CERN
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:02 AM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
It was mentioned on "Mock the Week" this week that the chances of the CERN Large Hadron Collider, the largest particle accelator in the world, causing a black hole is 1 in 50,000,000.
Interesitngly, you are more likely to burn to death while you sleep (1 in 48,000,000), be murdered (1 in 30,000,000), die in a plane crash (1 in 11,000,000), be struck by lightning (1 in 10,000,000), be struck by an asteroid (1 in 6,000,000), drown in the bath (1 in 685,000) or die today (1 in 257,000).
However, death by black hole is more likely than chocking to death (1 in 120,000,000), falling coconuts (1 in 250,000,000) or shark attacks (1 in 300,000,000).
So, are you worried about CERN, or do you think it is just hype?
Wikipedia article about the Collider
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:06 AM GMT, Griff said:
If the people at CERN can destroy all of creation painlessly in a nanosecond I'm all for it.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:07 AM GMT, Ben said:
I'm not even remotely bothered about some hacky statistics.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:10 AM GMT, zooo said:
I've got a bad feeling about this.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:10 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Ian Wolf @ September 4 2008, 10:02 PM BST
die in a plane crash (1 in 11,000,000), be struck by lightning (1 in 10,000,000), be struck by an asteroid (1 in 6,000,000)
You are more likely to be struck by an asteroid than die in a plane crash or be struck by lightening? Are you sure about that? Can't remember anyone dying of incoming asteroid, but can remember quite a few plane crash and lightening victims!
QuoteSo, are you worried about CERN, or do you think it is just hype?
It has been blown out of all proportion beyond belief - very possibly the media doing some scare mongering.
Black holes are not all humongous, in theory there are lots around us but they're so small we don't notice them and they have no noticable effect.
If they made a black hole at CERN, it would be one of these. They would not have anything like the energy needed to produce something dangerous.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:13 AM GMT, Stan Doubt said:
I know they wouldn't do it if it was 1 in 50 million. I can't see anyone going - '1 in 50 million that it'll destroy the world? F**k it, I'm feeling lucky'. It's probably more like one in 50 billion.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:13 AM GMT, Ben said:
Do you remember in late 97ish that the media were convinced an asteroid was going to hit the earth and destroy it?
It missed by 800,000 miles. However, astronomically speaking, that's still a close shave.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:14 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
I hate all this kind of thing.
Just as I'm doing well, it'd be typical for the world to screw me over.
Quote: Winterlight @ September 4 2008, 10:13 PM BSTDo you remember in late 97ish that the media were convinced an asteroid was going to hit the earth and destroy it?
It missed by 800,000 miles. However, astronomically speaking, that's still a close shave.
Yeah. That's known as a 'Gillette' to NASA.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:16 AM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
Quote: ian_w @ September 4 2008, 10:10 PM BSTYou are more likely to be struck by an asteroid than die in a plane crash or be struck by lightening? Are you sure about that? Can't remember anyone dying of incoming asteroid, but can remember quite a few plane crash and lightening victims!
According to QI, you are more likely to be struck by an asteroid than being struck by lightning in the UK. A large asteroid strikes the Earth once every million years. The expected death-toll is to be in excess of 1 billion people. The chances of dying of an asteroid are therefore 1 in 6,000,000 in a year.
As far as plane crashs go, there are actually quite a lot, but for most of the time, no-one dies. So statistically, the chances of death in a plane crash are lowed.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:27 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Ian Wolf @ September 4 2008, 10:16 PM BSTAccording to QI, you are more likely to be struck by an asteroid than being struck by lightning in the UK. A large asteroid strikes the Earth once every million years. The expected death-toll is to be in excess of 1 billion people. The chances of dying of an asteroid are therefore 1 in 6,000,000 in a year.
As far as plane crashs go, there are actually quite a lot, but for most of the time, no-one dies. So statistically, the chances of death in a plane crash are lowed.
Hmm, but I just don't buy it - purely because I have heard cases of the other two, but never the asteroid thing. To me that suggests a greater likelihood of the first two happening.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:31 AM GMT, zooo said:
I'm with ian!
*edit*
(ha! erm. didn't do that on purpose.)
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:35 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: zooo @ September 4 2008, 10:31 PM BSTI'm with ian!
*edit*
(ha! erm. didn't do that on purpose.)
Ian W, or Ian W?
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 1:37 AM GMT, zooo said:
Well, precisely. 
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 2:35 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Seefacts @ September 4 2008, 10:14 PM BSTYeah. That's known as a 'Gillette' to NASA.
Very good.Quote: zooo @ September 4 2008, 10:10 PM BSTI've got a bad feeling about this.
Ditto.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 2:37 AM GMT, zooo said:
Only 5 days now!
