Scientific Experiments (that will kill us all)

That is something I did not need to see today, or any other fucking day. Fuck you.

Nanotech will rape you in your sleep.

First it is simply impossible for The black hole to do any kind of damage as all theories that says that it could be created also says that it is very unstable and would fall apart emidiatly. And even though the particles are moving at such an enourmous speed their energy are as big as a mosquitos (remember we are talking about realy smal things here)
http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/en/LHC/Safety-en.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/18/cern-lhc-startup

Next traveling back in time is impossible as that is by defenition to travel over the speed of light wich have been proved to be impossible (this is according to the theory of relativity).

recreating big bang seems impossible as you would have to gather all the matter in the universe in a singularity and then let it all expand at a huge speed. The reason to this is that it is the definition of what big bang is.

I dont know what the quantum zero effect is. so I voted strange mater as we may collide with it on our journey around the sun. damn I regrett it now, it is much more likly that we create a weapon with nanothechnology that can kill us all.

@ Yushi I totally agree w/ you there, nanotech is the most fucked up experiment so far, and just imagining that one day nanotech will be selling like hot cakes in market is just shit! Although nanotech has some good sides on it like the probable antidote or medicine / vaccine to all most all of the diseases there is, but sheesh! Nanotech creeps the hell outta me! Me, being in the field of science I find it absurd to hve those little machinery walking, talking and can hve an AI like Einstein here! aww God! when that happens, the world will crumble to pieces, and yeah they can out number the human beings!

There is something amazing about science.
Everything that we take as "fact" is based on observation.
The truth is, WE DON'T KNOW. Nobody knows how much mass is needed to create a stable singularity, nobody knows what happened during the "big bang" and nobody knows what will happen if we smash two protons together at the speed of light.

We accept everything, including simpler bits (gravity), BECAUSE IT WORKS. There are scientists out there trying to disprove EVERYTHING.

Stop buying into whatever they're telling you. They just don't want people to panic over the largest "what if" we've ever attempted.

Did you even read everything I wrote? and the articles?
It was a teacher of mathematichs that came upp with the idea. NOT a physisist. moreover our atmosphere is constantly bombarded with particles from space wich does the same thing as they do in LHC, exept we now can do better measurements.
There is no worldwide conspiracy.
This is just like when the atomic bomb were going to be tested for the first time, people thought it would destroy the whole earth, not realizing that the particles will lose speed as they bounce into each other.

if you just look up all the facts that are talking against it. first of black holes is normaly created by a huge mass (stars) that is collapsing into itself due to the gravity, wouldnt that make seem very likely that it cant happen at all with particles? And that if it could it would be extremly unstable? if stable leave earth before anything happens Also isnt it strange how all physisists seem to agree on that this looks more like a joke than anything else? thats right noone is against it that have the knowledge. Is every single one of them prepared to risk their life? I find that very unlikely.

Im doing as my teacher in atom physics says, Im not trusting anybody, instead I think for myself and I find it much much more likely that this is a joke, like all other conspiracy theories.

I think the Big Bang theory would be the most likely, but that isn't really a serious vote as I just was curious to see what everybody else voted for. In all probability, humans wont kill themselves with any of these things, because we are not fucking retarded as you all portray us as. The average scientist isn't just smashing the most deadly molecules in the world together to "see what happens", they are following this:


So everybody chill out with the "NOTHING IS TRUE, SCIENTISTS ARE RETARDED, WE'RE GONNA DIE AT ANY MOMENT NOW" stuff please.

There's something in the scientific process that we call "Paradigm Change", where previous laws are disproved and new ones replace it. For example, science used to believe that every living being were created as they were now, but thanks to Charles Darwin (and no thanks to Dawkins, atheistic evolutionists, and creationists) that we all learned that we evolved from one specie into another until we reached what we are now.

We cannot truly say that new theories are to be disproved because they are not compatible with TODAY'S scientific laws, because I'm pretty sure new mindfucking theories and paradigms are gonna show up soon, and not all of them will be unthoughtful butt crap.

I'm with the "LHC will create a dark hole right in the middle of earth surface" faction.

