LHC's Latest Particle Collisions Find What May Be A New Form Of Matter

That's typical, before some idiots blow themselves to pieces, there is always one pointing out that something *strange* is happening ... and than bam, it's too late.

Check out the Darwin Awards : www.darwinawards.com

I wish some scientists were less egoistic and curious, so they would stop this type of nonsensical research, 'cause they might very well ignite matter on a sub-atomic level with their mega collider, and set of some sort of chain reaction.

Humanoids they have got absolutely no clue about what they're doing to our blue planet : /

@Chelle12

So you actually want all atomic science to stop because you are ignorant of what it takes to create a massive explosion...

They didn't do anything stupid to begin with. They just noticed a pattern that has never been investigated before.

I hope you ignite your own bodily manner on a sub-atomic level.

Emulating the big bang, entangled particles? Does this mean that the expansion of the universe potentially occurred in a predictable way? Do we have an entangled pair on the opposite end of the universe, do I?

@haywall

Yes, I want atomic science to stop, who doesn't want it to stop is the ignorant one.

... and yes they are doing *the dumb* to begin with; these collisions are compared to cosmic ray collisions in nature for safety measures, but the experiment is hardly the same and unique in the Universe. The frequency and density numbers differ immensely:

In nature there are about a thousand Cosmic ray collisions of a few GeV’s (1 GeV= 10^9 electron Volt) per second per m^2. In LHC it are about one 1 billion per second per cm^2. That’s 1.000.000 times more for an area which is 10.000 smaller, it is a density & frequency difference of 10 billion.

By the end of this year we humans are going to generate collisions on this planet, that are even 1000 times more intense, with energies of 8 TeV (1 TeV= 10^12 eV). These collisions are in nature even less frequent per m^2 while the density & frequency at the LHC of 10 billion per cm^2 is maintained.

--

Here is a quote from the MIT article:

"Those heavy-ion collisions produce a wave of quark gluon plasma, the hot soup of particles that existed for the first few millionths of a second after the Big Bang. In the collider, this wave sweeps some of the resulting particles in the same direction, accounting for the correlation in their flight paths."

Now keep in mind that the density & frequency is 10.000.000 times above the High energy Cosmic rays in nature; and think how you can't ignite a fire with a few pieces of wood rubbing against each other, but with a much higher frequency and density, causing much more friction you can; or how sunlight will not start a forest fire, unless you use a magnifying glass and bundle all the photons into one spot, artificially creating a density & frequency that is much higher than normal. Well the LHC bundles all this energy into one specific spot, that is surrounded by atoms made out of sub-atomic particles, so why shouldn't they be combustable due to these sweeping waves?

@ Chelle12
I'm sorry cosmic rays are very different than what's going on at the LHC. They are controlled experiments, from professional scientists. It's very laughable that you think that the LHC can bring harm since they shoot protons at each other. A fire can't start on a piece of wood in fractions of milliseconds, the size smaller than atoms.
Do you even know what combustible means? And the difference between a combustible and an explosive? Who compares them to cosmic rays? cosmic rays typically include more than one or two pieces of matter. The experiments done use predetermined matter, chosen by the scientists, at speeds, also chosen.
This is done for data, not to blow stuff up. And if your one of the nuts that thinks their going to make a black hole, well, maybe you need to learn more about the science going on before jumping to crackpot ideas.

@killbot, NASA has used its super computer to predict the current universe from what we believed happened at the big bang. The simulation was over 99% correct, from what i saw of the article.

@Wick25u

I know the science behind this project very well thank you; and no I don't think a black hole could come out of these collisions; in that case Cosmic rays are a very good analogy for safety.

Combustion or explosive doesn't make any difference, just think of an internal combustion engine and the explosions that are the driving force. It is about composites losing their composure, and releasing energy, this can be slow process or an explosive one, just like nuclear fission or fusion can be explosive or controlled.

