Oops

My favorite story recently is about the lawsuit to stop the $8 billion Large Hadron Collider out of fear that it might shrink the universe to the size of a gnat turd. And I don’t mean the plump and juicy kind.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/science/29collider.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

One of the reasons I like my job is that the worst mistake I can make is to offend someone, and I enjoy that too. I would never want to be a NASA engineer, for example, knowing that one wrong calculation lands the Space Shuttle on the Sun. And I really, really, really, wouldn’t want to be one of the engineers working on the Large Hadron Collider, no matter how sure I was that it was safe. There’s always that little chance of annihilating the universe, and it’s exactly the sort of mistake I would make.

On the plus side, no one would say, “I told you so.” I guess that would take some of the sting out of it.

I don’t know how you ever get comfortable with any level of risk of destroying the universe. If you were to do an expected value calculation, multiplying the tiny risk times the potential cost, it would still come out infinitely expensive.

And who exactly ran the numbers to decide it wasn’t that risky? After all, the whole point of the Large Hadron Collider is to create conditions that are not predictable. If someone already predicted what would happen using nothing but his laptop and Excel, and determined it was safe, I don’t think we’re getting our $8 billion worth.

I can’t see the management of this project spending $8 billion, realizing it was a huge boner, and then holding a press conference suggesting it be turned into a parking garage. I’ll bet a lot of people in that position would take at least a 5% risk of incinerating the galaxy versus incinerating their own careers. I know I would.

If the lawsuit succeeds, imagine trying to get another job with that project failure on your resume.

Interviewer: “So, you spent $8 billion dollars trying to build a machine that would either discover something cool or destroy the universe. Is it fair to say you are not a people person?”

Comments

[mebagseagerm]

my days we just were told were having I noticed for the even know his were about one night,

[patrice]

i agree with rene, monday would be best. If CERN is able to performe their first tests moday after my first coffee... that would be nice. I`ll write a request right after that comment.

and ... i think in my past life i was one of the engineers in CERN 10 (lets say we are now in cycle CERN 11)

we have learnt nothing since...

[pandu]

Anyone looking for a nice cave to rent?

[Rene]

We had that discussion before the lawsuit was public. We then agreed that preferrably all LHC experiments were to be set for Mondays. Because I wouldn't want to miss my weekend only because the Universe as we know it is destroyed.

Also, assuming CERN is responsible and potentially a black hole only ultimately triggers BigBang anew... We wonder on what cicle we're on. We could be talking of CERN7...

Just thoughts.

[JTankers]

Professor Dr. Otto E. Roessler estimates 50 months Earth accretion time from a single micro black hole captured by Earth's gravity (www.golem.de/0802/57477-4.html, translation at www.lhcconcerns.com/LHCConcerns/Forums/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=52)

[Rabbit]

This sounds like the stuff science fiction b movies are made of.

For a black hole to exist, wouldn't the acceleration due to gravity be equal to the speed of light? If you used Newton's laws of gravitation, how large of a mass would you need for that to happen? (extremely large) So I don't think that we will be getting sucked into a black hole any time soon.

[zhenya]

The small black hole found by NASA is believed to be the smallest black hole formed from a collapsed star. In theory, once formed, a black hole can be of any mass. Hawking theorized that primoridal black holes of about the mass of a large mountain might have formed early in the universe and still be present in the galactic Halo. Some of them would just now, some 13 Billion years later, be evaporating down to nothingness, releasing a rapid large burst of gamma radiation. The GLAST satellite, set for launch by NASA next May, 2008, will search for such signature.

[chuck]

Scott, I like your blogs. I really do. I try not to take things too seriously and I understand that most of the time you're trying to make people think. However, one of the reasons that scientific-type people have an issue with you is because you make statements like "...the whole point of the Large Hadron Collider is to create conditions that are not predictable..." The way science works is that questions are raised, hypotheses are formed, predictions made, and experiments run, some questions are answered and more raised, and so on.

In this case, the blanket statement that the scientists are causing conditions that are not predictable is extremely over simplistic and actually wrong. These colliders are used to try to verify predictions that have been made which is the basis of how science works. Colliders have verified many many predictions related to quantum mechanics. The knowledge gained and the new questions raised have generated new predictions which will be verified with new, more powerful colliders.

The bottom line is that there will be questions answered and new ones asked as a result of this collider. Sure, the exact experiments have not been performed before but that doesn't mean that scientists don't know what expected results are or at the very least what the approximate energy levels are of the particles being created.

The fears raised by Wagner and Sancho are not based on solid science. They clearly do not understand the basic science and do not take everything we actually DO KNOW into account. In this case the energy levels and time frames involved are orders of magnitude lower than what would be required to be a danger.

Sorry but sometimes I just need to rant...

[Don]

For those asking how a femto-black hole could be created in the LHC. (micro is just not small enough)

By smashing protons together at very high energies they are able to put a (relatively) large amount of energy into a very tiny space. Energy and mass being equivalent, it may be enough energy in a small enough space to collapse gravitationally into a tiny black hole. This would be a stupendous result as the theoretical model for creating black holes at the LHC requires that the extra dimensions postulated by String Theory exist, are relatively large, and that gravity penetrates those dimensions. That tiny black hole would immediately (is there a time shorter than immediately?) decay via Hawking's Radiation into a shower of particles and energy, and the LHC will hopefully be able to tell that the resulting particle shower is the result of black hole decay and not something else.

[JTankers]

This is the best commentary I have read yet. My feelings exactly.

