Stellar Splitting and pairing NEW Black holes foun

On the lhc at CERN. Ive been reading up on the legal challenges. The main one seems to be about the none evaporation of micro black holes from Hawking radiation. Now, I don't think that there's any such thing as a black hole but I do think the refractive index changes at the Shwartzchild radius.

CERNs argument is that gamma rays hit the Earths atmosphere on a daily basis and they carry much more energy than the accelerator. Agreed but its how that energy is distributed that matters. Stand in a room and a woman steps on your foot, she's wearing flat shoes, another woman, same weight, steps on your foot, she's wearing four inch high heels. Which hurts more?

A gamma ray is a big brute when compared to its Shwartzchild radius, that radius is so far away from the edge, that its mass core barely registers as a pull of gravity. Not so a proton in a gold nucleus. Its core carries a huge amount of gravitational energy, which is hidden behind that change in refractive index.

If two proton cores hit, we can have a rather dramatic release and conversion of grav mass to elecmag mass. Worst case, about a hundred tonnes of anti matter explosive.

I would hope that proton cores conspire to never hit each other. The protons are heading toward each other at near light speed but that's a snails pace compared to the speed of gravity. Cores can see each other and influence each other, there must be a gravitational repulsion of like objects. I wouldnt put money on it though.

All this to prove the big bang? If the CERN safety committee were a bunch of maoist geeks waving little red books we would be concerned but let them wave papers about string theory and we let them try an experiment, that they admit themselves, is a giant step into the unknown, and we give them shed loads of money to do it. We merry ship of fools!!

I've written to my m.p to try and get a debate going in the house of commons, I suggest that others here do the same. I don't expect anything to come of it but I would hate to have done absolutely nothing if the worst comes to the worst. Fingers crossed.

Sloat, The CERN project is not going to cause any harm to the planet and might help with getting the dead wood out of theory and models. As for planck's notes-they must be available in German unless they were destroyed at some point. The history guys should know these details but no one has writen a paper about how Planck did the work leading to one of the most important details in science. Why do you say a proton can explode with tons of energy? And also say the mass is unchanged by acceleration to light speed?

Hi Jim, you and I are walking about with the weight of three elephants on us. They don't crush us because our internal pressure is about the same. If someone exploded a barythermic bomb near us, then we would explode. Now, if we say that the speed of gravity is many times that of light, we need to stash this energy in the vacuum for starters. Then we need to stash some of it inside of our particles. The result is a slight over pressure to the particle.

The vacuum contains a huge amount of energy, it would be a super liquid and the most extreme form of bubble that could exist in it would be a neutron star. Inside of the Shwartchild limit of a neutron star would differ only slightly from the energy density of the vacuum. Its a spinning bit of gravitational space.

A proton in this vacuum super liquid will have more than a hundred tonnes of hidden gravitational mass. We don't say to a child, who has just blown a bubble, that the bubble actually weighs three elephants plus the weight of some soap and water. Though if we take a moment to think about it, the strength of a bubble wall is pretty amazing. Work was done to create a bubble and work was done to create a proton, the faster the speed of gravity the more work is contained and conserved.

It's not the case with Einstein's increase in mass with velocity. Before Einstein it had been noted that there appeared to be an increase in electromagnetic mass (actually e = mc^2 is down to Jeans) but as I've just pointed out, there will be change in permeability and permitivity of any charged particle at light speed. It becomes harder and harder to apply an electromagnetic force to a particle. The thing looks as though its mass increases but it simply doesn't.

With a bec particle we never have a divide by zero problem, therefore we never have infinite mass.

Can we release gravitational energy? When we smack two soft gamma photons into each other we, sometimes, release enough energy to create an electron/positron pair, there's simply not enough electromagnetic energy to a do this. A gamma ray photon is not a proton. If the photon were about two metres across, the proton would be about 2 mm across.

There are risks to the CERN lhc. The main guy bringing the lawsuit is considered to be the father of chaos theory, he cannot be a slouch or a loony. Hes asking for a public debate and a stepped approach, over a long period, to using this machine at full tilt. I think its only prudent to agree with him on this. Ask your senator to get a group called the "Jasons" to convene an emergency meeting over this issue.

Sloat,I agree the proton gains zero mass with speed and gains energy or momentum The acceleration of a proton is limited by the speed of light don't you think? No amount of energy will make a proton reach the speed of light because F=ma and force times distance is energy. When the proton gets near the speed of light the distance goes to 3x10^8 m/s and energy moves at that same speed. Therefore zero force is applied leading to zero acceleration even at infinite energy. The proton or any mass can't move at light speed but can be made to accelerate at a very high rate. So, why can't a photon accelerate? Smashing tiny high speed masses can result in acceleration rates of 10E20m/s^2 and even greater but very little else so what danger can you see in this project other than exposing the model?

Hi Jim, about eight months ago there was this really obnoxious character came on the board to rubbish the speed of gravity argument. There were a number of posts on the de-coupling of charged particles in an accelerator. Then I was hugely impressed by the writings of Robert Carroll, I still am, I thought that the internal frequency of a charged particle would fall to zero and it would be impossible to accelerate the particle up to c in an electric field.

No Ive still got some de-coupling. I thought Id better have a closer look at that. Ive got h = e^2 mu / 2a epsilon

e = charge on electron = 1.60217733E-19
mu = permeability constant = 1.2566370614E-06
a = fine structure constant = 7.29735257E-03
epsilon = permitivity constant = 8.854187818E-12

Mu has to change, what mu becomes, 3.33564074946E-09 is the reciprocal of the speed of light. The charge on the electron looks as though it has fallen. What if we put mu as being the reciprocal of the speed of gravity? My speed of gravity is 1.16464217444E 25 the reciprocal 8.58632824698E-26 Then we would have 1.70562909814E-50 = v^2 / b^2 where b is the speed of gravity.
1.52101960238E 00 metres per second for v. My hunch is that that is the speed of electricity in gold.

(Edited) oh, that probably isn't gold. I just assumed that the Fermi velocity would be highest in gold but it's not. What ever it is,that number is higher than the speed of electricity in copper.

Sloat, Do you know details about how an accelerator is purged of heat and matter? I was told by people at SLAC the purge process is only partly done because a total vacuum is not needed to get good results. It is clear to me a much better vacuum can be obtained by using a new method but no one can tell me how good a vacuum is made with the method currently in use or how much matter remains in the accelerator when the experiment is being done. They do say the machine needs cleaning often and that seems to me like a lot of unnessisary down time.