I picked number three!
I don't mind having nanobots crawling in my body to repair me in the future...however i do have a problem with mankind trying to recreate the BIG BANG. If the succeed than everyone is dead!
O__O

1. Contadictory statement.
2. The point is, something will happen. We don't know what, because we haven't done this before. It is still a what if, and we need to consider the negative too.
3. You cannot take theories as fact. By definition a hypothesis is something we've tested a couple times, a theory--thousands of times, and a law--trillions of times. Probability allows for a coin thrown 300,000,000,000,000,000,000 times to come up heads every time. There is nothing saying that it cannot come up tails, this is just what we believe will happen. No conspiracies here.


Your flowchart forgot the re-try unto explosive diarrhea bit.

Ok, Time to science the stupid out of you.

First off, Actually read the articles and look at their wording, and you'll notice things like
'Speculations about microscopic black holes at the LHC refer to particles produced in the collisions of pairs of protons, each of which has an energy comparable to that of a mosquito in flight. Astronomical black holes are much heavier than anything that could be produced at the LHC."

Notice that the word Comparable is used? it may be comparable to the energy of two mosquitoes, but you forgot one thing, Mosquitoes are much larger, I believe somewhere in the billions of times larger area. Which means that particle is being accelerated to the point it produces energy akin to something a Billion times larger. They used mosquitoes in the comparison so that the more incompetent will assume "oh, its small, nothing to fear here!" Idiots.

Also notice that they say "Astronomical black holes" as opposed to "Microscopic black holes", Im pretty sure thats because the LHC can create them, and the Theories that they used to predict the "immediately Disintegrate" are not only the ones that this machine could dissprove, they also only predict a 73% chance of the immediate disintegration. Which leaves a 23% chance of a fucking black hole on earth. As for Black holes "normaly" being created by the collapse of a star, the fact they they had to publish that, in laymens terms, means they "think" that there wont be any blackholes, and if there are, that they will disintegrate.

As for your post itself, You know what else is small? an atom. You know what happens when you split it? It obliterates a very large area, so dont assume that since its small, it wont fuck our shit up. Also, could you please link "how all physisists seem to agree on that this looks more like a joke"? The fact that the dangers of the LHC were Investigated by a panel of physicists, shows that there is the possibility of complications and undesired outcomes, and that there was a large enough concern from the scientific community that it wasn't just swept under the carpet.

As for You "not trusting anybody" like your teacher told you to, you do realize that you are in fact trusting him by following what he told you to do, on the basis that you believe he is correct? Im certain the Only "Joke" here is what you've posted, You assume that nothing is going to go wrong, there is ALWAYS a chance for something to go wrong, we are not perfect, we are not infallible, we are human, we make mistakes, it would be better if the possible "Bad ending" wasn't our entire existence being destroyed. Also, you fail to realize that unlike what you blindly assume, many scientists will risk their lives and the lives of others for scientific progress, often ignoring the dangerous outcomes, Read:Hindenburg.

**EDIT**
Let it be known, I am not a physicist, if you disagree, Please! disprove me, tell me where I am wrong, and explainwhy.

And remember, "you're a jackass", "You're stupid" and "go fuck yourself" do not count as "why".

I forgot to address your articles.
Neither of these are firsthand sources, or intended for anybody who wants to know the worst case. Both of these are intended to ease fear concerning the rumors which circle around its use.
The safety page is run by the organization that runs the collider. Very neutral source there.
The news article has changed the definition from harmless to mostly harmless.


More holes:
-The big bang. We DON'T REALLY KNOW what happened over the first couple minutes. Including if it started with a single....singularity.
-Creating more Higgs Boson particles will fuck with gravity. This makes a "known" into an unknown.
-Relativity is still a theory. Just bringing it back up.
-Mathematics Teacher v. Mailman v. Redneck v. Quantum Physicist: What a coincidence. I've wanted to smash stuff for most of my life too.
-All of the "proof" is given on the OPINION of many experts. Experts used to think that the earth was the center of a universe, which included differently sized planets, a revolving sun, and two large bowls with divine light shining through leaks. And, that's just in Europe.