CERN’s web site states that we have not been destroyed by effects of cosmic rays and micro black holes will evaporate.

However, cosmic rays travel too fast to be captured by Earths gravity, and Hawking Radiation is disputed and contradicts Einstein’s highly successful relativity theory. Collider particles can be captured by Earth’s gravity, and relativity predicts micro black holes will not decay. The LHC Safety Assessment Group has been trying for months to prove safety without success, but it may not be possible.

Alleged in the legal action: Chief Scientific Officer, Mr. Engelen passed an internal memorandum to workers at CERN, asking them, regardless of personal opinion, to affirm in all interviews that there were no risks involved in the experiments, changing the previous assertion of ‘minimal risk’.

(Statisticians generally consider minimal risk as 1-10%).

[Joel]

Nice one, AJ.

For more on that scenario, including discussions of a black hole's orbit around the Earth's core, you might want to check out David Brin's novel, Earth.

[KarmaBaby]

“There is no minimum mass for a black hole. A black hole the mass of a single proton is possible. It's all about how compressed the matter is. Nothing more.”

Well, actually, scientist believe the lowest mass a black hole can have is about 3 times the mass of our sun. On April 1, NASA scientists announced they identified a black hole about 3.8 times the mass of our Sun. It’s about 15 miles in diameter.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2008/smallest_blackhole.html

[Susan]

Really??? Only one person mentioned Dr Evil? Didn't they cover this in one of the Austin Powers movies???

[priya]

And spiderman will wear a gravity proof suit and will kick the hole off to the centre of our galaxy. .
On a serious note. I was going to have a pay hike in june. now, the universe is gonna get destroyed about that time. .bummer!!

[Steve]

Astronomers see gamma ray bursts and they don't yet understand how they are made. They could be other civilizations destroying their planet.

A tiny black hole would fall to the center of the Earth. Eventually it would hit other matter (it is kinda dense down there) and grow. At some point it would suck in all the other matter of the Earth. The Earth is rotating (around 1000 m.p.h. at the equator) so all the matter would spiral down. There would be lots of friction as all the matter of the Earth tried to fit into a space smaller than a basketball within a very short time span. The friction would make the matter get extremely hot, releasing light. If it gets hot enough the light would be gamma rays (very energetic light). Nearby civilizations would see another gamma ray burst and wonder what caused it.

If it wasn't for the radiation blast the Moon would be a safe place to be. Afterwards it would keep circling the very tiny Earth that is now a black hole.

Someone should at least calculate the spectrum and duration of the radiation blast the Earth would make as it was turned into a black hole and compare it with these gamma ray bursts of unknown origin.

[vash]

Haha, unless of course there were an afterlife, at which point you would hear a loud resounding TOLD YOU SO.

[Sondra]

The implication was that 27,000 people dying of starvation is a more important problem, not that they should be saved.

[Michael McCafferty]

This would be a good time for the other people in the universe (aliens) to visit and ask us WTF are we thinking, then spank us back into the stone age to give us another chance to get it right.

;o)

[Jason]

If the universe gets destroyed, nobody is going to miss it.

So what's the risk?

[Victor Prometeo L. Frankenstein]

Hi Scott,
Mr. Wagner, the man who took legal action against CERN, FNAL and NSF, spoke about ‘arms length scientists’. Maybe he should have said ‘armpits length scientists’ and ask for Your help; we all know You’ll be able to introduce him to some people [long-armpits] persons.

Now, speaking about me, I have to confess that a bad thought came to my mind while I was reading the article You mentioned in Your post; the thought was the following: if you were a physicist (or a group of physicists) that found a mistake out in the LHC, what would you do to delay the works and, at the same time, get attention and more money? Wouldn’t you try to pursuit a lawsuit and let the money that’ll come out from the main doors (the ones of the main participant countries to the LHC project), come back to the back door (the one of the CERN)?

…but now let me become serious, ‘cause I’m going to speak about things that really matter in our lives, and I’m going to do that posing a question to all of you. My question is: why extraterrestrial life forms, that are supposed to keep an eye on us, using each sort of Identified Flying Object (plate, sphere, cigar, bunch/cluster of …you name it…) would let us to destroy the universe, or even their favourite dried seaside resort at Groom Lake, inside the renowned Area 51 (Touristic) Zone?
Bye ;)
V.P.L.F.

[JEB]

now that's a great one!
no one would say "i told you so".
how would that take the sting out of it if the universe is gone?!

[Bort]

So these guys are suing out of fear of being rendered extraordinarily dense and strange? Sounds like they're too late...

[Joshua Jacobsen]

Doesn't a black hole dependent on its mass for its destructive forces? How do you collide two protons and wind up with sufficient mass to destory the world?

And regardless of what these scientists are claiming, high energy protons are surely colliding somewhere else in the universe. We have huge stars, quasars, and similar celestial bodies that are capable of energizing particles on a level at least comparable to some (relatively) tiny terrestrial device we've constructed. Our entire solar system has less mass dedicated to energizing particles than a typical quasar or even a medium-sized star (The sun being on the tiny end of things).

That just doesn't pass my sniff test.

[D. Andy]

"Strange matter." Somehow reminds me of Futurama (tm), with Nibbler generating the only fuel fit for intergalactic travel... :o)

[AJ]

thats the wonderful thing about the branching universe theory multiple universes so all we need to do is create a stable wormhole to another dimension and we can just worry about destroying some other universe instead .

seriously if it was really a risk and we work out the percentages of there been other intelligent life out there don't you think they would have already done it (hey maybe thats the solution to the big bang big collapse theory then) some jerk just goes around destroying universes all the time.

