German woman fails to prove atom-smasher will end world

Oct 16, 2012
A woman walks past the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN). A German woman who feared the Earth would be sucked into oblivion in a black hole failed Tuesday in her court bid to stop the work of the world's most powerful atom smasher.

A German woman who feared the Earth would be sucked into oblivion in a black hole failed Tuesday in her court bid to stop the work of the world's most powerful atom smasher.

The higher administrative court in Muenster, western Germany, rejected her claims, ruling there was no evidence the work of the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) posed a danger to public safety.

"The plaintiff ... was worried that the experiments could produce so-called '' which could eventually lead to the destruction of all life on Earth," the court said.

However, the court noted that the CERN's own safety reports ruled out any danger to life. "Objectively, there is no evidence to doubt the correctness of these safety reports nor was any conclusive evidence presented," it ruled.

The woman had failed in a previous attempt to stop the work of CERN in Switzerland at the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe.

After a quest spanning nearly half a century, CERN scientists in July said they had found a sub-atomic particle that may be the or "", believed to confer mass on matter.

CERN uses a giant underground laboratory where protons are smashed together at nearly the speed of light in the Large Hadron Collider, yielding sub-atomic debris that is then scrutinised for signs of the fleeting Higgs.

Other opponents have also sought to stop the experiments, fearing either a black hole whose super gravity would swallow the Earth or a called a strangelet that would in turn liquidise the planet.

Explore further: CERN to give update on search for Higgs boson

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

'God particle' out of hiding places: CERN chief

Aug 25, 2011

The elusive Higgs Boson, known as the "God particle", is -- if it exists -- running out of places to hide, the head of the mammoth experiment designed to find it said on Thursday.

Hints fade of elusive physics 'God particle'

Aug 22, 2011

International scientists searching to solve the greatest riddle in all of physics said Monday that signs are fading of the elusive Higgs-Boson particle, which is believed to give objects mass.

A closer look at the Higgs boson

Jul 04, 2012

Scientists working at the world's biggest atom smasher near Geneva have announced the discovery of a new subatomic particle that looks remarkably like the long-sought Higgs boson. Sometimes called the "God p ...

Recommended for you

US: NYU researchers took bribes from Chinese group

12 hours ago

Three New York University researchers from China divulged results from a U.S.-funded study to Chinese competitors in exchange for tuition, rent and other expenses, federal prosecutors said Monday.

US scientist not involved in classified research: witnesses

May 17, 2013

Colleagues of a US scientist found hanged in Singapore last year told a coroner's inquiry Friday he was not involved in projects with military applications and was never asked to compromise any country's national security.

User comments : 24

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

BSD
2.8 / 5 (11) Oct 16, 2012
Headline should read:

Woman Fails In Court Bid To Stop Earth From Disappearing Up It's Own Arse
natello
1 / 5 (16) Oct 16, 2012
So far LHC failed one of its main research targets, regarding the proof of extradimensions with production of black holes at LHC. But at the moment, when such black holes would be created, then their potential stability has been predicted with physicists itself. Such a black holes could therefore live infinitely by theoretical calculations and they could threat the civilization with gradual accretion of Earth. Another study proved, such an accretion could be quite fast, when magnetic field of black hole is involved. So we have scientific support for all steps required for destruction the Earth with LHC: 1) the prediction of black hole formation, 2) the prediction of its stability and 3) the prediction of its fast accretion based on standard peer-revived publications.
natello
1 / 5 (14) Oct 16, 2012
So if I would be involved in this court, then the physicists would be forced to retract their own studies officially and to develop new ones in order to prove, that the LHC CANNOT destroy the Earth.

Apparently the women was not so clever and she didn't use the arguments of scientists itself, because we have all evidence for the intentional preparation of dangerous objects at the LHC collider from the side of CERN physicists.
there is no evidence to doubt the correctness of these safety reports nor was any conclusive evidence presented
The studies linked above were published just after when the safety reports were published. In addition, these safety reports weren't peer-reviwed and they weren't issued with independent authority, but with CERN itself.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (24) Oct 16, 2012
I looked around for what the signature of a strangelet planet might be. Somebody must have speculated on what we might want to look for. Any sources?
So if I would be involved in this court, then the physicists would be forced to retract their own studies officially and to develop new ones in order to prove, that the LHC CANNOT destroy the Earth.
Too bad you did not know. Maybe you want to volunteer your services for the appeal? The future of civilization is at stake you know.
natello
1 / 5 (20) Oct 16, 2012
The future of civilization is at stake you know.
IMO the physicists are imbeciles and they didn't realize, that the alleged micro-black holes are actually the common atom nuclei, which were prepared at LHC in large count. But because the physicists don't known about the connection of atom nuclei and micro-black holes, they simply have no arguments for safety of LHC collisions, because their own publications speak against it.
axemaster
5 / 5 (13) Oct 16, 2012
IMO the physicists are imbeciles

Riiight.

