LHC danger, Full story at http://www.physorg.com/news10589.html

Says the little one who's provided nothing but immature rhetoric.

Liar.

Disingenous lie.

I was clarifying my comments, seeing as how you seem to be having trouble with reading comprehension.

No it isn't.

Of course, if it is, then i'm sure you'll be able to link to a post of yours where you prove, with math, that another of my calculations is wrong, or link to a post of yours where you provide a reference that contains more accurate data then what I have used in my calculations - followed be my ignoring.

Oh wait, you can't, because at no time have you attempted any of this.

I've asked you several times to provide more accurate information or alternative figures to what I have been using - you've refused.

I asked you several times to show me which step was wrong, or post correct numbers - you refused.

Therefore, the only outright lie is yours.

Thankfully "u" will be one crank who, in the course of time, will be shown to be utterly wrong. And not for being on the "wrong side of the question" --- since there is no dishonor in that --- but for being so unscientific and purely argumentative. And for being entirely unskilled even at that.


Just a few more weeks ...

Until then, why not just stop feeding this troll?

Looks like Roessler has filed a lawsuit...

http://bigsciencenews.blogspot.com/2008/08...n-of-human.html

Still no bosenova

Talk about brain dead! The European Court of Human Rights isn't going to do anything against CERN, since isn't a State. It's likely going to take a year before telling the applicants that they failed to file appropriately.

http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/EN/Header/App...sked+questions/
http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/D5CC2...lishAnglais.pdf

What is a bosenova? Is it a threat, or just Roessler demonstrating his ignorance?

Bosenova on Wiki

Aha. Here is the text of the complaint. It is based, however, not on a violation of human rights, so will not be heard by the court. There is also no record that they they, as required by paragraph 1(h) of the cited court rule 47, exhausted, or even used, the legal process in all (or any) of the States they are suing, which is another reason to suspect that this will not be heard by the court.

http://lhc-concern.info/wp-content/uploads...rn-volltext.PDF

Rules of the court: http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/D1EB3...ulesOfCourt.pdf

Ah, I heard about this. Is there any threat of a bosenova at the LHC? I'm assuming it'd be more ofa local threat?

Well, "local" in that it is not going to affect anyone in the U.S. and "threat" in the sense that it is another of these scenarios that only sound plausible to non-physicists. It's as basic as the difference between even and odd. It's roughly equal to comparing physics phenomena inside your refrigerator with physics inside a star.

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/bosenova.htm

Helium-4 is non-magnetic (even numbers of protons, even number of neutrons, even number of electrons), liquid, and clumps together from isotropic van der Waals forces as a superfluid due to low temperature from 2.1768 K all the way down to zero. Rubidium-85 is magnetic, clumps together in a special trap made of external photons (including magnetic fields) as a gas at 0.000000003 K.

http://physics.aps.org/articles/v1/13

This post has been edited by rpenner on Aug 29 2008, 03:22 PM

I knew there was another part of the reason why WE STILL HAVEN'T HEARD A BOSENOVA.

Not at all, I'm absolutely serious. You deserve all the credit for stating:

QUOTE Trippy @ Aug 23 2008, 10:41 AM
"...the 'lack' of neutron stars constitutes proof that dark matter is made of micro black holes and that the micro black holes are stable and that they're capable of consuming a neutron star, in it's entirety, over short time frames."

Personally, I wouldn't go so far as to say it constitutes "proof." But it certainly may be indicative.