[AJ]

thats the wonderful thing about the branching universe theory multiple universes so all we need to do is create a stable wormhole to another dimension and we can just worry about destroying some other universe instead .

seriously if it was really a risk and we work out the percentages of there been other intelligent life out there don't you think they would have already done it (hey maybe thats the solution to the big bang big collapse theory then) some jerk just goes around destroying universes all the time.

[Snazzydragon]

Bonus piece of info :
One of the "earth is destroyed" situations is that nano-black holes are created and through some system not understood somehow persist (from current theory they would evaporate instantly in a burst of hawking radiation)
all well and good, but said black hole would sink to the center of the earth, exponentially eat matter for a few thousand years then suddenly WOOMPH (simulated black whole eating sound) the earth would be gone, due to the wonders of exponential systems
so even if it did turn out to be a huge mistake, we wouldn't know about it for a long, long time

[dan]

for april 1st questionable content, dinosaur comics and xkcd all switched sites temporarily! crazy!
And if you didn't already know those are some of your online comic competition.
(none of them feature cubicles though)

[Guillermo]

Man oh man, thats the best cost/result rate ever for a weapon, 8 billions to destroy universe.
Well, that will prove if there are intelligent life out there, if we can destroy the whole universe, then someone will come to stop us.
If not, well, either we are not gonna destroy anything, or they are too lazy to come.
And for those complaining about people starving while science uses cash, remember that nobody complains about how much cash sportmen get, or movie stars, or anyone popular.

[Nick]

This has to be one of the coolest things i've ever read.

I can just imagine some of the conversations in the lab whilst designing this.

Geek 1; What does that button do.
Geek 2; Not sure, it may destroy the entire universe, but I doubt it.

Geek 1 + 2 look at each other for a brief moment, before jumping to push button.

[Not My Usual Alias]

As long as the person who pushes the start button doesn't utter the phrase

"hold my beer for a second while I try this"

I suspect that our universe will be fine.

[Sue Dunham]

Dr. Evil wants a GIANT Hadron Collider.

[GG]

Well, if you combine this story with the story a few months ago that it's very likely the universe is just a computer simulation, then it's not so scary. Even if it does destroy the universe, that will only amount to what, crashing the simulation? I'm sure someone will restart it and we'll never know the difference.

[Otis]

It's interesting to note that the only reason you're reading this is because of the work done by Tim Berners-Lee at CERN in 1990 to develop HTML, browsers and then ultimately find a use for the internet...

I would argue that that was worth $8bn regardless.

However, you could argue that with guys that clever (or lucky) working on it, nothing could probably go wrong.

On the other hand, having had one accidental runaway success, I guess this could be a case of the pendulum swinging back the other way, maybe we're due!

[Rack]

So where do I fit in thinking destroying the universe might not be a bad thing? I don't think there's ever been a time when on a global scale joy came anywhere near to eclipsing suffering, and we certainly don't seem to be working towards that goal at present.

[Pete Valle]

As usual, Scott, you made me laugh. Bad thing is that I'm in a computer lab with my freshman English class and they are all staring at me funny. You should see their "My God, the professor has finally gone insane!" faces...

[Vananovion]

Every big discovery or invention came with risk, no matter which one you choose (i.e.: nuclear energy, nuclear fusion, fire...). The risk at LHC creating an unstoppable black hole or strangelets is so small its practically impossible. On the other hand, LHC may lead humanity to great developement and prosperity (creating molecules out of pure energy (called Creation or Materialization, yeah just like in Star Trek), teleportation (also just like in Star Trek), new, nature friendly fuels/energy sources...). For these I think its worth taking that measly little risk.

(Of course LHC will be still too small for doing all these things (i.e. we would need a collider as large in diameter as the solar system for successful Materialization), but it will give us the knowledge of how to do these things in smaller scale).

I wouldnt like to be one of those building it though, as Im just like Scott at things like these - I would screw up the least probable thing.

[Chris]

Re: the cost/benefit analysis, what would be the cost of destroying the Earth? I would say it is zero. One often hears something along the lines of "the fire caused £50,000 worth of damage", but of course that's nonsense - damage doesn't have a value. The £50,000 is the cost of repairing the damage. If there's no-one around who cares enough to want to repair the damage, then the cost is zero.

Therefore, the LHC has many possible benefits and zero possible costs, so long as they really screw-up big style and don't just make a big hole in the middle of Switzerland.

[Andreas T]

In all seriousness now. I think the fact that no one would be around to say I told you so doesn't take some of the sting out of it. It takes all of the sting out of it!

If no one is left to mourn and to feel sad for the loss of life, in other words if you are not going to cause suffering (since everything will be gone) then go ahead! If the universe ends then I'm guessing it will be swift and we'll all be gone in a flash!

There's something wrong with me isn't there..?

[MattF]

It's interesting that no one ever explains, in words of one syllable, that the Higgs Boson that the big colliders are all trying to create is an oscillation in the fundamental constants of nature. I sure hope it'll turn out to be a stable oscillation.

[Leonel]

"As a result, Mr. Wagner and Mr. Sancho contend in their complaint, black holes could really be stable, and a micro black hole created by the collider could grow, eventually swallowing the Earth."