Well, one question then: Why hasn't the Earth been destroyed by cosmic rays already?
jalmy
1 / 5 (9) Oct 16, 2012
You know, the most basic step of science tells us the answer to this problem. Using basic observation we know that black holes exist, and we know they eat everything they encounter. We even know how they are created. The scientists that say this is not dangerous say it because quantum mechanics says that these small bits of matter cannot occupy a space smaller than their wavelength, thus creating a gravitational singularity with an event horizon. Einstein himself didn't believe the formation of black holes was possible even though his own theory suggested it. But yet there they are, we can observe them. Scientists believe they form from the collapse of super heavy bodies. Supernova. They form black holes the same way we make fusion bombs. Push things together really hard. Who can say that it takes 1 atom or 1 proton, or 10 atoms or 10 x 10 or 10x10^10. All we can be sure about is that black holes exist, they are stable, and they eat things.
tadchem
5 / 5 (9) Oct 16, 2012
[...the alleged micro-black holes are actually the common atom nuclei, which http://www.usnews...produced at LHC in large count. But because the physicists don't known about the connection of atom nuclei and micro-black holes, they simply have no arguments for safety of LHC collisions, because their own publications speak against it.

According to the No-Hair Theorem, a black hole can only have limited properties: mass, charge, and a Schwartzschild radius. Scattering experiments show atomic nuclei are far too complicated to be simple black holes.
natello
1 / 5 (13) Oct 16, 2012
Well, one question then: Why hasn't the Earth been destroyed by cosmic rays already?
I'm not saying, it should be destroyed with it. IMO the cosmic ray collisions occur under different conditions: they occur in sparse stratosphere, where is nothing to accrete and the product of collisions have high momentum toward Earth with compare to head-to-head collisions at the LHC. In addition, when some heavy object is formed in the path of LHC jet, then another protons can pile up and to accumulate at it - but the cosmic rays are quite sparse. But I don't think the microscopic black holes are physically relevant objects at all. IMO they can be never formed both at LHC, both in the Earth atmosphere. What is formed routinely during this are atom nuclei instead.
natello
1 / 5 (9) Oct 16, 2012
Scattering experiments show atomic nuclei are far too complicated to be simple black holes.
The general relativity itself doesn't enable the formation of stable microscopic black holes. These black holes could exist only when the extradimensions of space-time would be taken into account. This is why the black holes are attempted to prepare at LHC, after all: as an evidence of extradimensions, required with string theory. The properties of black holes stabilized with extradimensions could be quite different, than the simple general relativity predicts. Just because the string theorists don't understand the extradimensions, they cannot realize, that the common atoms are high-dimensional objects in fact.
ArtflDgr
1 / 5 (4) Oct 16, 2012
An example of "feminist physics"....
if you dont believe it, then look it up

Planting the seed for feminist physics culture

http://www.google...feminist physics&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCoQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.physics.arizo...;cad=rja

what we NEED is more Noethers!!!!!!
(no, the feminists never mention her!!!)

NOT more of this kind of thing...

ArtflDgr
3.3 / 5 (9) Oct 16, 2012
jalmy
All we can be sure about is that black holes exist, they are stable, and they eat things.

and their ability to do so is tied to their MASS

yes... a black hole made from a thousand suns can do that
but the degree it does that is a function of its mass

so a tiny tiny black hole, would not have mass high enough that its event horizon would even reach to another particle.

most of reality is empty space...
Silverhill
5 / 5 (11) Oct 16, 2012
According to the No-Hair Theorem, a black hole can only have limited properties: mass, charge, and a Schwartzschild radius. Scattering experiments show atomic nuclei are far too complicated to be simple black holes.
Not only that, radionuclides routinely emit particles (in a non-Hawking-radiation way), which black holes cannot do.
Plus, there's the density problem: nuclei are not as dense as black-hole matter must be.
Cave_Man
2.1 / 5 (11) Oct 16, 2012
The point she should have argued is that if the possibility exists AT ALL for the earth to be destroyed then further cation is required, we hunt down Near Earth Objects for the same reason.