What you need to look at is, that by colliding protons just like cosmic ray collision in nature, that you are smashing them apart. In an absolute empty vacuum every collision stands on it's one but the vacuum is in reality filled with a lot of other things; Dirac sea with particles popping in and out existence, the now confirmed Higgs Field, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, SpaceTime (ether). So when you're continuously shaking up this Vacuum, you actually might have the possibility that you are also shaking up al the atoms surrounding the collision spot with a frequency & density that is 10^9 higher than for cosmic rays. Thus you might start to shake atoms so forcefully that they start to break apart (combust) instead of colliding them to pieces. And very similar to how the ignition in a combustion engine makes the fuel explode, by adding intense sparks and releasing all the embedded energy.

btw here's a table of temperatures, so you get an idea of what we are talking about:
http://tinyurl.com/temperature-list

@ D13; I went and read the news from the MIT site, and they describe a brief occurrence of what appear to be new, higher energy state particles, given off in the proton vs Pb ion collisions. These particles seem to be moving in some correlated manner, but it's too early to know if this is a quantum entanglement or pairing of new type.

I find their speculation about a muon 'color glass condensate' interesting. So what are the correlations between this GSC and a Bose-Einstein Condensate? Differences? One of those might hold the key to sustainable fusion. Do any of these particles escape containment? Because that's what we need, right? We need to get something, or some reaction, past the magnetic confinement and we know it's not neutrons...at least not so far. Would a 'CGC' act as one particle? Lens?

@Chelle12

So what your saying is that the the sticks rubbing together is like the LHC, and the surrounding atoms are like oxygen that will ignite when enough heat is generated?

And this will do what exactly? Blow surrounding atoms apart -starting a chain reaction of other atoms blowing each other apart?

I'm sorry but that makes no sense.

@derlange

Yes, that's the idea, and it makes perfect sense. When you look at nature such a type of process happens everywhere and all the time. So when you're doing a safety analysis, you should certainly think about what would happen if there is a mediator, transferring a part of the generated friction. For nuclear fission and fusion you are dealing with processes on a Atomic level, whereby there is a far higher energy release than at a chemical level, and for atoms you have many configurations. On a sub-atomic level, they are all the same protons with 3 Quarks and gluons keeping it all together. It is also now a known fact that these protons get their mass due to connections with the Higgs-field, so what if you are disturbing this Higgs-field so often, at one location, that the connection of the protons with the Higgs-field is disturbed and Atoms no longer function like they should. Here you come in a situation that might look like a candle burning, heat shaking up the wax turning it into a gas etc. etc.

Like I said, if there is no medium (absolute vacuum) than you're 100% safe; but if you have one, than this is something that you can't just ignore, and certainly not with these temperatures that are 100.000 hotter than the core of our Sol, this isn't just some child-splay, although some like think of it as this way, by comparing it to a mosquito. But one very small sting of such a small thing and your metabolism stats to be disturbed, your body temperatures rises and start to decompose. I know it sounds stupid but that's how nature works, so what is the reason that we are on this planet and developing this kind of machine … When I look at the images of the Hubble telescope , I see many types of Supernovae, who says that one of them is induced by a population like ours, digging deeper and deeper until the win the ultimate Darwin Award.

btw you know that all the weapons build that have been build over time, where all made to destroy competing people like you and me, it's in our genes … an appetite of (self)destruction. It's a pattern you shouldn't ignore.

When this new material becomes absolute prove true, I suppose then it will be a matter of fact!

Ba dum dum...

@Chelle12

"Combustion or explosive doesn't make any difference, just think of an internal combustion engine and the explosions that are the driving force. It is about composites losing their composure, and releasing energy, this can be slow process or an explosive one, just like nuclear fission or fusion can be explosive or controlled."

Combustion is a specific type of oxidation reaction. How could this possibly be related to the LHC turning into a bomb?

"I know the science behind this project very well thank you"

Umm...

"... Higgs Field, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, SpaceTime (ether)..."