Ehehe... That's funny: where the hell is the critical mass to do that?! Isn't actually the other way around, i.e., the Earth swallowing the micro black hole?! Are these guys going after the Monty Python's Award of Quantum Mechanics or what? :-)

[Patrick Hothersall]

And you all thought that Nerd Rage was limited to throwing half empty cans of ountain Dew...

[Little me]

Once in a job interview in Geneva, I accidentally cited the object "Large Hardon Collider". I never got the job...

[Jordan]

"There's a great Arthur C. Clarke quote where he says (paraphrasing)
Most supernovae are industrial accidents that are the result of aliens tinkering with technology they don't understand ;-)
Appropriate in this case!"

Also interesting that on the day he died, the light from a huge supernova billions of light years away reached Earth!

[F]

It's exactly the same as if I suit Scott because there's a small probability that when he opens his orange juice bottle in the morning he will trigger a chain of events (including flying elephants impulsed by sterling engines, why not?) that will end up destroying my appartment.
What? it could happen!
I'll sue you!

[DD]

Boner? Isn't he the singer in U2? Has he been on the pies or something?

[didi]

I can't believe someone actually listens to someone like that. Do something intelligent with your time. I will try to pursuing a lawsuit that makes it illegal to accelerate my car faster than 80mph as I could create a worm hole and my kids could play star trek. But of course this COULD happen every day.
Buy the way a pic of the spread sheet calculation machine
http://picasaweb.google.com/ribalba/CernWork/photo#5102140131161493842

[The Hammer]

"...in which the colliding protons will recreate energies and conditions last seen a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang."

Never mind the lawsuit etc, how'd they "know" this "fact"? They've worked out that there was, in fact, a Big Bang (from nothing) AND they were able to calculate to the nearest trillion of a second when some protons collided?! The confidence and matter-of-factness that this statement carries boggles the mind.

[Jay]

Wait a second. If everything was shrunk to the size of a gnat terd, wouldn't it seem the same since we're all to the same scale as before?

Unless it doesn't affect some people, then that would fail.

[Keith Petrus]

The entire universe is made up of matter/energy traveling in waves through time. A black hole basically represents a a conglomeration of waves that have been flatlined into a single point (1 dimension equals no wave action). As I understand it, the only naturally occurring force in the universe capable of flatlining a bunch of energetic matter/energy waves into a single point is the gravitational collapse of a star several times the size of our own sun.

But what if it's the flatlining or dampening effect that's the key, and massive gravity is just the catalyst?

And now for an experiment you can try at home. Pick up your guitar, strum a single string, and then touch the string lightly with your finger. Notice how the music stops with just the slightest touch - no need to grip it tightly with a massive gravity fist? Now imagine the dead string touching another, and another, and another dampening each in turn.

[KD]

TMQ over at the ESPN website has been going on and off about this for a few years now. I think europe is building two of those things as well.

As I remember it, Europe started building one and the US first passed on it saying it was too expensive. Then we decided we were behind in the destroy the universe experiements so we started building one. Now europe is building a second, even bigger one to stay ahead of us.

Fun times while they last. Maybe we need to replace the red threat with something a little more modern.

[Joe]

This was boring until someone mentioned dragons.

[Real Live Girl]

I'm beginning to suspect that scientists aren't getting enough sex. Why else are they always coming up with ways to destroy the universe? For all our sakes, I think it's time for whores to get off the politicians and celebrities and just do the nearest physicist ASAP! I'd help out, but I don't run with that fast crowd of nuclear scientists and Girls Gone Wild.

[Dave Oblad]

Interesting subject Scott.

If you want a good litmus test, just check the incident level of UFO reports.
It is climbing rapidly. Several hundred reports monthly these last few years.
Now.. the test...

Explain in detail when the test will be performed and announce it world wide
on every communication media we have. Then watch the UFO reports.
If one notices a sudden major decline in observed UFO's, then "Stop the test!"

It's just that simple...

I'm absolutely sure we don't have to worry about destroying the universe.
Worst case scenario is we make a little black hole that gobbles up our planet.
The planetary mass won't change, the moon will still orbit the black hole.
So no big deal.. the universe is safe from us stupid humans, once and for all.

By the way Scott, I've been around your Blog quite a while now and don't recall
you ever blogging about UFO's. Where do you stand on such important matters?

Best I can glean from the internet noise is that ETI's will get tired of feeding Hi-Tech
info to the Black-Ops people, who promised to use it for good and not for weapons.
The ETI's will force the issue by world-wide landings and bring the issues before
the whole human race. The religious fundamentalists have already declared they
will oppose the ET's and pronounce them as Demons, tools of Satan. Riots will
ensue with curfews and martial law. Then the ETI's will offer the people a choice.
We can leave the earth for immortality and peaceful integration into the galactic
population or stay here without technology, to enjoy religious wars fought with
just gun powder. The Hindu's, Buddhists, Atheists and some weak Christians will
leave.. the rest can stay and enjoy their Armageddon.

What will be your choice? Just curious...

Check out: http://www.disclosureproject.org/

Again, cool Blog Scott. Best wishes from Dave :^)

[Marco]

I'd say go with it. Destroying the universe is not the worst thing that could happen. In fact, it may be the best.

[Chris]

It's not so bad. The purpose of the LHC is to produce collisions which do occur naturally anyway, but are basically impossible to find and observe because of their random nature. These collisions happen in the upper atmosphere all the time (notably failing to destroy the universe, or anything approximating it), but we can't predict when or where they will happen. So we build a collider to crash the particles where and when we want them to.