The bullshit part is they "estimated" first a 1 in 500,000 then revised that when they realized they had no fucking idea. Last I heard the people who built and run this thing have stated there is about a 1 in 50,000 chance the LHC will produce a black hole that eventually does in the entire planet.

People win the lottery all the time, with worse odds. In reality odds don't exist (i know, hotly debated quantum yada blah), "Anything that can happen, does." (it's all in your head.)

The point it, shouldn't they be forced to do this somewhere other than our planet. Intergalactic space would be my default choice but then I hate kids playing with guns, I would rather them do it on a busy street on the other side of town.

Just sayin'. Maybe I'll build my own LHC and see how they like it =P
ubavontuba
2.8 / 5 (9) Oct 17, 2012
so a tiny tiny black hole, would not have mass high enough that its event horizon would even reach to another particle.
Gravity extends beyond the event horizon.

ubavontuba
3 / 5 (8) Oct 17, 2012
Well, one question then: Why hasn't the Earth been destroyed by cosmic rays already?
Conservation of momentum.
pancake
1 / 5 (1) Oct 17, 2012
Hello, First post

I find this article funny, and munster cheese is charming

My friend and I speak of particle "botany" , and i would like an understanding of charm and strange quarks- are these heavy bosons observed? Where? Can I read about it?

Thanks

jsdarkdestruction
1 / 5 (5) Oct 17, 2012
Mmmhhhhh, why is this news? this was debated years ago and its been shown multiple times that the lhc will not and has not created any micro blackholes that could somehow destroy the planet. is she arguing that the new levels of energy they will be ramping up to after the scheduled upgrades is now suffecient to do so when before it wasnt? either way, it seems like a waste of time.
Lord Haw-Haw
5 / 5 (1) Oct 20, 2012
So if I would be involved in this court, then the physicists would be forced to retract their own studies officially and to develop new ones in order to prove, that the LHC CANNOT destroy the Earth.

Apparently the women was not so clever and she didn't use the arguments of scientists itself, because we have all evidence for the intentional preparation of dangerous objects at the LHC collider from the side of CERN physicists.
there is no evidence to doubt the correctness of these safety reports nor was any conclusive evidence presented
The studies linked above were published just after when the safety reports were published. In addition, these safety reports weren't peer-reviwed and they weren't issued with independent authority, but with CERN itself.


Have you even read the LHC safety reports before posting your comment? Had you done so you would be aware they are peer reviewed and are issued with independent authority. Please read the relevant reports from LHCAG.
VendicarD
not rated yet Oct 21, 2012
I suspect it has, and that what you are experiencing are just the resulting vacuum fluctuations after its (and your) destruction.

It is the only rational way to explain the completely irrational behaviour of people like RyggTard.

"Well, one question then: Why hasn't the Earth been destroyed by cosmic rays already?" - Foofie
baudrunner
3 / 5 (2) Oct 21, 2012
Remember the old saying, "A little knowledge is a very dangerous thing?"

Well, a little ignorance can be a very hilarious thing.
Bogey
not rated yet Oct 21, 2012
Just so long as they don't create a new universe.
Inflation has got to sting.
sirchick
2 / 5 (1) Oct 21, 2012
Does this women have a education in science at all ? If not the court should of thrown the case out straight away.

And if she does - she should go back to education for a bit more.
jimbo92107
1 / 5 (2) Oct 22, 2012
Boy, if that woman is right, some people are going to be soooo embarrassed.

More news stories

Tiny ancient bandicoot shines light on future

(Phys.org) —A 20 million-year-old fossil skull identified as a 'pocket-sized' ancestor of the bandicoot will give insights into the future of Australia's modern endangered animals.

No new H7N9 cases in China for a week

No new human cases of the H7N9 virus have been recorded in China for a week, national health authorities said, for the first time since the outbreak began in March.

Slow pokes: Acupuncture helps hypothermic turtles

Two endangered sea turtles that are shells of their former selves after getting stranded on Cape Cod during a cold spell are getting some help easing back into the wild—from an acupuncturist.