Till we all DIE.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 2:56 AM GMT, Stan Doubt said:
Anyone else going to use this as a *fantastic* pulling line this weekend? Not only is it an excuse for easy sex, but it's also a way to filter out people that don't keep up with current events. An important factor in every one night stand.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:00 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: zooo @ September 4 2008, 11:37 PM BSTOnly 5 days now!
Till we all DIE.
*hugs zooo*Quote: Stan Doubt @ September 4 2008, 11:56 PM BSTit's also a way to filter out people that don't keep up with current events. An important factor in every one night stand.
Haha!
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:36 AM GMT, sootyj said:
Well if it makes you feel any better the Sooryj-mega-deathray should be ready by Monday afternoon latest.
Here it's destroying my local kebab shop after they ran out of red cabage.
And here's Kebabylon afterwards.
Tenby will be first to be reaped.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 11:44 AM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
Quote: ian_w @ September 4 2008, 10:27 PM BSTHmm, but I just don't buy it - purely because I have heard cases of the other two, but never the asteroid thing. To me that suggests a greater likelihood of the first two happening.
Well, you are more likely to be struck by lightning in America, but in the UK, you are more likely to be struck by an asteroid. I'm guessing it is because the UK is smaller.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 11:53 AM GMT, Frankie Rage said:
It's OK I think they're going to fix it so only foriegners die.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 12:01 PM GMT, Sofa Matt said:
Quote: Frankie Rage @ September 5 2008, 8:53 AM BSTIt's OK I think they're going to fix it so only foriegners die.
Yes, I heard that Frankie. Trouble is CERN is based in Geneva, so I'm guessing (to them) most of us are 'foreigners' here
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 12:06 PM GMT, sootyj said:
I think the irony of the neutral chocolate gobbling Swiss accidentally annihilating them selves is marvelous.
I'm going to write a sketch just in case they do.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 12:07 PM GMT, Frankie Rage said:
Mmm it would have been better if they had built this thing in Yorkshire. We have plenty of unused old pits courtesy Mags. There's another skit in there somewhere.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 12:18 PM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
If they did build in Yorkshire and it a black hole was made, at least they would be happy that Lancashire would be destroyed.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 12:20 PM GMT, Sofa Matt said:
It obviously says a lot about the people from that part of the world. They dont mind that the world is going to end as long as they (Yorkshire) go first! Numpties
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 12:23 PM GMT, Frankie Rage said:
Quote: Ian Wolf @ September 5 2008, 9:18 AM BSTIf they did build in Yorkshire and it a black hole was made, at least they would be happy that Lancashire would be destroyed.
I thought it had been. We don't usually mention it.
Quote: Sofa_Matt @ September 5 2008, 9:20 AM BSTIt obviously says a lot about the people from that part of the world. They dont mind that the world is going to end as long as they (Yorkshire) go first! Numpties
There are only two types of people. Yorkshirefolk ..and numpties!
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 12:24 PM GMT, Tim Walker said:
From as much as I can understand about quantum physics, should a black hole/expansion particle event occur, it would split away into a parallel dimension and we would be none the wiser... I think?
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 12:26 PM GMT, swerytd said:
I really hope it doesn't, as I'm pretty sure our disaster recovery site is less than 500 billion miles away!
<sound of one techie laughing in background over tumbleweed>
Dan
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 2:49 PM GMT, SlagA said:
I see Ian Wolf's points with the stats. We're talking the 'potential' chance. Although incredibly rare an asteroid strike has more potential than lightning to cause large scale death. I think someone once worked out the chances of being killed by a falling fridge in Norwich. It probaby hasn't happened but the potential aways exists.
As to the experiment creating events to which we're none the wiser (calving black holes ino parallel universes), it strikes me as a pretty poorly designed experiment when it culminates in a lot of perplexed shrugging gestures at the end of it. However, it sounds a typically European ending.
I don't think it'll end with the end of the universe... yet. But what does it say about us as a species that we're prepared to play with things that might destroy not just the planet but the fabric of space-time and it seems of little importance?
I hope we never get off this planet as the rest of the universe doesn't deserve to have us inflicted on it.
Re: Matter and the 'missing' matter. The fact that everything carries mass unexplained by the actual amount of matter we can see. I read one analogy to describe the huge gulfs within an atom: if you remove the interactive forces, people could walk through walls without a single atom (electrons and nuclei) of the wall or the person colliding. Some particles (is it Hadrons, someone?) can pass through the planet without collision with anything solid. We are in a way insubstantial ghosts living in a ghostlike universe where consciousness seems incredibly important in deciding outcome.
