All those who have been scared witless over the thought of researchers turning on Switzerland’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC) this summer, might have something.
According to a new report out of the facility at least three physicists say that when the device is cranked up and creates a predicted black hole, that phenomenon could last for a lot longer than was previously expected.
Roberto Casadio from the University of Bologna in Italy, along with Sergio Fabi and Benjamin Harms of the University of Alabama have taken another look at the math and don’t like what they are seeing. According to these respected scientists the black hole created by the LHC could last longer than previously predicted, perhaps as long as a full second in duration, which in quantum physics is an eternity, allowing sufficient time for the black hole to gobble up enough energy and matter to remain open and expand. It was originally calculated that the black hole would remain open no longer that a few micro-seconds and quickly dissolve into decay mode. Now, however, that theory is being reexamined.
All three physicists agree that even at one second it is highly unlikely that the black hole could absorb enough energy to maintain itself, but feel it might be prudent to investigate that potential anyway before going full-bore with this summer’s experiments.
“We conclude that … the growth of black holes to catastrophic size does not seem possible. Nonetheless, it remains true that the expected decay times are much longer than is typically predicted by other models,” stated all three in their scientific paper now available for review at ArXiv.org.
Now, how close is December 21, 2012 again?
Oh Jeebus! We gonna DIE!!
It’s the sentence “highly unlikely that the black hole could absorb enough energy to maintain itself†that makes me nervous.
“It’s highly unlikely†you will ever be struck by lightening or survive being struck by lightening but Roy Cleveland Sullivan was struck 7 times and survived every strike.
Oh, what the heck; the place is going down hill fast anyway.
At least we'll go in a spectacular way, and from an observer's standpoint we'll appear frozen in the event horizon, all spaghettified like.
Could you provide a link to the actual article? There are about a billion, and I'm not finding this one.
Thanks!
Here is the specific Link:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.2948
The authors do not say "highly unlikely," they say "impossible."
They are not "concerned" -- they are promulgating a 5-dimensional theory of black holes and are hoping that longer lifetimes within the LHC will confirm their theories.
In addition, their predictions pertain to the outside limits of energy possible within the LHC; because the LHC will increase energy levels gradually, studying results at low energy levels before advancing to high energy levels, we will understand more about black holes (including whether they are possible within this context) long before we get to any theoretical or practical danger point.
Thanks to Sam Sloan for a link to an interesting theory of black holes, but not so much for twisting the authors' intent.
Huh. I see a comment has been removed that pointed out some possible flaws in this story's logic. Are dissenting opinions not allowed here on Slice of SciFi?
Marti I'm not sure which comment you are referring. I haven't edited or deleted any comment about this article. The only time I do remove or edit comments is if they contain very harsh or foul language, or are obvious attempts at spamming a product or another's website for personal gain. I don't recall coming across any comments for this story like that.
I agree Bluejack that the possibility of a runaway black hole being created by the LHC is highly remote and the trio's paper supports that theory. However, like true scientists they never completely rule out that an LHC black hole might reach critical mass (however unlikely that is) and state that to do so would bring such an event near the maximum we are currently unable to repeat in the lab in real-time with Newton's law. They admit that LHC black holes growing to critical size within that elongated 1 second interval "does not SEEM possible" (emphasis mine), they nevertheless have to reconcile that in their equations it remains a fact that the expected decay times for the LHC event have exceeded 1 second and that alone raises the question of validity for current thinking on the subject because their findings are not those "typically predicted by other models."
It should be understood that, as one who works with physics every day of my life for the past 33 years, that I have no concern over firing up the LHC and firmly believe - like most scientists - that the benefits of the LHC far out-weigh any fears (founded or otherwise) brought on by ungrounded hysteria.
The article was written to show that even under the best circumstances, which I believe the science behind the LHC is based, there are still an infinite number of unknown qualities and quantities and these three physicists have been able to mathematically bring just one of those unknowns out into the light. The article is not intended to bring fear, but to reveal that even at our best we don't know all the answers and sometime, even us scientists, have to put fear behind us, have a little faith in what we do know, and then run with it. That is the only way true and wonderful discoveries have been and will continue to be made -- by the daring armed with some fact, faith and a will to accomplish.
I gather you are a different sam sloan from the colorfully litigious chess sam sloan. Thanks for the follow-up. I confess I get a trifle annoyed with those who talk up the doomsday scenarios within the LHC, and apologize for lumping you in that category. It distresses me when the media uses their usual over-the-top terror tactics to frighten people away from science.
Hi Bluejack, Marti,
maybe we are talking about different articles, I am referring to the slice of Sci-Fi article
http://www.sliceofscifi.com/2009/01/28/scientists-rethink-lhcs-possible-destructive-capabilities/
in the last to sentences. the "highly unlikely" is there along with "does not SEEM possible" are the parts I was referring to.
All three physicists agree that even at one second it is highly unlikely that the black hole could absorb enough energy to maintain itself, but feel it might be prudent to investigate that potential anyway before going full-bore with this summer’s experiments.
“We conclude that … the growth of black holes to catastrophic size does not seem possible. Nonetheless, it remains true that the expected decay times are much longer than is typically predicted by other models,†stated all three in their scientific paper now available for review.
George....
Yeah. That happens a lot. The chess guy with my name isn't quite as intelligent or handsome as myself.
Sweet. I can't wait to see what the other side of a black hole looks like.
Chathulu lives there and I for one welcome our new Squid overlord.