    This is an "intervention", right: you, William, and all the other muppets......



    Sincerely,

    Ghost of McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    If I understand correctly, Stream/Quest is accusing the moderators of creating William McCormick as a sock puppet to sabotage Stream's threads by posting something even loonier. That's an interesting theory, but nobody could dream up William's electron universal science without being a complete lunatic themselves. This is quite entertaining.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Thank you Harold. I find SS/Quest's prose almost impenetrable, but your interpretation makes sense.
    Of course the ironic thing is that Stream's threads would tend to autodestruct without the intervention of a luminary such as William McCormick.
    Like you I appreciate the entertainment value of these pieces. I know that some members would prefer they were wholly absent, but I think - in moderation - they bring something to the community.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •