PDA

View Full Version : LHC Will never work?



chaggle
14th October 2009, 07:38 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/6318034/Could-the-Large-Hadron-Collider-be-held-back-by-its-own-future.html


Forget the far-fetched belief that it will create a black hole, two distinguished physicists have gone even further claiming nature itself is stopping the troubled £4.4billion project from getting off the ground.
In a theory reminiscent of the time travelling film Back to the Future, the theoretical physicists Holger Nielsen, from Denmark, and Masao Ninomiya, from Japan, have concluded that its discoveries could be so "abhorrent to nature" that they are coming back to stop their own creation.

That led me to this:

http://eprintweb.org/S/authors/All/ni/Ninomiya/1


Card game restriction in LHC can only be successful!

Holger B. Nielsen and Masao Ninomiya

Received. 02 October 2009 Last updated. 02 October 2009

Abstract. We argue that a restriction determined by a drawn card or quantum random numbers, on the running of LHC (Large Hadron Collider), which was proposed in earlier articles by us, can only result in an, at first, apparent success whatever the outcome. This previous work was concerned with looking for backward causation and/or influence from the future, which, in our previous model, was assumed to have the effect of arranging bad luck for large Higgs producing machines, such as LHC and the never finished SSC (Superconducting Super Collider) stopped by Congress because of such bad luck, so as not to allow them to work.


Are they serious?

Harryprice
14th October 2009, 08:53 AM
Are they serious?

Why not? It is a well known idea in theories of time travel that the way to stop paradoxes, like disturbing the past so the future is different and time travel never happened, are stopped by 'nature'. We might be in one universe, out of an inifinite number, where such a paradox never happens. Maybe most other universes are screwed up by paradoxes and go out of existence.

As to how it would work, who knows. But science is about evidence, theory and prediction. You'd need more than one example, like the LHC, to demonstrate the theory.

chaggle
17th October 2009, 05:27 PM
Well they actually discussed this on Jref (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=156463&page=1) and the general feeling was that it was either a practical joke or lunacy.

The trouble is that one poster called it the Large Hardon Collider and I will never be able to call it anything else again.>:D And the picture it conjures up .....:-X

Tony Williams
18th October 2009, 12:11 PM
The trouble is that one poster called it the Large Hardon Collider and I will never be able to call it anything else again.>:D And the picture it conjures up .....:-X
Aaaaargh....why did you have to tell me that? ;D

commandlinegamer
18th October 2009, 12:22 PM
Why do we have to wait till January to see what happens when Large Hardons Collide? Can't they just hire a movie?

Graham Lappin
18th October 2009, 08:09 PM
Why do we have to wait till January to see what happens when Large Hardons Collide? Can't they just hire a movie?

Large Hardons - what sort of movie, exactly did you have in mind?

A Malapropism for physicists - you don't hear one of those everyday.