CERN Thread

dragulagu

dragulagu

Galactic Explorer
MBTI
INTJ
Enneagram
549
Ok, so as promised I wanted to make a thread on CERN, The LHC and it's Research Facilities and explain a bit on how it works and to cover various subjects on it.

Just to push myself to start off, I'll be starting off the thread with a couple debunking posts. Will see how it'll continue from there. This post will be used as a general Index Guide for the thread. This thread will also be updated further along its progression (it just takes some time to properly write out the topic).

Page 1
- Topic: Does CERN Produce Black Holes?
- Topic: CERN and Dark Matter - The NA64 Experiment

@Sandie33 @Chickensoup @John K @flower @Aneirin added you peeps from the Blogging thread.
 
Last edited:
Topic: Does CERN Produce Black Holes?

A popular belief, started from CERN itself is the belief that this machine is able to create Microscopic Quantum Black Holes which would then seep slowly to the core of our planet by its gravitational field, slowly swallowing it from the inside. Our beautiful blue planet still seems to be doing its thing, so let's debunk this theory.

First of all we'll have the see what a stellar Black Hole is, a black hole is formed when a Star of a mass more than 1.4 times the mass of our Sun (which is called the Chandrasekhar Limit) collapses in
itself at the end of its life and forms a Supernova, Neutron Star or even a Black Hole, dependable on the actual mass of this Star. For a Black Hole to be formed, we are talking about gigantic stars, many times the Stellar mass of our own Sun.
The smallest stellar black hole found so far is around 3.8 times the mass of our Sun.
scientificamerican0312-32-I4.webp

If we compare this with a Quantum Black hole which would be generated within the experimental facilities of CERN we notice that these microscopic Black Holes are far more weaker than their Stellar counterpart. Logically, as far less energy/mass is used to produce these. Quantum Black Holes are formed by pushing (or rather, smashing) accelerated particles in very specific conditions as tightly as possible within a possible a tiny region of Spacetime so they would form a "Quantum Black Hole" with a density approaching that of a stellar Black Hole. However, these are so minuscule and "weak" compared to their surroundings that they would instantly release their energy and evaporate into nothing. In other words, these mini black holes would just not be strong enough to survive longer than a fraction of a moment in the experiment to escape let alone do any mayhem on our little planet.

According to the well-established properties of gravity, described by Einstein’s relativity, it is impossible for microscopic black holes to be produced at the LHC. There are, however, some speculative theories that predict the production of such particles at the LHC. All these theories predict that these particles would disintegrate immediately. Black holes, therefore, would have no time to start accreting matter and to cause macroscopic effects.
Click to expand...

So far, though the experiment theoretically could on very specific conditions, no Black Holes were created or harmed during the current experiments at CERN.
However, should these be generated, it would give our scientists the opportunity to detect interesting phenomena from these tiny black holes and discover more of the underlying complexity that is
our existence or even the formation of the beginning of our Universe as these were extensively formed during that time period. In other words, would actually be able to observe and research black holes within the safety of scientific experiment.

Indeed, high-energy collisions such as those at the LHC have already taken place--for example, in the early universe and even now, when sufficiently high energy cosmic rays hit our atmosphere. So if collisions at LHC energies can make black holes, nature has already been harmlessly producing them right over our heads. Early estimates by Giddings and Thomas indicated that the highest-energy cosmic rays--protons or heavier atomic nuclei with energies of up to 109 TeV--could produce as many as 100 black holes in the atmosphere a year.
Click to expand...

"Black holes are the dark and massive pirates of interstellar space."
- Nature

Sources:

I recommend reading the article from Scientific American at the end of the list.

https://home.cern/resources/faqs/will-cern-generate-black-hole
https://angelsanddemons.web.cern.ch/faq/black-hole.html
https://home.cern/science/accelerators/large-hadron-collider/safety-lhc
https://indico.cern.ch/event/19360/attachments/279276/390527/Randall.pdf
https://phys.org/news/2015-03-mini-black-holes-lhc-parallel.html
https://www.nature.com/articles/news011004-8
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/artic...limit-the-threshold-that-makes-life-possible/
https://www.space.com/5191-smallest-black-hole.html#:~:text=massmeasurement could help shed light,that produces a neutron star.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/quantum-black-holes-2007-04/
 
Last edited:
Asa said:
Oh, yay! Thanks for this thread.