A far more amusing observation of the situation is the philosophy behind particle colliders. It's like trying to decipher the workings of a watch by throwing one really hard at a wall and examining the pieces.

[Sue London]

Has anyone considered the potential upside to this? Universe recycling! Maybe the next go-round with these atoms (sub-atomic particles?) won't include PHBs and in-duh-viduals. I can dream...

[Fern]

Yeah, we're doomed ... looks like the Borge built it.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080225.html

[KiwiAtaahua]

Would it be safer if they first tried it with a Large Hadron Hug? Or maybe just the physics equivalent of a Firm Handshake with Appropriate Back-Slapping?

'Colliding' is always so messy...

[Garrison]

I noticed in the article that Wagner decided not to sue CERN in France or Switzerland, and instead decided to sue them using a Hawaiian court, in order to "Save expenses".

If Wagner really believed that CERN was about to annihilate the universe, would he really be that concerned about saving his money in his quest to prevent them from doing so?

[DM]

By the way, did you notice the guy putting forth this lawsuit also put forth lawsuits against earlier experiments, which I think I personally can safely determine did not destroy the world. Of course, we have no way of knowing how far we can go with this before we create something that DOES destroy the world.
Also, the article in the first paragraph talks about destroying the entire universe, but I don't see any mention of a destruction of the universe anywhere else in the article. The worst scenario the article describes still only involves our rather un-universal planet. So why does it talk about the universe in the beginning?
And finally, I'm curious if they can assign values to the probability of universal destruction. Is the probability any more or less than the probability that ANY action could cause universal destruction (through a combination of quantum physics and chaos theory)?
On a different note, it all sounds like something Michael Chrichton (of "Jurassic park" and who I haven't ever read, only heard about) would write. The person putting forth the lawsuit would be the hero.

[friskybeaver]

0 probability times a non infinite repercussion = 0 risk.

[Jess]

As dying goes, that's not a bad way to do it at all.

[Kevin Kunreuther]

And the universe being destroyed is a bad thing how?

[DWH]

Unfortunately, the only way to prove how the universe was created, is to create one of your own, destroying the current one in the process.Sounds like a job for an egotistical intellectually superior person, like a physicist.A self correcting universe indeed!

[DM]

Here's what the scientists should do:
Run the experiment, and then issue a fake press release saying that this is exactly what happened, and that a black hole had been created that would eat the earth, but only in the course of a few months. It could either be the best peace initiative ever (faced with impending doom, people realize the utter pointlessness of violence, and would instead try to live life to the fullest) or everyone would blow each other up (after all, what would they have to lose?). Of course, as my brother pointed out, a large number of people would have a lot of sex in the leftover time.

[Theo Bee]

Particles of the energy the collider produces are plentifull in our universe already.

If they would generate black holes we would have run into a few zillion wild ones by now.

Theo

[Dale Henderson]

Scott,
A recent Science channel on Hawking described the two different perceptions of falling into a black hole. One was as an observer seeing the subject ripped and splattered. The other was as the subject, a truly interesting and not deadly event. Let the folks at Cern have their fun, and have Disney and Universal charge admission as a hedge.

[Steven]

Sure, 27000 people a day starve to death, so scientists genetically modified crops that could feed them requiring next to no water to grow. And those 27,000 people didn't want them. So the scientists went and did something else.

[Biff]

Forgot to point out that some of the first tests of nuclear fission in the U.S. took place right in the middle of Chicago. I guess you're right- physicists aren't people persons. Or is that people people?

[Biff]

A group of scientists once told a reporter that there was a chance, though incredibly small, that their particle collider could create a black hole big enough to swallow the earth. After all, according to quantum mechanics which they use pretty much every day, there is a chance that you might, without notice, turn into a sofa, for instance.

As a result, they were forced to go through an investigation to estimate whether that chance was worth it. The collider passed, and the scientists learned a lesson about marketing. I guess these guys didn't get the memo.

[lncoharp]

"...the collider could produce, among other horrors, a tiny black hole, which, they say, could eat the Earth. Or it could spit out something called a “strangelet” that would convert our planet to a shrunken dense dead lump of something called “strange matter."
I do not know why, but this unwanted scenario brought a huge laugh to me and my fellow cubicle dweller.
I am unsure, but it seems that something along this line has already happened within the skull of our illustrious comic/blog writer.

[Leora]

You, Scott Adams, are hereby dubbed a strangelet. Though it sounds more like my last tenant...

Kudos to D. Mented for being able to spell hyperlitigiousity and using it correctly in a sentence. Some of us out here still appreciate that sort of thing.

[mvincent]

I for one welcome our new dragon overlords.

[Moriarty]

"That collider thing does look like a big donut, maybe we are in some trouble here." from dsg.

A simple solution to that is to have Homer Simpson standing by the big donut. If things start going astray, let Homer do what he does best...

[Bookdiva]

My husband has a theory that this is why we have not found evidence of other intelligent life on other planets. Perhaps every civilization progresses to the point that it starts mucking about with the essential elements of the universe... creates a collider... and promptly wipes itself out.

[quantum_flux]

We "could" all be very well boned here. Whenever 1 parallel universe gets created (black holes may create a lot of these), the other universes always gets destroyed. It's just a conservation of mass-energy. Of course, it is true that mass-energy always takes the path of destruction of lower entropy order to reach a new higher entropy stabilization point, as the total entropy in the universe always tends toward increasing whenever a high enough activation energy is supplied for a new stabler equilibrium point to be achieved. I believe that the Earth "could" be destroyed by a black hole, but it is highly unlikely that this will happen before the black hole evaporates into pure gamma and nuetrino radiation.

