They're gonna fire the World Cannon

Believe it or not they have held enquiries into the possibility and the outcome was that even if the creation of black holes is allowed by the laws of physics, the chances are incredibly miniscule. Even then, the chances of the black hole growing rather than evaporating instantly are equally miniscule.

There's probably just as much chance of you sitting on a chair and passing straight through it - also allowed by the laws of physics in just such an unlikely set of circumstances.

The atomic bomb atmospheric chain reaction thing was something they were fairly certain wouldn't happen before they tested the Trinity device. (They did the maths and worked out the probabilities).

Same deal with the LHC. Current physics theories as proposed by Stephen Hawking and other suggest that black holes evaporate over time when they aren't consuming material which generally means they last a long time when composed of a few stellar masses of material (a.k.a a few times the Mass of your average star!).

I'd therefore imagine that any black hole created by the LHC would like microseconds at best.

Personally, i'd not panic just yet.

I've been waiting for this thing to be turned on for the last couple years.

Saw a great documentary called the elegant universe that aired on nova a while ago. (i m pretty sure this is the colider they were talking about in there) Anyway, hopefully they can prove some things about string theory with it. ie wether it is a crock or actually true.

Personally, i am really excited. It would be real nice to finally hear someone say, we know this for sure instead of... we think this is happening, but we have no way of proving it.

BTW here is the link.
This doc rocks
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

lestat666 wrote:Anyway, hopefully they can prove some things about string theory with it. ie wether it is a crock or actually true.

Not that I know much about physics in general or superstrings in particular, but I found this in an article:

"In most cases, to test string theory directly, experimenters would have to build an accelerator to boost particles to the so-called Planck energy, at which “stringy” effects are expected to show up, roughly 10 quadrillion trillion electron volts. That is a quadrillion times the energy of the new hadron collider, which will accelerate protons to energies of seven trillion electron volts before smashing them together."

Another problem with string theory, as far as I understand it (and it is not far) is that it aspires to be a theory of everything. Is that not to be aiming to high, I mean, when or how can we with any confidence say that it is nothing more to know about the universe. Theories in physics are no better than the matematical framework it is expressed in, and how do we know that todays mathematics is the final one. I am probably on deep water here. Maybe I should rather be pointing to the fact that we have only observed the one universe, our own. And to observe just one occurence of something is not sufficient to know everything about it. As far as anybody know there might me other universes besides our own.

This being said, I will check out the nova link. I have read "The Elegant Universe", but to say that I understood it would be a huge overstatement.

Have you guys seen this? It's a Rap Video called the Large Hadron Rap.

It was produced by some of the folks involved in the LHC project (and probably explains why they are such terrible dancers.) The lyrics are quite informative and it is fairly entertaining.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM

Well, the LHC is currently inoperational due to a fault with the liquid helium cooling system. It will take around 2 weeks to raise the accelerator's temperature in order to repair the fault, then a further 2 once it's repaired to reduce it back to operating temperature.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlCa ... QD93AF8RG1

Another problem with string theory, as far as I understand it (and it is not far) is that it aspires to be a theory of everything. Is that not to be aiming to high? I mean, when or how can we with any confidence say that it is nothing more to know about the universe.

The question you pose here is a perfectly valid one. Generally speaking, the more we learn, the more new doors are opened to new unknowns. In other words, the more we know the more we know that we don't know. As knowledge is a never-ending quest, it would seem like a Theory of Everything is a contradiction or oxymoron. In the sense that you have questioned it, you are right.

But that isn't what is meant by the phrase "theory of everything'. I will explain...

As far as we know right now, there are four fundamental forces which describe the interactions of all matter. They are the Weak nuclear force, the Strong nuclear force, the Electro-magnetic force and the gravitational force. There were, originally, four separate theories for describing each of these four different forces.

During the later part of the 20th century something called The Standard Model was developed, in which the weak, strong and electromagnetic forces were all combined into one unified theory. Essentially, it was shown that the weak, strong and electromagnetic forces were each different manifestations of the same thing and the Standard Model showed how they were related and why they each have the properties that they do.

