World’s Largest Atom Smasher Audioholics Survival Tips

[Halon451]

Here I am. As the video link posted by Gene (http://gmy.news.yahoo.com/v/8573163) clearly explains, cosmic rays with much higher energies have hit the Earth and all the objects in the solar system an enormous number of times since the Solar System formed about 4.5 billion years ago. The Earth and its biosphere have survived these events without any difficulty. The majority of these ultra-high energy cosmic rays were (and are) produced in supernova explosions.

The Higgs Boson that Halon451 mentions is thought to be the particle that gives matter mass. In particle physics, there are 2 main types of fundamental particles: those with mass called "elementary" particles; and those that are massless called "field" particles -- the 4 known natural forces in the Universe are transmitted via these field particles according to particle physics (i.e., gluons for the strong [nuclear] force, photons for the electromagnetic force, intermediate vector bosons [also called "weakons"] for the weak [nuclear] force, and the yet to be discovered gravitons for gravity). In addition to these classifications, subatomic particles have an intrinsic spin associated with them, and these spins come in two types: 1/2 integer spins (i.e., 1/2, 3/2, etc.) particles are called "fermions" and particles with integer spins (i.e., 0, 1, 2, etc.) are called bosons. Electrons (and other "leptons" [= low mass elementary particles]) and all the quarks (6 of them) that make up hadrons (those particles that obey the strong [nuclear] force) are fermions. Baryons [= heavy elementary particles] are particles composed of 3 quarks (i.e., protons and neutrons), hence have spins of either 1/2 or 3/2s and are fermions. The mesons [= middle mass particles] are composed of quark pairs and have spins of either 0 or 1 and hence are bosons. The field particles mentioned above all have integer spins and hence are bosons.

The spin is important in describing the "final" wave function of the particle which is important in figuring out the physics of particle interactions. However, I won't go any deeper than this and sorry for all the text, but I feel that particle physics is a really "cool" field in physics and the Standard Model summarized above explains a lot about the nature of the Universe.

Excellent explanation Astrodon, and thank you for the input. I cannot profess to know near as much on actual particle physics, but having been educated in Nuclear Engineering, do have a good fundamental grasp on the elementary forces, obviously in particular electromagnetic and the strong and weak nuclear forces, as this was a critical part of my education. However, being educated in the field of nuclear engineering and particularly reactor physics, only goes so deep into the even more fundamental natures of these forces, especially on the sub-atomic level, from there I am left with only my own personal curiosity to explore further into it. Reactor physics teaches you enough to understand particle interraction as a function of both various electromagnetic forces, and of course e=mc2, being one of the key components of the fission process.

Obviously, there is another universe of knowledge that exists beyond my level of formal education, and represents the very things you speak of, what really makes up the universe as we know it, hence the name "God" particle. My understanding of the LHC and the data that it is anticipated to generate, will take several years before scientists will even be able to disseminate the massive volumes of said data, so the actual firing up of this enormous machine in of itself is likely to be a non-event, correct me if I'm wrong. It is my understanding that we're not going to really open up any real mysteries at first, but will pave the way so to speak.

 

[niget2002]

Heh... I actually had a physics prof in College that subscribed to the idea that this thing will cause a black hole... of course, he also admitted that about the worse it may do is cause minor damage to the machine itself and that the damage is most likely to be electronic in maner.

Makes me kinda wonder if he still believes that.

 

[krabapple]

reminds me of this

 

[mtrycrafts]

I am just curious now after seeing the pictures and the size of this is sinking in, 17 miles in length, what amount of power will it need to cool it so low and to power the magnets.

 

[Adam]

I am just curious now after seeing the pictures and the size of this is sinking in, 17 miles in length, what amount of power will it need to cool it so low and to power the magnets.

"One point twenty-one gigawatts!"

 

[Halon451]

Heh... I actually had a physics prof in College that subscribed to the idea that this thing will cause a black hole... of course, he also admitted that about the worse it may do is cause minor damage to the machine itself and that the damage is most likely to be electronic in maner.

Makes me kinda wonder if he still believes that.

Well, who knows anyway - the folks at CERN I place a lot of faith and trust in, this organization is comprised of people a zillion times smarter than me. I might have slight thoughts of strapping on a tin-foil hat when the time comes and waiting for the inevitable crunch of space-time being ripped apart!