I think also that they're looking for the hidden mass of the universe in the wrong place. The true mass is not contained within yet-to-be-discovered sub-atomic particles but more likely within the higher dimensions (at the last count there were eleven) that extend beyond and yet permeate our 3-D world. Although we feel its effects in this plane we are incapable of percieving or understanding those other dimensions. It's like inhabitants within an oil painting trying to explain and understand air pressure from outside rippling the canvass. They live in a 2D world so they're incapable of understanding a gust of wind that originates from the 3D world. They're incapable of fully comprehending the room the painting hangs in, let alone the nature of gas, and the physics of the third (and higher) dimensions. In a 2-D world they would experience gravity between objects within the painting but they couldn't explain the much more massive gravity that the Earth would exert on every object within the painting. There would be a hidden mass that they can't explain.
Personally in my cookie little belief system, I think they'll open something they can't shut. I hope not.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:24 PM GMT, Jonathan21 said:
This:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM
Is my favourite thing ever.
I can't believe the chances of wiping out all life on earth is as low as 50 million.... statistically that means that switching the thing on is the equivalent of killing 120 people.
Nevertheless, I LOVE this machine.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:29 PM GMT, Curt said:
Can't wait for the outcome of the experiment! Well...not the dieing part...but what they'll learn when the project succeeds.
I'm trying to be an optimist these days. 
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:31 PM GMT, Gavin said:
Thats brilliant!
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:49 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
It's all down to understanding the statistics. A 1 in 50 million chance of creating a black hole does not mean that the black hole will definitely destroy the entire planet. If a black hole is created, it will most likely be microscopic and evaporate almost instantly (look up Hawking radiation).
SlagA - you might be right with your multidimensional theory. One of the theories about why gravity is so weak is that it acts across all of the 11 or so theoretical spatial dimensions. It is weak in the three we experience because they have spread out. The other 8 dimensions are supposed to be all curled up tight so we can't see them, in which case gravity would work more strongly there. The Higgs Boson may well come from one of these other dimensions if String/Superstring/M- theories are correct. what the LHC will detect will be the string/membrane's extrusion into the three normal spatial dimensions.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:52 PM GMT, Tim Walker said:
My brain hurts!
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:55 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
I don't want to dieeeeeeeeee! *wails*
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:56 PM GMT, sootyj said:
Well atleast we'll be able to see France sucked to it's doom a few seconds before us.
What happens if we're all reincarnated as each other?
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:57 PM GMT, Gavin said:
No ones gonna die. It'll be fine, I looked over the plans.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:57 PM GMT, Tim Walker said:
Quote: EllieJP @ September 5 2008, 12:55 PM BSTI don't want to dieeeeeeeeee! *wails*
Better take shelter under the table. With a bag on your head or something.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:57 PM GMT, Gavin said:
Quote: sootyj @ September 5 2008, 12:56 PM BSTWell atleast we'll be able to see France sucked to it's doom a few seconds before us.
Thats why we put it there
Quote: Tim Walker @ September 5 2008, 12:57 PM BSTBetter take shelter under the table. With a bag on your head or something.
Duck n Cover.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 3:59 PM GMT, sootyj said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEP6wVSN_Ks&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXx5Y2Fr2bk
Can't hurt I'm still living in my fallout room.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 4:41 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: sootyj @ September 5 2008, 12:56 PM BSTWell atleast we'll be able to see France sucked to it's doom a few seconds before us.
Prezunctly.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:47 PM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 5 2008, 11:49 AM BST
As to the experiment creating events to which we're none the wiser (calving black holes ino parallel universes), it strikes me as a pretty poorly designed experiment when it culminates in a lot of perplexed shrugging gestures at the end of it. However, it sounds a typically European ending.
I think they do half the things they do because they can
. They probably have a meeting after the experiment has been organised to vote on a reason for it.Quote
I hope we never get off this planet as the rest of the universe doesn't deserve to have us inflicted on it.
LOL
Quote
Re: Matter and the 'missing' matter. The fact that everything carries mass unexplained by the actual amount of matter we can see. I read one analogy to describe the huge gulfs within an atom: if you remove the interactive forces, people could walk through walls without a single atom (electrons and nuclei) of the wall or the person colliding. Some particles (is it Hadrons, someone?) can pass through the planet without collision with anything solid. We are in a way insubstantial ghosts living in a ghostlike universe where consciousness seems incredibly important in deciding outcome.
I thought it was muons passing through us, but I forget too.
Interesting to see just how much of an atom is empty space. I think someone said that if the nucleas was the size of a pea you'd have to walk half a mile down the road to get to the nearest electron. That's a LOT of empty space - ghostlike indeed! And yeah, electomagnetism is amazing, like so much in the universe.