SpaceTime (ether)?

If you don't know that the SpaceTime "fabric" is just a method of visualisation and not a physical thing then you clearly haven't progressed past sitcom physics. Not to mention that ether is sudoscience from the sixteen hundreds at it's worst.

"Yes, that's the idea, and it makes perfect sense. When you look at nature such a type of process happens everywhere and all the time. So when you're doing a safety analysis, you should certainly think about what would happen if there is a mediator, transferring a part of the generated friction."

Friction on an atomic level... I can't even begin to explain how silly this is in context.

" But one very small sting of such a small thing and your metabolism stats to be disturbed, your body temperatures rises and start to decompose"

As a biology student I find the idea that a few degrees difference starts decomposition to by laughable. Decomposition in corpses is caused by bacteria, not some spontaneous phenomena caused by a few degrees temperature difference. That kind of change isn't even enough to cause the denaturing of protein, let alone your bodies more stable compounds. Don't spread misinformation on subjects you don't even begin to understand.

@ neoneum; Ok then, can you tell me a reason why The Big Reason We Die couldn't be that we lose a battle against this specific bacterium or group of invasive organisms? Are they in us before death?

@ neonium; I'm just thinking on the temperature requirement for bacteria. We classify them as distinct. What if they aren't? What if there is a group that adapted that are all basically the same, but have adapted by type to different temperatures of the human life cycle? To the point now where they exist still, but are being broken down by temperature variance as the body grows to physical peak, and then, by type all grow stronger as we grow weaker? Take the stem cell. Is it a good possibility to consider that one or more bacteria could be killing our ability to make them? Our skin, for example, is to some greater or lesser degree, host to many bacteria. Where do they live? Often in polyp zones, brainstem, and on the scalp. Feet. All places we cover, providing a nice cozy temp as you alluded to. No air and no UV. Those inside us, we like to say are harmless or even helpful. If they were our size and staring us in the face we wouldn't think so, so why would we now?

@neonium

• "Combustion is a specific type of oxidation reaction. How could this possibly be related to the LHC turning into a bomb?"

Of course it wouldn't be the same way as a regular fire, I'm pointing out that by adding energy to a composite, you could start a process where by it starts releasing it's energy. Just like it are heat vibrations for a candle help the fire ignite, and for a combustion engine it are sparks, and for Nuclear fission it's the addition of a neutron that causes the Uranium atoms to split, and release energy.

Here I'm pointing out that the collisions a could generate waves in a medium, shaking the Atoms apart, just like how sound waves can start to break a glass when the volume is increased.

--

• "If you don't know that the SpaceTime "fabric" is just a method of visualisation and not a physical thing then you clearly haven't progressed past sitcom physics. Not to mention that ether is sudoscience from the sixteen hundreds at it's worst."

Honestly, I believe that its you who has got some catching up, Aether was one of the main discussion points in physics at the second half of the 19th century and into the beginning of the 20th century. Note Maxwell equations where based on the concept of an Aether, once he had his formulae working he left the idea because it was no longer needed. A second point is that you should have a look at this quote from Einstein:

“Thus, once again ,,empty” space appears as endowed with physical properties, i.e., no longer as physically empty, as seemed to be the case according to special relativity. One can thus say that the ether is resurrected in the general theory of relativity, though in a more sublimated form.”
A. Einstein, Grundgedanken und Methoden der Relativitatstheorie in ihrer Entwicklung dargestellt, (Morgan Manuscript) Einstein Archives 2070.

--

• "Friction on an atomic level... I can't even begin to explain how silly this is in context."

It's not about *silly* ... I believe you haven't got a clue about how the Higgs mechanism works, you might want to read up on it.

--

• "As a biology student I find the idea that a few degrees difference starts decomposition to by laughable. Decomposition in corpses is caused by bacteria, not some spontaneous phenomena caused by a few degrees temperature difference."