Who's bringing the chips and salsa to the End of the World party? It's 12/31 1999 all over again!

 

[mtrycrafts]

"One point twenty-one gigawatts!"

Obviously! Why didn't I know this?

 

[skers_54]

We had a huge debate about this in my comm class today. My professor, along with most of the class, is completely convinced that the world will end when the black hole it makes eats the solar system. I tried to explain (crudely) how it works and that the masses aren't enough to do any real damage. Then I realized most of the people I was talking to hadn't even taken general chemistry...I miss my engineering classes...

 

[MapleSyrup]

"One point twenty-one gigawatts!"

LOL, too funny. Proof positive that watching movies makes you smart.

 

[Adam]

Proof positive that watching movies makes you smart.

Then I bet that we have some absolute geniuses on here!

 

[MapleSyrup]

My professor, along with most of the class, is completely convinced that the world will end when the black hole it makes eats the solar system.

Wouldn't the world end "before" the black holes eat the solar system? Especially since earth is where ths black hole will originate.

Also, how come extra terrestrial intelligences haven't eaten up their own solar systems (that we can detect)? Are they not as technologically advanced as we? Just a thought.

 

[Adam]

Also, how come extra terrestrial intelligences haven't eaten up their own solar systems (that we can detect)? Are they not as technologically advanced as we? Just a thought.

Well, for all we know, they have. We really have no way of telling if that has happened. Our observations of the universe are severly limited, in both space and time.

There's a guy at work who goes to UFO conventions and was relaying a story to me about how one civilization is here and can't go back to their home world because they had mucked around and created a bunch of pinpoint blackholes in their atmosphere (or something like that). I can't remember if that was before or after he told me about the "insectoids." Yep, what you'd think - giant grasshoppers and such. Guy probably still makes more than me.

 

[Halon451]

Well, for all we know, they have. We really have no way of telling if that has happened. Our observations of the universe are severly limited, in both space and time.

There's a guy at work who goes to UFO conventions and was relaying a story to me about how one civilization is here and can't go back to their home world because they had mucked around and created a bunch of pinpoint blackholes in their atmosphere (or something like that). I can't remember if that was before or after he told me about the "insectoids." Yep, what you'd think - giant grasshoppers and such. Guy probably still makes more than me.

But I'd say it's a safe bet he isn't getting laid much...

 

[Adam]

But I'd say it's a safe bet he isn't getting laid much...

A good guess - but, he has a girlfriend. Me? No. Him? Yes. Hmmm, maybe I should start attending those conferences. Heck, if a woman falls for that stuff, I can only imagine what I could get her to believe.

What am I saying? What I should be doing is going to those and trying to sell cable lifters and audio clocks and stuff. I'd just paint them green with sparklies, and somehow link it to the fight against the interdimensional, time-traveling, shape-shifting lizards.

 

[astrodon]

"One point twenty-one gigawatts!"

Doc Brown mispronounce the metric prefix "giga" in "Back to the Future" -- he pronounced it "jiga" instead of "giga". He also had the wrong physics unit, he should have used "Joules" (energy) instead of "watts" (power) [note that 1 W = 1 J/s] -- it's total energy that should have been important in that experiment, not energy per unit time. I always show an example in my physics class that calculates the minimum energy of a lightning bolt and it comes to about 32 gigajoules (giga = 10^9, or a billion). On the other hand, Doc Brown knew how to build a flux capacitor and I don't, so I guess he can make these kinds of mistakes and keep his reputation.

I know, I'm a real nit-picker!

 

[Adam]

Doc Brown mispronounce the metric prefix "giga" in "Back to the Future" -- he pronounced it "jiga" instead of "giga".

According to Wikipedia (I know, I know):

In the United States, it is well documented that the National Bureau of Standards issued pronunciation guides for the metric prefixes in the 1960s and again as late as the 1980s, giving the 'g' in "giga" a soft "j" sound, thus formalizing the pronunciation as "jiga"[2] within the United States.​

So, Doc Brown was just - as always - a man ahead of his time, using the soft sound in 1955.

On the other hand, Doc Brown knew how to build a flux capacitor and I don't...

Don't worry, just give it some time. You'll get there! Slipping and hitting your head on the toilet might help.