Quote
It's like inhabitants within an oil painting trying to explain and understand air pressure from outside rippling the canvass. They live in a 2D world so they're incapable of understanding a gust of wind that originates from the 3D world. They're incapable of fully comprehending the room the painting hangs in, let alone the nature of gas, and the physics of the third (and higher) dimensions. In a 2-D world they would experience gravity between objects within the painting but they couldn't explain the much more massive gravity that the Earth would exert on every object within the painting. There would be a hidden mass that they can't explain.
I really like that analogy, really nice! Is it your own?
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 5 2008, 12:49 PM BSTIf a black hole is created, it will most likely be microscopic and evaporate almost instantly (look up Hawking radiation).
I don't think anyone is listening/wants to listen.
QuoteSlagA - you might be right with your multidimensional theory. One of the theories about why gravity is so weak is that it acts across all of the 11 or so theoretical spatial dimensions. It is weak in the three we experience because they have spread out. The other 8 dimensions are supposed to be all curled up tight so we can't see them, in which case gravity would work more strongly there. The Higgs Boson may well come from one of these other dimensions if String/Superstring/M- theories are correct. what the LHC will detect will be the string/membrane's extrusion into the three normal spatial dimensions.
I really hope they find at least some evidence to support string theory - even a vanishing graviton would be a huge boost.
I find membranes a bit scary though, it makes you think where the hell does it all stop? But then universes with their very own physical laws, there would be some real, incomprehensible wonders out there.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:48 PM GMT, Aaron said:
ian's brain is the size of the universe.
TRUFAX.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:49 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Tim Walker @ September 5 2008, 12:57 PM BSTBetter take shelter under the table. With a bag on your head or something.
You must have a 'Protect & Survive' tucked away somewhere?!
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:52 PM GMT, sootyj said:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=protect+and+survive&search_type=&aq=f
I keep telling you people they're all available on line.
Well I'll be in in my inner sanctum under a table, shitting in a bucket and laughing at you.
As you get evaporated by a giant black hole monster.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:54 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
At least nobody will be around to set up a Facebook page for Ellie.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:54 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Quote: ian_w @ September 5 2008, 4:39 PM BST
I really like that analogy, really nice! Is it your own?
I borrowed from an old 70s experiment where they created a 2-d world with animals, houses, people. And there was an old turn-of-century novel about a 2-d world of circles visited by a 3-d sphere. It tries to convince them it's 3-d but they only see the sphere as a 2-d circle like themselves. One of the circles breaks out with the sphere into the 3-d world and sees the true nature of its universe and its confines. I transferred the idea over to a painting for some pieces I incorporated into a novel. But the analogy about wind and gravity as having effects from outside a universe's dimensions I bolted in myself.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:55 PM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 5 2008, 4:48 PM BSTian's brain is the size of the universe.
TRUFAX.
Ha!
I just read a lot - more geekiness than anything else. People like Afinkawan probably actually understand the equations that allow for the layman's, real-world explanations I am ingesting.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:56 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Af?
Ah.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:56 PM GMT, sootyj said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 5 2008, 4:54 PM BSTI borrowed from an old 70s experiment where they created a 2-d world with animals, houses, people. And there was an old turn-of-century novel about a 2-d world of circles visited by a 3-d sphere. It tries to convince them it's 3-d but they only see the sphere as a 2-d circle like themselves. One of the circles breaks out with the sphere into the 3-d world and sees the true nature of its universe and its confines. I transferred the idea over to a painting for some pieces I incorporated into a novel. But the analogueies about wind and gravity as having effects from outside a universe's dimensions I bolted in myself.
The Flat Lander novels, lots of mad ideas. A Circle from a 2D world visits a 1D world and people think he's really thin, oh and circuit boards are enormous.
On surviving the Black Hole, the original Duck and Cover
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK2UZ3YTLIY&feature=related
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 7:59 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Flat lander - that's it. Cheers, Soot.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 8:01 PM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 5 2008, 4:54 PM BSTI borrowed from an old 70s experiment where they created a 2-d world with animals, houses, people. And there was an old turn-of-century novel about a 2-d world of circles visited by a 3-d sphere. It tries to convince them it's 3-d but they only see the sphere as a 2-d circle like themselves. One of the circles breaks out with the sphere into the 3-d world and sees the true nature of its universe and its confines. I transferred the idea over to a painting for some pieces I incorporated into a novel. But the analogy about wind and gravity as having effects from outside a universe's dimensions I bolted in myself.
Well it makes a great image and it's very thought-provoking. I'd love to read your novel I honestly would. Is it available to read anywhere? Btw, did anything come of it?
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 8:04 PM GMT, sootyj said:
Yes where is the Slagg novel?