Decompose, it's a matter of how you interpret the word, I see it as losing it's composition,

These are two description from the dictionary:
- "cause (something) to decay or rot : dead plant matter can be completely decomposed by microorganisms."
- "(of a chemical compound) break down into component elements or simpler constituents : many chemicals decompose rapidly under high temperature."

You can also check this on Wiki: "Blackwater fever is a complication of malaria in which red blood cells burst in the bloodstream (hemolysis), releasing hemoglobin directly into the blood vessels and into the urine, frequently leading to kidney failure."

--

• "Don't spread misinformation on subjects you don't even begin to understand."

I don't.

@Chelle12

I agree with you that people are concerned with the direction of research. I do not agree with you however, that atomic ( subatomic ) research in this case should stop, or that they are dumb as you say.

We as a species are here today because of dumb research. Your ability to post on this forum is because of dumb research.

I personally believe that quantum mechanics and particle physics is due for a makeover. It will lead to the development of the technology that will allow us to traverse space, use and energy more efficiently and possibly understand our role in the cosmos (regardless of how miniscule that may be)

Would it not be better if we could find a way to power our blue planet in a less primitive manner? Or understand gravitation such that we do not need to be blasting rockets with chemical power?

Understand that what I am saying is that research provides us with opportunity to learn, and the only way to learn is to do. Otherwise we have philosophers that postulate that the earth is flat and that ll living things emerge from pangenesis.

:)

@Chelle12

But if a "spark" at the sub atomic level "ignites surrounding atoms, how does that continue to ignite surrounding atoms?

I think your describing a nuclear explosion... which at the end of the day does not continue to blow up surrounding atoms.

And why do you think distorting the higgs field is always happening in the same location or has any effect at all for that matter. Technically the LHC is in a new location every time as the world turns, and circles the sun and the sun circles the galaxy etc, etc, etc

@imotep,

• "I do not agree with you however, that atomic ( subatomic ) research in this case should stop, or that they are dumb as you say."

The point of doing research is because we are dumb to start with, as always the unknown is exciting, we want to know how something works, who's doing it with who etc. we just want to be smart. Anyway for the LHC there is a safety report considering BlackHoles and Strangelets, but the most common risk factor of shaking up atoms isn't discussed, why isn't this subject critically looked at, and why do we completely ignore the fact that the frequency and density of the collisions is ten billion times higher than in nature? btw here is the report if you want to have a look at it:

http://lsag.web.cern.ch/lsag/LSAG-Report.pdf

It doesn't mention the possible fact of transmitting energy through a medium, and yes there is no light carrying medium (luminiferous aether), but there is a medium, empty space is full of stuff and one element or property of it is the HiggsField, and is *connected* to matter. It's just like Einstein mentioned: "One can thus say that the ether is resurrected in the general theory of relativity, though in a more sublimated form."

--

• "Would it not be better if we could find a way to power our blue planet in a less primitive manner? Or understand gravitation such that we do not need to be blasting rockets with chemical power?"

Yes, but we're not going to find these answers with particle collisions going beyond what we already know now. There is no energy source coming out of these collisions; and like I suggested, the only way that energy would come out of it, is by shaking sub-atomic particles lose, so they would bust open, but how could you contain such a reaction … when all atoms are made out the same stuff?

And for gravity it is a known fact that you can't build any particle collider that is powerful enough to detect a graviton. So there is a lot of daydreaming going on in your head about the functionality about this project.

The technology of the LHC is pretty impressive, and its an amazing drive for science, but that doesn't mean that you couldn't get an undesired result at some point. Everybody who does research get's to be confronted at some point with some negative consequences, and for all projects on this planet you can work in quarantine, and analyze the situation perfectly, no worries. But for reactions on a sub-atomic level there is no boundary, unless you go far enough in space were there is no longer any matter to be found.

--

• "Understand that what I am saying is that research provides us with opportunity to learn, and the only way to learn is to do."

