Didn't you wonder about Dr. Ellis from CERN saying onto topic LSAG: "There is no scientific motivation for these reviews. They are a foregone conclusion"?

Only by changing to ‘fixed-target’-collisions might most risks, arising through collider-experimentationing
without any second planet Earth to escape to,
be avoided.



Hello Marc,

obviously You are not sensible enough for the very high beam energy input needed
for center-of-mass-energies up to 14 TeV in case of fixed-target experiment, therefore
I want provide You a short calculation.

The special relativity teaches us, that the energy
of a particle with (rest) mass and momentum
is given by



The energy be means which "the music" of a reaction is played with two colliding particles with energies

,, rest masses , and
momenta ,

is calculated by



For the case of a collider experiment (head-on-collision, resting center of mass) You can set
and equation (1) simply yields



What happens in the case of fixed target?
Assuming Particle 1 is the projectile and Particle 2 the fixed target, You set and
(=rest energy !).

equation (1) now tells us



(the last step is because of energy-momentum-equation (1)).

For the special example of proton-proton-fixed-target-collisions with


You get



For equation (2) simplifies itself to



Applying the rest energie of proton =0,938GeV and CERNs
planned center-of-mass-energy
=14TeV
the needed beam-energy is calculated to about 1.05 * 10^17eV.

That means that the fixed target experiment would be too much expensive, because the main part of the inputted energy
is spent to catapult the center of mass away into the outer space.

Cheers
MB97912

Thank you, MBwithNo., for quite impressing calculationing.

I am quite sure, we 'know' each other already from other disussions, but you used another 'nick' (and still use it in your home-forum).

Do you really mean, that because technology isn't ready to make 14 TeV collisions in safe mode, those collisions must be done in unsafe mode?

???

Of course, i do not agree.

Did you ever wonder what future generations will think of ours, accepting just an (might be) ultrasmall risk of transforming Earth to a lump of strange matter or disappearing into one small (or billions of ultrasmall micro-black-holes) just because a few quite interesting physical theories/speculations should have become tested/verified/falsified as soon as possible?

Wouldn't it be much wiser to accept, that if technologies of our 'civilization' aren't yet able to accelerate hadrons to 10^17TeV it should be investigated how to do so ...
allowing save collider-experimentationing in fixed-target-mode excluding pollutioning of Earth's core from fall-out of 'exotic-particles' anybody knows which reactions could possibly happen 'down there' in the very nucleus of our planet?

Please take a look at this links:
http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~jholden/strange/strange.html where following sentences:

A negatively charged strangelet would have no coulomb barrier against absorption of normal matter, and would in fact attract it. The resulting exothermic reaction would simply produce a larger strangelet. Since the energy per baryon always decreases with A, a negatively charged strangelet on earth would continue to digest all of the matter it came into contact with until the earth itself was entirely strange.

are no longer to be found.
Self-censorship, by the way,

is very typical of the way in which many physicists 'sanitize' their writings so they will either be published, or so that they will obtain the funding they desire. They rationalize that the LHC will operate, so better be on the side of obtaining funding, and omit offending assertions of warning that will dry up their funding.

Another paper explaining strangelets: http://www.infim.ro/rrp/2009_61_2/art04Lazanu.pdf

having mentioned this material onto risks arising by happy but silly creationing masses of unexpected quantities of Kaons at minimal 1 tev. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/lhc-results-0205.html it must considered as ignorant to continue pollution of Earth's core with collider-fallout.
( http://www.achtphasen.net/index.php/2010/02/16/p1506 )

So, if technology of our days isn't ready to make 14 TeV collisions in safe mode collisions must be done at 7 TeV in fixed-target-mode, which CERN over decades promoted loudly of beeing able to.

These days at Chamonix CERN announced to be in need of some further billions of (tax-payers) money to reach finally those energies. ( http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceOtherViews.py?view=standard&confId=67839 )
But nevertheless exactly these days now, they are starting to reach 2*3.5 TeV = 7 TeV collision-energies to experimentate - knowing and accepting that collision-products will fall out into Earth's core!

So it would just be wise and fair to towards the uninformed rest of mankind to halt this fraudulent experimentationing these days and to change machines cenzeptualization to fixed-target mode collider-experimentationing.

Some years later all physical progress by experimentationing until 7 TeV (or - due to the fast technological progress of our days - maybe already some TeVs more) could be done in earth-friendly fixed-target-mode.

please take a look here for the same 'idea', i scetched out yesterday with the aim of inspiring CERN's scientists (and politicians and judges) onto the possibility how CERN could become famous for it's responsablity towards our planet Earth: http://www.achtphasen.net/index.php/plasmaether/2010/02/22/nebst_obligatem_muckengleichnis_zeigt_un#c2287.