 

[astrodon]

My understanding of the LHC and the data that it is anticipated to generate, will take several years before scientists will even be able to disseminate the massive volumes of said data, so the actual firing up of this enormous machine in of itself is likely to be a non-event, correct me if I'm wrong. It is my understanding that we're not going to really open up any real mysteries at first, but will pave the way so to speak.

You are correct sir!

One of the purposes of building larger and large particle colliders is to try and simulate the physics that occurred during the first few moments of the Big Bang when temperatures were extremely high. It is thought that during the "Quantum Era" (0 < t [time] < 10^-43 sec = Planck Time), that T (temperature of the Universe) > 10^32 K [Kelvin] and all the 4 natural forces (see my earlier post) acted as one. The Quantum Era ended when gravity decoupled from the other 3 forces -- such a decoupling is known as "symmetry breaking" in physics (somewhat analogous to a phase transition in matter). This lead to the "GUT (Grand Unified Theory) Era" (10^-43 s < t < 10^-35 s, T_ave = 10^27 K = 10^23 eV [electron-volt] = 10^11 TeV [tera-eV, 1 tera = 10^12]). During this era, the strong, electromagnetic (E/M), and weak forces acted as one and the temp. was so high that only field particles could exist. At 10^-35 s, the strong force decoupled from the electroweak force and this symmetry breaking lead to an inflationary expansion of the Universe (an exponential instead of the normal linear growth). This "Inflationary Era" ended at 10^-32 s when the Universe had a temp. of 10^25 K = 10^9 TeV. Individual quarks were made out of the field particles during this time. This would be the era when the Higgs Boson becomes important. This lead to the "Quark Era" (10^-32 s < t < 10^-6 s) which corresponded to the Universe resuming a linear expansion and it is during this era when the E/M and weak forces decouple from each other. This symmetry breaking is not nearly as energetic as the previous symmetry breaking and has no impact on the expansion of the Universe. The temp. of the Universe at this decoupling is about 10^15 K = 0.1 TeV. (We are now at the energies that the LHC can reach.) At the end of this era, T = 10^13 K = 1 GeV and we enter the "Hadronic Era" which lasts until the Universe celebrates its 1 second birthday.

I won't go any further at this point and I left out a lot of important events during the eras that I did mention. From what I understand, I don't think the LHC will get anywhere close to seeing any evidence of the Higgs Boson (and it certainly won't make any, one would need a collider that was a billion times more energetic to create Higgs Bosons). However, whenever physicists turn on a new, more energetic collider, they always find out something new. I'm sure that the LHC will produce some very interesting results. It's just too bad that the U.S. Congress cut the funding for the Superconducting Supercollider (SSC) when it did since I believe it was suppose to reach higher energies than the LHC.

 

[astrodon]

According to Wikipedia (I know, I know):

In the United States, it is well documented that the National Bureau of Standards issued pronunciation guides for the metric prefixes in the 1960s and again as late as the 1980s, giving the 'g' in "giga" a soft "j" sound, thus formalizing the pronunciation as "jiga"[2] within the United States.​

Thanks for that post Adam, I was unaware of it. But this is contradictory to the way that the physicists and astronomers that I have met (and we're talking about a lot of them) pronounce "giga" -- we don't use the soft "j" sound (as Doc Brown did). This has been true for at least the mid-1970s when I was in college. I wonder where Wikipedia came up with that piece of information?

P.S. And I used to work at the Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics which is jointly ran by NBS and the University of Colorado. Everyone was using giga like "Gilligan" there too.

 

[Adam]

Thanks for that post Adam, I was unaware of it. But this is contradictory to the way that the physicists and astronomers that I have met (and we're talking about a lot of them) pronounce "giga" -- we don't use the soft "j" sound (as Doc Brown did). This has been true for at least the mid-1970s when I was in college. I wonder where Wikipedia came up with that piece of information?

I hear ya. Same for me, although my experience only goes back to the 90's. I thought that he pronounced it wrong, but your post got me thinking, so I looked it up a bit.

From the reference at Wikipedia, they got it from here: NBS Special Publication 304 & 304A, revised August, 1981, "A Brief History of Measurement Systems".

 

[astrodon]

I hear ya. Same for me, although my experience only goes back to the 90's. I thought that he pronounced it wrong, but your post got me thinking, so I looked it up a bit.

From the reference at Wikipedia, they got it from here: NBS Special Publication 304 & 304A, revised August, 1981, "A Brief History of Measurement Systems".

You learn something new every day!