It's got to be better than my follow upto Murder she Wrote.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 8:27 PM GMT, Aaron said:
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 8:43 PM GMT, Stan Doubt said:
Quote: Jonathan21 @ September 5 2008, 12:24 PM BSTThis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM
Is my favourite thing ever.
I can't believe the chances of wiping out all life on earth is as low as 50 million.... statistically that means that switching the thing on is the equivalent of killing 120 people.
Nevertheless, I LOVE this machine.
Wow, that's not too bad and totally accurate. We could could discover the Grand Unification Theory/Theory of Everything.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 8:56 PM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Stan Doubt @ September 5 2008, 5:43 PM BSTWow, that's not too bad and totally accurate. We could could discover the Grand Unification Theory/Theory of Everything.
And the most exciting thing of all is, just imagine the quality of the rap they could make from that!
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 10:28 PM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
It looks like CERN is the subject of comedy. This Wednesday a one-off comedy called The Genuine Particle written by Steve Punt which explores the actual possibility that CERN's Large Hadron Collider may result in the invention of time travel.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 10:33 PM GMT, Finck said:
It would be quite nice if that black hole only ate Switzerland, because I'd have a perfect view over the Mediterranean Sea then. The rent for my flat would probably go up, though...
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 10:41 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Ian Wolf @ September 5 2008, 7:28 PM BSTIt looks like CERN is the subject of comedy. This Wednesday a one-off comedy called The Genuine Particle written by Steve Punt which explores the actual possibility that CERN's Large Hadron Collider may result in the invention of time travel.
Oooo, now that I do approve of... But is the risk of killing every last one of us good enough? I mean, the French do die first...
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 10:52 PM GMT, Curt said:
to Sooty's new book. I look forward to reading it...perhaps with a paper bag hiding the books cover.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 11:09 PM GMT, Loopey said:
I have read Slagg A's novel - amazing.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 11:16 PM GMT, Curt said:
Yea I want to read his book but last time I checked it wasn't available in this country. "To Be or Not To be Innit" was though, I just haven't had a chance to crack it open yet.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 11:20 PM GMT, Loopey said:
I've read Martin's book too - what a talented lot we have on here. There is a website you can get Slagg's book from but I can't remember what it is now. You will have to ask him.
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 11:27 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Lulu.com?
On Friday 5th September 2008 GMT at 11:36 PM GMT, Loopey said:
Ah yes, that was it.
On Saturday 6th September 2008 GMT at 1:29 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Loopey @ September 5 2008, 8:20 PM BSTYou will have to ask him.
Well I did, but didn't get a response!
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 12:09 PM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
The guide for The Genuine Particle is now online.
http://www.comedy.co.uk/guide/radio/the_genuine_particle/
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 12:46 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
Quote: ian_w @ September 5 2008, 4:55 PM BSTPeople like Afinkawan probably actually understand the equations that allow for the layman's, real-world explanations I am ingesting.
Nope! I understand the concepts and am pretty good at dealing with the more abstract concepts involved but I definitely don't understand the actual equations! Physics is one of those subjects I absolutely love while it is explaining how the Universe works. I lose interest when it comes to all the sums to work out exactly how much it all works.
That's why I ended up in chemistry - not much maths, virtually all explanation of how things work.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 1:01 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Quote: Loopey @ September 5 2008, 8:09 PM BSTI have read SlagA's novel - amazing.
Cheers, Loopey.
Quote: ian_w @ September 5 2008, 10:29 PM BSTWell I did, but didn't get a response!
Book is in the post today.I didn't want it arriving before your birthday and spoiling your day.
Quote: Curt @ September 5 2008, 8:16 PM BSTYea I want to read his book
I'll sort one out for you. It's taking a worryingly long time to move from pre-proof to a proper home. And I'm beginning to think I need to source a new home for it but I like the guy who's sorting it ... that's always been my trouble - liking everyone too much. I need to learn some hate. I'm off to Critique for the morning.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 1:20 PM GMT, Frankie Rage said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 8 2008, 10:01 AM BST... that's always been my trouble - liking everyone too much. I need to learn some hate. I'm off to Critique for the morning.
Hate is not much use, but a good dash of disdain is very healthy, especially when addressed to the smug, pompous and/or arrogant!
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:21 PM GMT, Loopey said:
A Physicist I discussed this thread with made an interesting point:
'It is good that people are getting excited about science, shame we have to make it all so dramatic and scary for people to wonder just what things are made of again! What happened to curiosity and when did sensationalism take over!
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:30 PM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
Quote: Loopey @ September 8 2008, 6:21 PM BSTWhat happened to curiosity and when did sensationalism take over!
The sensationalism took over as soon as the media heard the words, "Create a black hole".
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:44 PM GMT, zooo said:
If I ignore the fact that we're going to die, yes it is really exciting stuff.
