Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Bosco123 on December 03, 2009, 06:24:14 PM
-
Here is a linky:
http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/LHC-en.html
"Our understanding of the Universe is about to change...
The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the minuscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe.
Two beams of subatomic particles called 'hadrons' – either protons or lead ions – will travel in opposite directions inside the circular accelerator, gaining energy with every lap. Physicists will use the LHC to recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. Teams of physicists from around the world will analyse the particles created in the collisions using special detectors in a number of experiments dedicated to the LHC.
There are many theories as to what will result from these collisions, but what's for sure is that a brave new world of physics will emerge from the new accelerator, as knowledge in particle physics goes on to describe the workings of the Universe. For decades, the Standard Model of particle physics has served physicists well as a means of understanding the fundamental laws of Nature, but it does not tell the whole story. Only experimental data using the higher energies reached by the LHC can push knowledge forward, challenging those who seek confirmation of established knowledge, and those who dare to dream beyond the paradigm."
My two cents,
I think, if it works, it is really going to change the way we see our world now. They are looking for subatomic particle that go faster than the speed of light, and as far as we know, nothing can go faster than the speed of light. It would also explain gravity, and how it works, which then we can make laws to get around gravity and in return, make us go faster than we ever thought we could.
They have had a lot of problems though, for one, a magnet bursted from all of the pressure and was down for a couple of months. They tried it again and a bird droped a piece of bagel into one of the exaust ports, and the bagel super heated, and overheated the collieder.
The last time they tried it, which I believe was tuesday, the made the most powerful energy sorce on the planet, putting out 1.2 trillion Joules, and they say it can go up to 30 trillion! I think it could the be the greatest invention, or fluke we have eber seen, and I'm hoping it is not a fluke. So many things could be answerd just with this.
-
Hadron, dear feller, not Hardon. That would smash different particles altogether . . .
;)
And yes, it'll be very interesting to see what comes out of such research.
:cool:
-
Large Hardon Collider sounds like some kind of... eh nvm
:lol
-
Large Hardon Collider sounds like some kind of... eh nvm
:lol
..the name of your Ex-wife? :neener:
-
My two cents,
I think, if it works, it is really going to change the way we see our world now. They are looking for subatomic particle that go faster than the speed of light, and as far as we know, nothing can go faster than the speed of light. It would also explain gravity, and how it works, which then we can make laws to get around gravity and in return, make us go faster than we ever thought we could.
The theory of relativity only states that matter cannot be accelerated faster than the speed of light. It says nothing about a particle that is created with speed above that of light.
They have had a lot of problems though, for one, a magnet bursted from all of the pressure and was down for a couple of months.
The magnet did suffered from heat quenching, a rather destructive process in a supercooled magnet. When the magnet heats up beyond a certain point the resistance increases at an exponential rate. An engineering fault caused the magnet to melt down from excessive current and lack of cooling.
Also, they are mainly looking for a particle called the Higgs Boson, a large hadron that does not travel faster than the speed of light, hence the name.
Strip
-
Will this discovery help my AH hit %? If so, I would like two hadron thingy's sent to my house in time for Christmas...shipping must be free like everyone else.
V/r
Changeup
-
Actually, Neutrinos do go faster than light.
This device from what I read is to discover theoretical particles that, if 'found' by the LHC , would indeed open a whole new branch of physics.
In fact, here's a direct link to one of the many amazing things that the collider can prove and open our understanding of things: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/large-hadron-collider/3314456/Surfer-dude-stuns-physicists-with-theory-of-everything.html
in short, this guy says that the E8 (lie 8) IS the theory of everything..its the very structure of the universe itself (geometrical/spatial/etc). He and other scientists have been checking and found that this E8 matches and links all that we know about the universe neatly..except for 20 items which are explained only by particles we know little about: gravity.
and that, is exactly what the collider is trying to discover. If it does discover it and this E8 theory is proven a fact, its the holy grail... its the unified theory made real. the technology that can come from it is mind boggling.
-
Large Hardon Collider sounds like some kind of... eh nvm
:lol
ignored this thread for a while thinking it was going to show "sword fights" of an odd sort. :bolt:
-
Neutrinos do not travel faster than the speed of light.....
-
Yea I did make a mistake, not that big of a deal.
The theory of relativity only states that matter cannot be accelerated faster than the speed of light. It says nothing about a particle that is created with speed above that of light.
Since I just learned about theory of relativity, it states that Gravity is not a force, rather that space bends around gravity, not gravity bends around space, and we cannot explain that without something doing it, so we believe that these subatomic particles would prove that Einstein was right about his theory.
-
Weren't they supposed to fire that up last spring, and then postponed it for some reason?
I seem to recall something like that, but I forget.
-
Magnetic quench overheated hundreds of magnets....
Strip
-
Yea I did make a mistake, not that big of a deal. Since I just learned about theory of relativity, it states that Gravity is not a force, rather that space bends around gravity, not gravity bends around space, and we cannot explain that without something doing it, so we believe that these subatomic particles would prove that Einstein was right about his theory.
If i remember correctly, ( please correct me if im wrong ) he proved his theory by photographing stars that were blocked by the sun. They were able to do this when there was a solar eclipse, and photographed a star that they new was behind the sun. The image taken showed the star, thus proving that the gravity bent space, and light.
-
Correct. Another simple way he did it was he took a large towel and threw balls across the towel. He then took a large ball and placed it at the middle of the towel, then threw balls around the big ball, and the little ball was sucked into the "field" of the big ball, as it went around the ball.