Also, My FIL used to work at CERN.
Click to expand...
Would love to have him add to the thread discussion one day.
giphy.gif
 
Chickensoup said:
I’m glad micro-black holes are theoretically harmless :tearsofjoy:. Can CERN artificially make one, or would it only be accidental?
Click to expand...
If they would make one it wouldn't be accidental. But it's extremely hard to make one, as are any experiment in these facilities. You can compare it a bit like throwing a dart in the dark a couple million/billion times, hoping it would hit
the hidden balloon. You'd hear it pop, record the pop and hope that the pop would carry enough information to actually describe that balloon. Oh and the balloon is theoretical, perhaps partly hidden in another dimension.

No problem Asa, understandable.
 
Chickensoup said:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-black-hole-information-paradox-comes-to-an-end-20201029/

This is exciting. This resolves the paradox of quantum entanglements and theorizes a new kind of space in black holes. I like the idea of paired-bonds holding.
Click to expand...
Nice article

But almost everyone appears to agree on one thing. In some way or other, space-time itself seems to fall apart at a black hole, implying that space-time is not the root level of reality, but an emergent structure from something deeper. Although Einstein conceived of gravity as the geometry of space-time, his theory also entails the dissolution of space-time, which is ultimately why information can escape its gravitational prison.
Click to expand...

This in particular seems interesting.

In August 2019 Almheiri and another set of colleagues took the next step and turned their attention to the radiation. They found that the black hole and its emitted radiation both follow the same Page curve, so that information must be transferred from one to the other. The calculation does not say how it is transferred, only that it is.

As part of the work, they discovered that the universe undergoes a baffling rearrangement. At the outset, the black hole is at the center of space and the radiation is flying out. But after enough time has passed, the equations say, particles deep inside the black hole are no longer part of the hole anymore, but part of the radiation. They have not flown outward, but simply been reassigned.

This is significant because these interior particles would ordinarily contribute to the entanglement entropy between the black hole and the radiation. If they are not part of the black hole anymore, they no longer contribute to the entropy, explaining why it begins to decrease.

The authors dubbed the inner core of radiation the “island” and called its existence “surprising.” What does it mean for particles to be in the black hole, but not of the black hole? In confirming that information is retained, the physicists eliminated one puzzle only to create an even bigger one. Whenever I asked Almheiri and others what it meant, they looked off into the distance, momentarily lost for words.
Click to expand...

Baffling

Sidenote: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-03883-9
 
Last edited:
Sandie33 said:
Entanglement. ... I'm thinking a term for 'it's complicated'.
This was inciteful.
Click to expand...
Good video :)

As I could describe it:

Quantum entanglement is the shared characteristics between 2 entangled particles when they form an entangled state. Together they share "all" information to describe themselves in this entangled state. So when you move the particles away from each other, they each will keep part of that entangled state with them.

In other words, they will both share a part of "all" information. So when you look into the characteristics of one particle A. You can discover the characteristics of the other B by deducing ("all entangled information" - "the information of the particle A"). So let's say particle A has a 70% chance of being spin-up, that'll mean the remain 30% chance will be on particle B, so it will probably be spin-down. - Very roughly described.

The key is the entangled state. Which makes it very interesting in regards to Black Holes. Entangled particles that radiate out of black holes, share information of their entangled counterpart that's hidden inside the Black Hole of this state. So we can read what's happening inside the event horizon by reading the radiated particles.

It's all about Alice's Box and what she has put in it. Bob knows. It's quite an entangled situation.
 
I'm amazed the conspiracy theory people haven't added this to their list of suspicions. They must have been distracted by the election (or is it fraudulent?) and the pandemic (or is it a hoax?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top