Thing is, knowing scientists, after they actually switch it on they won't make any announcements about exciting things they've discovered until about 5 years have passed.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:46 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: zooo @ September 8 2008, 6:44 PM BSTIf I ignore the fact that we're going to die, yes it is really exciting stuff.
My physicy friend says we're not going to die. But I'm still not convinced.
Quote: zooo @ September 8 2008, 6:44 PM BSTThing is, knowing scientists, after they actually switch it on they won't make any announcements about exciting things they've discovered until about 5 years have passed.
So, so true.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:50 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 8 2008, 6:46 PM BSTMy physicy friend says we're not going to die. But I'm still not convinced.
That sexy scientist bloke off the telly said in the Radio Times that we weren't going to die.
He made me feel a bit better.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:51 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Ha! Which one was that?
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:54 PM GMT, zooo said:
Dr. Brian Cox.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:56 PM GMT, PhQnix said:
THIEF! 
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:58 PM GMT, zooo said:
Whaaaat?
Have you claimed him?
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:58 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Heh heh heh. Cox.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:58 PM GMT, PhQnix said:
Quote: zooo @ September 8 2008, 6:58 PM BSTWhaaaat?
Have you claimed him?
Your image! It says "I steal images from Scif-Fi.com."
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:59 PM GMT, zooo said:
Ohhh! Well, I can see it. You'll just have to copy the url!
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 9:59 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: zooo @ September 8 2008, 6:58 PM BSTWhaaaat?
Have you claimed him?
The image you posted has come up as "I STEAL IMAGES FROM SCI-FI ONLINE".
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 10:00 PM GMT, zooo said:
Is that better?
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 10:01 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Yep, that one works.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 10:01 PM GMT, PhQnix said:
Better!
Nice...
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 10:29 PM GMT, Loopey said:
Quote: Ian Wolf @ September 8 2008, 6:30 PM BSTThe sensationalism took over as soon as the media heard the words, "Create a black hole".
Apparently, if that amount of energy did condense into a black hole, calculations say it would be absorbed or would evaporate. Can't quite remember which, or the details, but it was something like that!
Quote: zooo @ September 8 2008, 7:00 PM BST
Is that better?
Ooo - he was so funny when he used to do experiments live on This Morning. I seem to remember one where an egg was supposed to turn to dust like matter but it was still runny when he threw it at someone and one where the presenter got an electric shock by mistake.
Mmmm, come to think of it, doesn't exactly inspire confidence.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 11:23 PM GMT, Scatterbrained Floozy said:
Quote: PhQnix @ September 8 2008, 7:01 PM BSTBetter!
Nice...
Not at all worried about you!
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 11:48 PM GMT, zooo said:
All the best boyfriends are a little bit gay.
That way you can lust over Johnny Depp together. Perfect.
Yes, Dr. Cocks is really cute when his experiments go wrong. Aw.
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 11:50 PM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
Quote: Loopey @ September 8 2008, 7:29 PM BSTApparently, if that amount of energy did condense into a black hole, calculations say it would be absorbed or would evaporate. Can't quite remember which, or the details, but it was something like that!
I believe it is evaporate. I personally don't believe that the world will be destroyed, but the more people go on about it, the more worried I get.
So talking about this on a forum isn't really helping me, is it?
On Monday 8th September 2008 GMT at 11:56 PM GMT, PhQnix said:
Quote: Scatterbrained Floozy @ September 8 2008, 8:23 PM BSTNot at all worried about you!
I thought you wouldn't see!
Quote: zooo @ September 8 2008, 8:48 PM BSTAll the best boyfriends are a little bit gay.
That way you can lust over Johnny Depp together. Perfect.
It's a trade-off, Johnny Depp for Audrey Hepburn.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 1:37 PM GMT, zooo said:
Ha!
Ooooooh, Dr. Cocks is on This Morning riiiight noooooowwww!
*dies*
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 1:43 PM GMT, Finck said:
When will they switch that thing on today?
I might want to do some final naughty things in a doorway before we all die.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 1:45 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Is it today we're going to die? 
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 1:57 PM GMT, zooo said:
It's tomorrow! Don't worry!
(yet)
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 1:59 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Oh phew... I hadn't packed a bag.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:18 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Less than 24 hours UNTIL WE ALL DIE.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:19 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Can someone explain in simple terms what's happening please? I have no idea why we're apparently going to die... and Aaron you're going to feel very bad if we don't die and you've scared me.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:25 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Quote: zooo @ September 8 2008, 8:48 PM BSTAll the best boyfriends are a little bit gay.
Unless you're gay, in which case you're better off with one who's a lot gay.