The question is, can we be eternally optimistic. It's like doing drugs its all fun until you over dose, it's about knowing your limits. Sure you can test everything on a bunch of guinea pigs but on a sub-atomic level we're all the same on this planet, there are no boundaries. And at the end of the day the outcome of a scientific project is simply indifferent; not good nor bad, just a the result.

@derlange

• "But if a "spark" at the sub atomic level "ignites surrounding atoms, how does that continue to ignite surrounding atoms?"

Volume and density. The sparks that combust the injected gasoline in your car's motor depends on concentration and intensity, same goes for nuclear fission, water is used to control the mechanism. In a grain of sand there are already a couple of quintillion atoms, so figure out the proton density surrounding the collision center. It would be a matter of surpassing a threshold level, and the vibrations would strike all the protons within close range of the collision center, and disturb their mechanisms, so they would al would bust at once, like an earthquakes can strike a whole city, the output of sub-atomic particles would be immense, and could go only outwards shaking up the medium as heavily as the initial ignition and hitting the next line of atoms and so on, one big explosion.

--

• "I think your describing a nuclear explosion... which at the end of the day does not continue to blow up surrounding atoms."

No, I'm not describing a nuclear explosion, that's an event that happens when the core of atoms break apart, or are fused it's an other level. And for that 'level' all types of atoms are composed differently, and we know exactly how much energy it takes to break them up. And it are the heavy unstable elements that are used as a fuel, so we know there is no risk.

But on a sub-atomic level all matter in our Solar system is build up out of Protons and Neutrons, at this level we are all the same, with an inner mechanism/interaction of Quarks and Gluons. We know exactly what power it takes to smash these protons apart, there is no risk there, but can you also shake them apart, how strong is the bonding with the Higgs field?

Here you also need to look at side effects, we're adding up a manny little collisions in very short frequency, and concentrated it one very small spot. The reference with cosmic rays in nature no longer holds. What would you say if I shook your hand 1 time per second versus 10 billion times during that second, frequency and density do make a difference.

--

• "And why do you think distorting the Higgs field is always happening in the same location or has any effect at all for that matter. Technically the LHC is in a new location every time ..."

Because the place of the medium that transfers the collision energy is irrelevant; the collisions center moves along with the area that surrounds it, them two are related. Imagine having a group of cars riding on a highway and the one in the middle puts on a siren, than you'll hear the noise in all those cars even though the air in-between is constantly different, as is the location of the group of cars. Now imagine turning up the noise being so loud (frequency & density) that it starts breaking your eardrums, and all the bolts in your car start to be shaken lose … while all the molecules that make up the air molecules stay just the same, there're only mediators. Everything acts on its level: Molecules - Atoms (Electrons/Protons/Neutrons) - Sub atomic (Quarks/Gluons) - Medium (Higgs field/DarkMatter/DarkEnergy/SpaceTime).

@derlange

I forgot to mention, between the 'Sub atomic' and the 'Medium' there is a connection, the Higgs mechanism:

"According to this theory, particles gain mass by interacting with the Higgs field that permeates all space. More precisely, the Higgs mechanism endows gauge bosons in a gauge theory with mass through absorption of Nambu–Goldstone bosons arising in spontaneous symmetry breaking." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_mechanism

in order to thank everyone, characteristic, novel style, varieties, low price and good quality, and the low sale price. Thank everyone

http://al.ly/_9v

http://al.ly/_9v

http://al.ly/_9v

http://al.ly/_9v

│＼＿╭╭╭╭╭＿／│ 　
　│　　　　　　　　　│＼｜／ 　
　│　●　　　　　●　│—☆— 　
　│○　╰┬┬┬╯　○│／｜＼ 　
　│　　　╰—╯　　　／ 　
　╰—┬○————┬○╯ 　
　　╭│　　　　　│╮ 　
　　╰┴—————┴╯

Once again proof of the fact that there's no upper or lower physical limit for the size of particles. Only for the humanely visible. And, I'm afraid, that's very, very limited.