[Rudy Phelps]

I think it was the first hydrogen bomb test, rather than the first atomic bomb (uranium) in New Mexico that the scientists were worried about. There was actually a legitimate chance that the fusion reaction would spread to the hydrogen in the upper atmosphere. Fission bombs don't get hot enough for this.

In this case it was some of the physicisists on the project themselves that were concerned, not some nut who has a history of claiming scientific apparatus will destroy the world. (Even if a mini black hole could swallow the Earth before evaporating, it would have little effect on even the Moon, let alone the Universe at large.)

[BlazingGeek]

Technically the risk is of destroying the earth... not the universe. You still have the benefit of nobody complaining afterwards AND you can take comfort in the fact that if it goes badly you will probably be giving a good laugh to whatever higher intelligence is watching us.

[Yuriy]

[I’ll bet a lot of people in that position would take at least a 5% risk of incinerating the galaxy versus incinerating their own careers. I know I would.]

Exactly, people's expected value calculations tend to be rather subjective as "What are the risks?" becomes "What are the risks to me?" Their thinking goes "Destroying the universe might be an infinite potential risk, but to me it's the same potential risk as skyjumping going awry. Either way, MY universe comes to an end. The fact that in the former scenario EVERYONE's universe ends is not that much more bothersome."

[argenbert]

hail the Large Hadron Collider, bringer of dragons and black holes!

[Kevin]

We are all part of a simulation, a (for lack of a better term) computer game being played by two children of a god-like being who are of the relative age of 8 human years or so.

The goal of the game is to coax a bunch of microbes to evolve into a civilization and develop technology. The winner is the one whose civilization destroys the universe first. Yay, we're about to be winners!

Seriously, it's fun to think about the rules of this game. No direct intervention (such as assassinating Lincoln, or fixing voting) are allowed. Only external manipulation is allowed (asteroid strikes, solar flares, etc..)

For example, those dinosaurs don't look promising? Here comes a comet! Or, if you wanted to slow down the economy, or force technology in a certain direction, you could increase solar activity, thus increasing Earth's temperature, and just wait for the world's geniuses to discover global warming.

Technology not moving fast enough? Through careful manipulation of various space objects, you could divert a space faring civilizations scout ship so that is crashes in the backyard of your most advanced technological civilization, boosting them quickly into the computer and space age.

Playing the game well would give the player a useful directed DNA modification every 100 years. Of course, theres always a chance it will backfire and have a negative affect, which is how we got Paris Hilton....

The game would end if your 'subjects' ever figured out what the true nature of the universe is. If we ever figure out it's just a game, it will shut down almost immed.....

[argenbert]

i LOVE you

[Yuriy]

This was a big part of the plot of the near-future sci-fi novel Forever Peace. There some scientists calculated that a similar experiment (though with a MUCH larger particle accelerator) would not merely simulate what would've happened immidiately after the Big Bang, but would in fact CAUSE the Big Bang. Unfortunately the director of the project was a member of a doomsday cult which had a vested interest in the destruction of the universe.

Hmmm, just how well DO we know the people in charge of this CERN?

[Blind Squirrel]

I believe life exists elsewhere in the universe. Furthermore, I believe that more intelligent and capable life exists elsewhere. We are not the most advanced form of life in the entire universe. Therefore other beings have already built a collider more powerful than the Large Hadron Collider and they didn't annihilate the universe - so it must be safe.

On the other hand, on March 19th, NASA scientists observed gamma ray burst GRB080319B, which lies 7.5 billion light-years away, yet was visible to the naked eye, at least momentarily. It was 2.5 million times more luminous than the brightest known supernova! Maybe some advance beings on the other side of the universe really smoked themselves big-time with their own Large Hadron Collider, 7.5 billion years ago.

[Jacob G]

There's an equally small chance of this:
http://wttf.org/2008/02/01/hadron-collider-finds-the-epic-lulz-particle/
happening. I say we risk it.

And if it doesn't eradicate the universe we could have fun little black holes to play with. Set up some caution tape around the event horizon and let the games begin! I'm thinking mini-golf. Best 18th hole ever.

[Jameso]

I think it's instructive that the relevant parties are trying to sue a European research agency, based in Geneva, in a Hawaiian court. They recognize that the court has no jurisdiction, but won't file in Europe so that they can save on costs. Either they really assume America rules the world, and thus a judgement would stick, or they're not actually that bothered about stopping the test.
And what are they trying to achieve by suing the US Department of Energy? Have they any involvement?

[Mokkery]

I have five dollars that says it will be perfectly safe. Anyone want to bet me?

[Jon]

HAL:

You said the entire solar system doesn't have enough mass to collapse into a black hole.

There is no minimum mass for a black hole. A black hole the mass of a single proton is possible. It's all about how compressed the matter is. Nothing more.

[Anonymous]

P.G. Wodehouse through Bertie Wooster once described the problem as follows:

I was reading in the paper the other day about those birds who are trying to split the atom, the nub being that they haven't the foggiest as to what will happen if they do. It may be all right. On the other hand, it may not be all right. And pretty silly a chap would feel, no doubt, if, having split the atom, he suddenly found the house going up in smoke and himself torn limb from limb.

[chuck]

The original purpose of this project was to simulate particles that may exist in black holes. The budget was $5,000 and they were going to do the whole thing on an Excel spreadsheet.

Then they hired the PHB to manage the project. $8 billion later...