Quote: EllieJP @ September 9 2008, 11:19 AM BSTCan someone explain in simple terms what's happening please? I have no idea why we're apparently going to die... and Aaron you're going to feel very bad if we don't die and you've scared me.
There's a teeny-tiny theoretical possibility that they'll accidentally create a black hole which will smash all our atoms together into a tiny space. A bit like the Meet-up only more effective.
But it's only a tiny possibility - maybe one in ten.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:29 PM GMT, Nil Putters said:
Quote: zooo @ September 9 2008, 10:57 AM BSTIt's tomorrow! Don't worry!
(yet)
I thought it was the 12th.
Quote: EllieJP @ September 9 2008, 11:19 AM BSTand Aaron you're going to feel very bad if we don't die and you've scared me.
This is Aaron we're talking about?!
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:29 PM GMT, Sofa Matt said:
In very simple terms EllieJP we are all going to die because there isn't enough free love in the world anymore. Scientists are looking to make a replica of the 'Free Love Vibe' before it is too late.
Anything that we are able to do ourselves will obviously help, all you need is an open mind and low expectations. We all need to do our bit
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:36 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Graham Bandage @ September 9 2008, 11:25 AM BSTUnless you're gay, in which case you're better off with one who's a lot gay.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:37 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Quote: Graham Bandage @ September 9 2008, 11:25 AM BST
There's a teeny-tiny theoretical possibility that they'll accidentally create a black hole which will smash all our atoms together into a tiny space. A bit like the Meet-up only more effective.
But it's only a tiny possibility - maybe one in ten.
But who is "they"?
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:41 PM GMT, Nil Putters said:
The Swedish scientists.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:43 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: EllieJP @ September 9 2008, 11:37 AM BSTBut who is "they"?
Scientists from over 60 countries based at the CERN research centre in Geneva, Switzerland.
I think.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:45 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
They may be killing us all, but they did invent the World Wide Web. So, swings and roundabouts.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:47 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Actually, an English scientist invented the world wide web. He just happened to be in employment of CERN at the time. It wasn't a CERN commissioned project.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:49 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Yeah, but if Tim Berners-Lee hadn't been waiting for them to dig a big hole under Switzerland, he wouldn't have had time to invent the WWW.
All I do when I've nothing else to do in work is post on here.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:51 PM GMT, Aaron said:
The original intention of the web was to allow scientists across the globe to share research more quickly and efficiently.
TRUFAX.
(Just for zooo.)
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 2:56 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Bastards... why are they doing this if there's a chance we could all die?
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:06 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Because they reckon it's a very small chance. Oh well. Now I've finally met zooo, I can die happy. My life is complete.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:10 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
Quote: EllieJP @ September 9 2008, 11:19 AM BSTCan someone explain in simple terms what's happening please? I have no idea why we're apparently going to die...
I'll have a crack at it.
All matter is made up of stuff called atoms. The atoms themselves are made up of other stuff called sub-atomic particles such as electrons, neutrons and so on. Some of these sub-atomic particles are in turn made up of other particles such as quarks and bosons.
To study these particles, scientists whizz them round at nearly the speed of light in a huge magnet thingy then smash them together. This smashing together breaks them down further into the bits they are made of which can be detected on detectors. Mostly these break-down bits only last a tiny fraction of a second.
The bits they break down into are fermions (particles associated with matter) & bosons (particles associated with forces).
At CERN they have built the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) which is the most powerful of these huge magnet thingies ever built. It is intended to smash hadrons together (a Hadron is a particle made up of quarks - such as a proton) in the hope of discovering the theoretical Higgs Boson which is thought to be the particle which gives things mass - i.e. it is the particle which is associated with the force of gravity.
Whirling things round and smashing them together with so much energy gives a very, VERY small theoretical possibility that a miniscule black hole would be formed (a black hole is where some matter is squashed down so far it basically breaks space-time). Some people think this black hole could devour the Earth. Most people think that the black hole would evaporate almost instantly due to the radiation they give off.
Oddly, most people seem to be worrying about the tiny chance of a black hole (probably because they've heard of them and they sound all dramatic) instead of the equally tiny but equally valid chance that the experiment will create a rather odd particle called a strangelet.
A strangelet is another particle which is just as theoretical as the Higgs Boson but more scary than the thought of a black hole. Rather than evaporating, a strangelet (if they exist) would turn pretty much everything it touches into the same strange matter, which would also destroy the Earth pretty effectively.
Most people also think this is extremely unlikely to happen.
Massively over-simplified but I hope that gives the sort of gist of it.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:13 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Fantastic. A proper scientist.
OK, if light is a particle, how can it move at the speed of light without its mass increasing to infinity?
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:14 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
Because it is also a wave. (sometimes called a wavicle).