As a side note, the LHC can and more than likely will produce enough energy to create a black hole. The black hole on the other hand will only be the size of the width of your pinky, and will last only fractions of a second because as soon as it is produced, it will collapse on itself, so I don't think we have to worry about the world getting sucked into a black hole, but the real question is, if we were sucked into a black hole, would we actally know if we were in the black hole? Because it's not just one person going into the black hole, it will be everyone in the world, and how could we figure that out? Just kinda neat that we can produce that amount of energy.
-
The photographing a star light being bent played a big role in proving the validity of Einsteins Theory of Relativity.
The movement of Mercury's perihelion (closest point in the orbit) also helped prove it....
-
The last time they tried it, which I believe was tuesday, the made the most powerful energy sorce on the planet, putting out 1.2 trillion Joules, and they say it can go up to 30 trillion!
Think of the carbon footprint!! THEY'RE RUINING THE PLANET!!!!
:bolt:
-
Correct. Another simple way he did it was he took a large towel and threw balls across the towel. He then took a large ball and placed it at the middle of the towel, then threw balls around the big ball, and the little ball was sucked into the "field" of the big ball, as it went around the ball.
As a side note, the LHC can and more than likely will produce enough energy to create a black hole. The black hole on the other hand will only be the size of the width of your pinky, and will last only fractions of a second because as soon as it is produced, it will collapse on itself, so I don't think we have to worry about the world getting sucked into a black hole, but the real question is, if we were sucked into a black hole, would we actally know if we were in the black hole? Because it's not just one person going into the black hole, it will be everyone in the world, and how could we figure that out? Just kinda neat that we can produce that amount of energy.
A black hole the diameter of your pinkie would have the mass of the earth, it will create atom sized black holes.
Strip
-
A black hole the diameter of your pinkie would have the mass of the earth, it will create atom sized black holes.
Strip
"GENEVA — When launched to great fanfare nearly a year ago, some feared the Large Hadron Collider would create a black hole that would suck in the world. It turns out the Hadron may be the black hole."
Your swinging and missing today Strip lol :)
-
Your rebuttal does nothing to disprove my comments or prove your comments....
Also, please list any other examples in this thread of me being incorrect, providing hard data from reliable sources along the way.
Strip
-
Look again, you said that atomic partical, assuming that your saying that it would not produce enough mass to suck the Earth in. What I posted simply stated that it could produce somthing the mass of the Earth, thus, it would have to be the size of a regular human pinkie.
-
The LHC could only produce a black hole the size of an atom, if only for a infinitely short period. The only way it could become the size of a marble would be after it ingested the Earth. Black holes of that size are incredibly unstable and impossible to expand or even sustain their existence. So no, LHC could not produce a black hole of that size under any circumstance.
Please do a little more research before you discredit people about a subject you have only a rudimentary knowledge of.
Strip
-
Look again, you said that atomic partical, assuming that your saying that it would not produce enough mass to suck the Earth in. What I posted simply stated that it could produce somthing the mass of the Earth, thus, it would have to be the size of a regular human pinkie.
There was enough media hype spewed by people who had no clue what they were talking about to create a black hole capable of destroying the earth, that's about as close as it got ;)
-
The LHC could only produce a black hole the size of an atom, if only for a infinitely short period. The only way it could become the size of a marble would be after it ingested the Earth. Black holes of that size are incredibly unstable and impossible to expand or even sustain their existence. So no, LHC could not produce a black hole of that size under any circumstance.
Please do a little more research before you discredit people about a subject you have only a rudimentary knowledge of.
Strip
I wouldn't call it rudimentary, since you seem to forget the easiest theory in the book, so check yourself again.
-
Go read Wiki some more, by the way I am still waiting on some hard data that discredits me.
I wont be holding my breathe though......
Strip
-
Im excited to see what they can learn from this project. Watched a program on national geographic that talked about problems they were having, and how hard it is to fix them when the collider is deep underground in a narrow tunnel. they talked about the black holes too, and basically what strip said sums it up, they are at the atomic level, and don't have enough mass to sustain themselves, and vanish in tiny fractions of a second. They said a black hole that size would have to be there for years to grow big enough to start destroying a noticeable amount of matter.
-
A black hole the diameter of your pinkie would have the mass of the earth, it will create atom sized black holes.
Strip
The below quote was taken from a report completed by a Professer from M.I.T ( my appologies i forgot to copy and paste the link )
"Before you can wrap your head around this research, consider how big a black hole has to be. For a stellar mass black hole, the event horizon – the point at which nothing can escape – is only a few kilometres from its centre. A black hole with the mass of the Earth? It would be less than 2 cm across. A black hole with the mass of a mountain? Smaller than a hydrogen atom."
Strip is right, although it would be a little smaller than a pinky
Great post Bosco, i love this stuff <S>
-
I'm more concerned about the development of SkyNet.
:noid
-
Go read Wiki some more, by the way I am still waiting on some hard data that discredits me.
I wont be holding my breathe though......
Strip
Wiki is probably the most unfactual factual site out there, I thought your genius self would have figured that out by now. You must have seen the Theory of Reletivity there as well. Yes ok I was wrong, are you willing to admit that?
-
Neutrinos do not travel faster than the speed of light.....
You are correct. its Tachyons. got them confused :)
-
Wiki is probably the most unfactual factual site out there, I thought your genius self would have figured that out by now. You must have seen the Theory of Reletivity there as well. Yes ok I was wrong, are you willing to admit that?
Wikipedia, particularly high profile articles, is more reliable than some random website.
-
Although perhaps Motherland is correct, I was speaking a sarcastic tone, in general Wiki is a poor source.
Yes I am willing to admit you were wrong though....
Strip