[HALiverpool]

Hi Scott,

You could piss off Osama Bin Laden and some nuclear physicist with access to fissile materials with one of your witty blog entries. That could end life on Earth.

Seriously, I think the entire solar system doesn't have enough mass to collapse into a black hole.

The problem is that ordinary people like to believe in absolutes. Any scientist worth his/her salt doesn't beleive in absolutes.

-HAL

[Bubba]

Didn't they say something similar about the first nuclear tests in New Mexico? I think it's just a ploy to get free publicity.

[sieve]

If you destroyed the universe, you could have a new nickname. "Armegeddon" All your friends could call you that.... umm, well, maybe not.

[Ibid]

There was a similar issue with the first atom bomb test. Luckily the scientists were all guys or it may not have happened.
"So, this thing we've built...it will either make a really massive boom or it will cause the atmosphere to ignite and all life on Earth will die screaming."
"Pretty much."
"Hmmm. How big of a boom are we talking?"

[Bill]

Scott, did you ever thought of this:

I was involved in a wage and salary scale setting exercise. The most important value they place on an employee was their opportunity to screw up. The bigger the mess, the more the pay. And you get more pay if you can do the most damage all by yourself, with no help whatsoever.

[Eric Meyer]

"Other people are insignificant insects."

"And we go to the tie-breaker question."

[WCE]

Well, it seems to be an extension of the syndrome I've seen consistently over my career, that the biggest screw-up on the program is the one with the greatest job security. ("Can't stop his funding, he isn't done yet.")

When I was working for the biggest aerospace company in the world, one of the "hot" program managers coincidentally had a track record of screwing up one program after another, and each with a larger budget than the one before. (The one I worked on was worth $5billion, he screwed that one up, too.)

I suppose this can be thought of as the quintessence of that syndrome - potentially annihilate the universe, and if you don't, you're at the top of the list for the next project that has a better chance of succeeding in destroying it.

I would be interested in seeing if their schedule matches the end of the Mayan calendar, in 2012.

[Shelley]

I think my kidneys are going to explode from laughing. I have nothing clever to say from exploded kidneys, except "thank you".

I also like the comment about the self-correcting problem. That also made my guts twinge a bit. And the Arthur C. Clarke quote. RIP

[D. Mented]

True - they don't know what force it is that keeps the universe expanding instead of being pulled back together and eventually returning to that infinitely compacted supermolecule that preceded the big bang.
They don't know if that force is constant or variable.
It is possible that somehow something they could do with a large Hadron collider might in some way affect that force.
The likelihood that it would affect that force in a measureable way is less than my chances of winning Powerball (I don't buy tickets, but a lost ticket could blow against my foot and it could be the winning ticket...Yeah, and the Hadron collider could measureably affect the mysterious force now referred to as "dark energy")
Even if so, even if it reversed or removed the repulsive force, we'd probably have 3 billion years before things started to get crowded, so the perpetrator would have enough time to prepare a really good excuse.(If anybody even realised that it wasn't a natural event)
Was it the fear that the distance between atoms would shrink? Everywhere in the universe simultaneously? How would we know?
On the list of things to worry about, this ranks a little below blue-sky lightning strikes in the middle of the Kalahari, the president growing a brain, alien invasions, and government conspiracies.
I suspect hyperlitigiousity syndrome, in conjunction with a desperate need for the plaintiffs to get their 15 minutes.
D. Mented

[daniel]

in response to Sondra:
You're on the wrong blog Sondra. If we spend that 8 Billion on feeding people, or teaching them to feed themselves (provide farm/fishing equipment), those people would just keep having more children till there were too damn many people to feed! How do you think we got in this mess of 27000 people dying of starvation every day in the first place?
There are not enough resources on the plant for over 6 billion people to enjoy nice long lives.

And in response to Rita Mae:
Being dragon food will clearly be the highest honour in our future dragon society! I hereby nominate you as an appetizer should the Large Hadron Collider succeed in creating dragons!

All hail the Large Hadron Collider, bringer of dragons and black holes!

[Diana W]

In a related story -

A team of researchers from the University of Calgary and the Tokyo Institute of Technology proudly announced in February that they had successfully stored "nothing" inside a puff of gas and then had managed to retrieve that same "nothing." That "nothing" is called a "squeezed vacuum," and the physicists tell us that a light wave can be manipulated so that its phases are of uncertain amplitude, then the light itself removed so that only the "uncertainty" property of the wave remains. [ScienceNOW Daily News, 2-29-08]

I'm a typically curious engineer - I say we stick some "uncertainty" into the Hadron and see what happens. I've got first dibbs on any dragons.

[DF]

Give it another week and you'll see some guys on the internet selling insurance for this.

[rockbert]

I remember hearing a theory (and I'm fairly certain it was from you, Scott) that the people who make the biggest screwups get the biggest promotions. This theory seems right to me. Screwups create visability at the higher PHB levels (doing your job competently does not!), and visability is what gets you promoted.
Anyway, annihilating the universe should get you to at least Executive Vice-God.

[Into my Timecube!]

This brings up a good idea, Scott.

I should probably file a suit against God. After all, according to the bible, sometime soon he's going to destroy the world and kill everyone. Him and the Antichrist, I guess - though as the Antichrist is just part of God's plan, the culpability is entirely God's.

Armageddon and the Tribulation should therefore go through an environmental assessment. In fact, I think the international court of Human Rights would also have something to say about this little plan of his, as would even the International War Crimes Tribunal.