Thank you!
Marc Fasnacht

Hello Mr. "WithNo.phasen",

You cited a sentence:
A negatively charged strangelet would have no coulomb barrier against absorption of normal matter, {...}

Self-censorship? This is an classical over-hasty. Come on, look here on the same site
http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~jholden/strange/node17.html

You wrote:
{...}collisions must be done at 7 TeV in fixed-target-mode, which CERN over decades promoted loudly of beeing able to.

I think You maybe have something not decoded correctly. Would You like to show us some links where CERN this
would have claimed reportedly for experiments in range of TeV?
For example solving my first comment's equations (2) respectively (3) for with =7TeV
and two protons with =0.938GeV yields energies usable for physics of particle reactions only about
=115GeV.
Please don't forget that in case of FTM the main part of beam energies is circulated into the kinetic energy
of the collision product kicked out. In case of CM no or only few kinetic energy has to be financed,
the most part of inputted energy is available for usable energy, which then
would be about proportional to the input energy. In case of FTM, however, the usable energy increases
only about proportional to the square root of input energy (in limit case , see above) what is very inefficient.

You wrote:
Some years later all physical progress by experimentationing until 7 TeV (or - due to the fast technological progress of our days - maybe already some TeVs more) could be done in earth-friendly fixed-target-mode.

Please forget it, don't be naïve.
But up to now all attempts to rebut special relativity have been failed! Do You really want to jump on this bandwagon? :-)

You wrote:
please take a look here for the same 'idea', i scetched out yesterday with the aim of inspiring CERN's scientists (and politicians and judges) onto the possibility how CERN could become famous for it's responsablity towards our planet Earth: http://www.achtphasen.net/index.php/plasmaether/2010/02/22/nebst_obligatem_muckengleichnis_zeigt_un#c2287.

Yeah, nice idea! In the same manner You must address Your proposals to these audiences.
The politicians and judges for the most unacquainted with high energy physics not will know what to do with that,
during the physicists will crack up!

Kind regards
MB97912

Hello MB(ninesevennineone2),

sure, no intention of mine to critizise Einstein's theories of special- and general-relativity.

Although there are some disputes about possible existence of an Ether, my aim is not at all to critizise most plausible theories which's 'prophecies' were proven correct that often.

I indeed am perplexed about the fact, that i didn't understand faster, why 7TeV collisions wouldn't be realizable in spite of LHC's planned ability of accelerating hadrons to 7TeV in opposing directions and thus realizing 14TeV collision-energy! I am sorry about this.

So i finally learned, that 2*7TeV is resulting in 14TeV energy usabale for experimentationing but 1*7TeV is not resulting in 7TeV energy usabale for experimentationing because quite all this 7TeV are bound by the (intended) relativistic escape-velocity.

Thank you, MB97912, i indeed learned something here.

But as my main intention is to keep Earth safe from nihilization into one small black-hole or billionth of billionth of quantasized ultrasmall black-holes i do not consider your arguments as a reason to start up LHC - but as a reasonable explication why fixed-target-mode-experimentationing isn't sufficient for physicists interests.

So there would remain advanced analysis of cosmic-rays hitting Earth or the Moon as a source of safe collisiondata.

As you know, i am not a physicist, but i am worried about neglected risks eventually arising by experimentationing in head-on mode.

I just do not agree in a necessity to create collisions in a way the unknown resulting 'exotic-particles' will stay on Earth, because i can not believe in G&M's calculations about billions of years eventually created black-holes would need to aggregate a few kilogramm of Earth's matter (as they didn't even mention possibility of so called 'Dark Matter' to be aggregationable nor supposed 'particles/antiparticles' of vacuum-fluctuations and other scenarios as mainly the following:

quanta-sized micro-black-holes (intentionally produced in multitudes at CERN (1/second)) could (until now undisproven) aggregate exponentially fast mass/energy as long as those lhc-mbhs will be smaller as the 4d-size of 'warped and thus not completly (not at all) understood parameters of extradimensional topologies.
But reaching the 4d-boundaries of those extragravitational parameters of those not completly understood extradimensional topologies, lhc-mbhs could - according to “Black Holes in brane worlds” by P.Suranyi, L.C.R.Wijewardhana (http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0207084) - break apart and thus, again smaller as the 4d-size of exponential growth enabling extradimensional topologies, aggregate permanetly exponentially fast Earth's matter and nihilate our planet within a few hours.

Exactly this frightening scenario is these days my personal main-reason to strongly hope CERN will halt its experimentationing at LHC or get halted by juristical ways or by a not-catastrophic event destructing their beloved machine.

Our planet Earth is at stake - which 'chances' there are for catastrophic events to become true is urgently to declarete as honest as possible. LSAG failed declareting risks honestly.

Further, warnings on topic strangelet-creationing have to become considered as more reasonable as had been (at least in discussions in german-speaking part of the world) but onto this i will publish soon.

Again, thank you, MB(withNo.) for providing the correct link to J.Holdens stranglet-theory-basics.

best regards, thank you!
Marc Fasnacht