You are right, I half read your previous posts. I don't mean to flame, but you're comments cast a shadow suggesting higher education. Put more thought behind each post, and use semi-proper grammar. We(most of the Fakku userbase/I) don't mind conversational english, but these two samples are difficult to understand.
I honestly do not mean offense. It is advice. Take it.

Hm, I'm going to go with nanotechnology since it's pretty much the only one on there that is really feasible, at least at this point, and poses at leas some level of danger.

I concur.

I too agree!

Nobody can stand up too the cuteness, and by the time we do it would be too late!

2012 much? I think we're onto something here!

You make me sad.
To insult a person is not a good way to make him listen (if you knew this I wonder why you said anything to me at all, it would seem a little pointless).
Now I dont know if anything is true or false: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0zSCpsOSSw&feature=channel_page this is a little phillosophy that explains this (start looking from 1:25). Now if you watched the video I say a person can only decide what propability something has to be true. So yeahh youre right, Im sorry I do think that it is a higher propability that what my teacher says about physics is true than people that dont have the same knowledge in the subject. But that doesnt mean that I will accept wathever he says unconditionally. He has to make some kind of argument that seems logical.

To "prove" something in physics simply means that you test it with an experiment many many times. Now .They cant "prove" anything by just a few experiments, they have to make many. If its 20% chanse that they create a black hole for every collision, as you mentioned, then try this throw a dice 50 times and se if you can do it and never get number 6. Now if this propability that the world is going to end is so high why does no physisist say anything against it in the media, so that everyone can see and read about it and why in all the nations (this many http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CERN#Member_states) that are involved in the project there is none that seem to be against it (should be on the front of the newspaper otherwise or something similar as the first collisions were made this week).

There is two answers that I find most likely to be true
Either its a BIG conspiracy among all physisist with the knowledge, a conspiracy that doesent care about the ridiculusy smal chanse (if you excuse the strong language) that they will not die and take everyone with them. This is of course only if the theory you are talking about exists and are correct. But you cant publish any theory and call it science it has to be accepted by real scientists, wich means it must seem to be logical.

The other answer is that what the one who came up with the idea said about it in the first place, simply didnt make sense at all.

Now heres a comic for you (wich may be something to think about):


Ah Im not sure why Im writing this at all, you may not even read it. Or just dont listen and laugh convince that you stil are right. I dont know you so I cant tell, but anyways I think Im not not going to jump into discusions like this at any random place anymore, its a little timeconsuming and sometimes totaly hopeless as some persons simply dodnt listen when you say certain things. I hope you didnt find anything of this offensive, cause I mean no harm to you.

/Peace

I think just for fun the scientists at the LHC should announce the experiment will be conducted on December 21 2012.

@teoretikern,

You missed the point of my post, I'm not saying you're wrong, Im saying you're half-right and Naive. You're assuming that something bad won't happen just because the articles (on the LHC site might I add) say that it probably wont happen. There is a chance that the LHC could cause Unwanted effects, which may happen now, later, or never, if there never is a problem, that'll be great, but ignoring the what could happen just because there's a minor chance of it happens.

And no, Im not a conspiracy theorist, I have done research on the LHC, and I think it'll work fine, I just think its stupid to blindly follow what we are told. If you had done some research Like I did, you would know that the Microscopic Black holes the LHC can theoretically produce have only a .03% chance to not instantly disintegrate, very small chance, but one that everyone seems willing to take, which is also the reason no one is speaking out against it.

In the end, its Pros vs Cons, very small con, very huge Pro, I hope the LHC Works how we want it to, but I hope and pray it doesn't cause any of the Minor possibilities that everyone seems to ignore.

And next time please actually read and thinkabout it, I'm trying to get you to think for yourself, but you cant seem to get it, You made assumptions, and I told you that you were wrong and why. Your response is an attempt to discredit me by assuming that Im the cliche'd poster who will simply ignore what you said and respond, and by comparing me to and in part calling me a conspiracy theorist.

Please, only respond if you are actually going to prove me wrong or inaccurate, not if you're just going insult and attempt to discredit me.