Can some American lawyer please get in touch with me to set this up?

[daniel]

You have a good point, if we already knew what was going to happen why build it at all? But we might have some idea whats going to happen.
I've done some chemistry experiments where i didn't know exactly what was going to happen, but I was confident the worst outcome would involve a tiny explosion shooting chemical acid and shards of glass everywhere.
Someone must have some ideas as to what sorts of results are expected.
If they do manage to make a tiny black hole, although it would suck big time (because how do you clean that up? you cant!), I would be damn impressed. It's not everyday someone creates a black hole.
Also, I must say the dilbert where "the boss" fails the Turing test is awesome!

[LA Clay]

Puts the whole theory of global warming into perspective, doesn't it?

[Alicorn]

It is not formally impossible that there is a hitherto undiscovered law of the universe such that if you offend a certain number of people, you will cause the universe to be annihilated. However, it is equally possible that if you do *not* offend a certain number of people, you will cause the universe to be annihilated. If you consider the universe being annihilated to be infinitely bad, then even the inifintesmal risk that there is such a bizarre law of the universe should inform your behavior, except for the part where for every potential bizarre law of the universe, it is equally likely that there is a completely opposite bizarre law of the universe.

[Fred]

Yes, I blogged on this sort of thing a few months ago in
http://www.avolio.com/weblog/misc/BigBang.html

"We're just going to make a very small black hole, and if anything goes wrong we'll just stop the experiment. Unless we cease to exist, of course."

[Gofast]

Doesn't the entire concept of "loss" require a cognizant existence to recognize it?
Since annihilation of the universe would likely be total and instantaneous, why would we care?
Assuming one does not believe in an afterlife or existence beyond our current physical realm *(which I take it you don't, Scott); why should we worry about losing something that we'd never miss?

[dsg]

Hi Scott,

I think we have some important issues to address before these guys go ahead and destroy the universe. If there is such a potential of universal destruction, however small, does this mean that the Large Hadron Collider could be considered god? Especially since they are trying to recreate some post big-bang scenarios. These guys may be starting the whole process all over again. That collider thing does look like a big donut, maybe we are in some trouble here.

Before they fire that sucker up, we should blog about whether or not The Large Hadron Collider is actually god.

Thanks for the warning,
dsg

[Mark M]

"After all, the whole point of the Large Hadron Collider is to create conditions that are not predictable."

Not really. It's to create conditions to prove theories about what will happen in those conditions. One of the biggest uses of the LHC is to create particles at certain energy levels - and to detect them. If they show up consistently, then you've got a theory being proven. If they don't, then you've got another theory to check.

It's also often used to help us understand the conditions at the time of the "birth of the universe" better - but we think we know what the conditions are like, and so we are verifying predictions.

And that's the thing - scientists use the LHC to verify predictions based on theories. It's possible that things won't pan out the way we predict they will (and boom! there goes the universe), but the fact is, people don't get to use the LHC unless they are testing a prediction. That's how science is supposed to work.

[Slap D. Monkey]

I know that if I wanted to file a completely bogus lawsuit against a company not under the jurisdiction of the court in which I were to submit it, I would pick Hawaii too.

"Yes, Mr. Boss. I think Hawaii is our best bet. Have you ever been to Switzerland? It's cold and snowy and everyone there's a blond banker driving a Volvo. If I were them I'd welcome a lawsuit in paradise. I'll just fly over to Honolulu and wait a few months to see if they answer our complaint. See you in October or so with my expense reports."

[Les]

Bill Amend was into physics stuff in college wasn't he? Maybe you should ask him about it. As for me, I'm not too concerned. I suppose we're all going to die anyway, and quite frankly, going into a blackhole would be a pretty cool way to go. In fact, it's probably one of the coolest ways possible.

[JR]

Suppose it does destroy the universe. Who will know?

Pretty much fits the definition of a self-correcting problem.

[Ken E]

Is PHB involved with this project....Wheres Al Gore when we REALLY need him....

[Diana W]

I caught a few minutes of a show this weekend on The Bible Code, which talks about secret clues to catastrophes hidden in the Bible. Could someone with a decoder please run a check for the words "Hadron", "Collider" and "Doom" please? Finding something might not stand up in court, but it could guide me in whether or not I should keep socking away money in my 401K.

[ThomasB]

There's a great Arthur C. Clarke quote where he says (paraphrasing)
Most supernovae are industrial accidents that are the result of aliens tinkering with technology they don't understand ;-)
Appropriate in this case!

[jerry w.]

Speaking of Large Hadron Colliders:

http://www.xkcd.com/401/

http://boskolives.wordpress.com/

[Rofa]

What, no puns about the Large Hardon Collider? Or is it just cleverly disguised in the line "..realizing it was a huge boner.." ?

Also, no puns about the "arms length scientists" mentioned in the article?

And most of all, no puns about how it's natural for these "arms length scientists" to feel a need to create a Large Hardon Collider, what with them being a bit on the small side themselves?

What are you, lazy??

[rita mae]

Closing quote from the article:

[Dr. Arkani-Hamed said concerning worries about the death of the Earth or universe, “Neither has any merit.” He pointed out that because of the dice-throwing nature of quantum physics, there was some probability of almost anything happening. There is some minuscule probability, he said, “the Large Hadron Collider might make dragons that might eat us up.”]

Might make dragons that might eat us up? WTF? Give me a black hole any day.

Rita (not dragon food) Mae

[Sondra]

"Huge boner" is right.

27,000 people a day starve to death on this planet.