All except gravity. We have not yet been able to include gravity into the model and put it on the same theoretical foundation as all of the other forces. We consider the combining of the three forces to be a Unified Field Theory. If we could also include gravity into the theory it would be a Grand Unified Field Theory or A Theory of Everything.

Theory of Everything simply means that all of the forces of Nature (weak, strong, electromagnetic and gravitational) can be described by one unified theory. From this theory, all of our familiar equations, such as Newton's Laws, Maxwell's Equations, Quantum Mechanics, General Relativity would all be derivable and related to each other through this one Grand Theory.

It doesn't mean that we know everything. It just means that all of the know forces have a common foundation and we know what they are.

Now I'll get a little weird on you...

In principle, if we achieved a Grand Unification Theory, we could then build a gigantic computer (Deep Thought anyone?) and program it with the fundamental equations of the universe and then press 'start'. As that program cranks away, a universe, not unlike our own would gradually evolve inside the computer.

It is fun to think of our universe this way. It is a giant simulation inside of God's computer (which he programmed with the same equations.) Occasionally he jacks-in and tinkers with it or even walks among us. Sometimes he sends his graduate students (angels) in for other tasks. This model also makes it easy to imagine different realms of existence. For instance, how it is possible for God to be outside of the universe, yet everywhere in the universe at the same time.

Think about it. It's fun to speculate.

It is fun to think of our universe this way. It is a giant simulation inside of God's computer (which he programmed with the same equations.) Occasionally he jacks-in and tinkers with it or even walks among us. Sometimes he sends his graduate students (angels) in for other tasks. This model also makes it easy to imagine different realms of existence. For instance, how it is possible for God to be outside of the universe, yet everywhere in the universe at the same time.

Think about it. It's fun to speculate.

I like your theory. It reminds me of the type of God that was described in Arthur C. Clark's Rama. A grand scientist with a calculative mind. I could say more but i don't want to spoil it for anyone who wants to read this series.

Good explanation dr. paul.

Also steve, the nova doc explains the theories in much less mathematical terms and makes it even easier to understand. I would recomend people watching the doc before reading the book. Brian Greene also wrote a book called the fabric of the cosmos. Haven't read that one yet though.

Reminds me of the Einstein quote: "God does not play dice".

Turns out that Einstein was quite wrong with that.

DrPaul wrote:

It is fun to think of our universe this way. It is a giant simulation inside of God's computer (which he programmed with the same equations.) Occasionally he jacks-in and tinkers with it or even walks among us. Sometimes he sends his graduate students (angels) in for other tasks. This model also makes it easy to imagine different realms of existence. For instance, how it is possible for God to be outside of the universe, yet everywhere in the universe at the same time.

Think about it. It's fun to speculate.

How very Matrix'esque. But you're right, it does provoke some interesting thought and interpretation of everyday events.

-Cub. =o)

How very Matrix'esque.

You're right. The major difference is only that the beings who evolve inside the simulation only exist inside the computer. They aren't sleeping in pods somewhere else, as in the Matrix.

It turns out that my story-line is actually a lot more like another movie that came out the same summer as the Matrix and it was called The Thirteenth Floor. Check it out if you haven't seen it. Very thoughtful movie. Great science fiction.

I see. So the 'theory of everything' is a 'theory of all forces, and how they relate to each other' (or not relate as it may turn out). This sounds familiar now that you come to mention it.

This is exactly the sort of things that I have no mathematical understanding of, and at the same time, acknowledge that such an understanding is absolutely crucial. It is not that your explanation are unclear in any way, because it is not (exept for the last paragraph perhaps ). It is just that I do not know what holds the three forces together and exclude gravity. I do not have the faintest idea if there is something in the theoretical framework that forbiddes there being a fifth force, not yet discovered. And I do not know if this fifth force could very well exist even though it is not depicted by the Standard Model or String Theory. As you can see, there is a lot I do not understand.

You must excuse my scribblings. You see, I am a philosopher, and words pour from my fingers like diarrhea after a particularly spicy meal. Add the fact that english is my second language, then the result may perhaps be entertaining, if not intelligible.

It is just that I do not know what holds the three forces together

Obviously, it's The Force that binds the universe together

I haven't been keeping up with this... I know they tested it to make sure it fired... Does anyone know when they will be firing it for their intended purpose???