Light is VERY odd stuff.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:16 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
You're just making this up.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:20 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
It's true I tells ya! Look up the "Double Slit Experiment" for an example of just how odd light is.
It acts as both a wave and a particle. Sometimes the one it acts as depends on how you observe the experiment!
I find it easiest to imagine light as little packets (photons) of waves. It's not quite right but allow me to get my head round some of its odder behaviours.
It's probably all quantum.
EDIT: Oh, as to the light speed thing. Photons are massless they can travel at the speed of light. When you get near the speed of light e=MCsquared kicks in and they acts as if they have mass as well as acting as if they are waves (i.e. mass=energy).
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:21 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Thanks Afinkawan for explaining that! x
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:28 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
No worries. It's a subject which fascinates me but I could never do it for a living. I'm just an informed layman.
I always forget about Wikipedia. Here's a link to the aforementioned Double Slit Experiment. Really odd.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:46 PM GMT, Aaron said:
I think that my brain may have just seeped out of my ear.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:50 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
The world's definitely going to end. I've just has a look at the Workstations thread and Aaron's got a phone.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:51 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Ha! Only because I have to have one to get the interweb. Plus, it means I get a cool London 0208 number. 
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:52 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
Just seen an interesting quote from Brian Cox on the subject:
"Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat."
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 3:53 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 9 2008, 12:52 PM BSTJust seen an interesting quote from Brian Cox on the subject:
"Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat."
Just to prove him wrong, I almost hope it will kill us all.
Almost. But not quite.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 5:56 PM GMT, Curt said:
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 9 2008, 12:52 PM BSTJust seen an interesting quote from Brian Cox on the subject:
"Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat."
That's awesome. Not like there would be anyone around to tell him "I told you so".
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 7:36 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 9 2008, 12:10 PM BSTA strangelet is another particle which is just as theoretical as the Higgs Boson but more scary than the thought of a black hole. Rather than evaporating, a strangelet (if they exist) would turn pretty much everything it touches into the same strange matter, which would also destroy the Earth pretty effectively.
Oh, well thanks for giving us something else to worry about. Thanks A LOT.
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 9 2008, 12:52 PM BST"Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat."
Bless him.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 8:00 PM GMT, Scatterbrained Floozy said:
Quote: PhQnix @ September 8 2008, 8:56 PM BSTI thought you wouldn't see!
It's a trade-off, Johnny Depp for Audrey Hepburn.
I was going to say thaaaat!
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 8:22 PM GMT, Tuumble said:
Not to be outdone by the French the British are also 'doing a CERN' - they are sucking up particles using a Dustbuster in the black hole that is every teenagers bedroom.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 8:30 PM GMT, Curt said:
Quote: Tuumble @ September 9 2008, 5:22 PM BSTNot to be outdone by the French the British are also 'doing a CERN' - they are sucking up particles using a Dustbuster in the black hole that is every teenagers bedroom.
ewwwww..
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 11:19 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 9 2008, 11:51 AM BSTThe original intention of the web was to allow scientists across the globe to share research more quickly and efficiently.
TRUFAX.
Equally interesting true fact is that the first page the inventor viewed was porn. But before he got caught literally with his pants down, the phone rang and bumped his modem off the Net.
Re: Afinkawan's points - that light behaves either as a particle with mass or a massless wave depending on the observer's expectations is basically a concept that sheds both light and confusion (so typically quantum in that respect) on the nature of reality.
On Tuesday 9th September 2008 GMT at 11:55 PM GMT, NickTheDon said:
I'm going to have a big wank before I go to sleep just in case.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 10:49 AM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Quote: NickTheDon @ September 9 2008, 8:55 PM BSTI'm going to have a big wank before I go to sleep just in case.
Hope that went well for you.
Everyone still alive?
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 11:07 AM GMT, Gavin said:
No I'm afriad I'm quite dead.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 11:37 AM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
I'm listening to the live coverage on BBC Radio 4. They seemed to have cocked it up the first time around, but nothing major.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 11:46 AM GMT, Nil Putters said:
\0/ Hurray. We're still here!
So far...
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 11:54 AM GMT, RubyMae - Glamourous Snowdrop said:
Bye everyone!
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:00 PM GMT, Nil Putters said:
Watching this on BBC News. They all seem rather happy.
Off to work..... The universe better not end while I'm there.
^^^^Hope you've recovered from your burthday celebrations Ruby.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:07 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
I'm a bit worried I'm going to die alone on the reception desk!
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:30 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Yaaaaaaaaaaaay! We're still here!
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:31 PM GMT, EllieJP said:
Yes, but apparently they messed up the first one! Did it actually get switched on now?
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:34 PM GMT, Gavin said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 10 2008, 9:30 AM BSTYaaaaaaaaaaaay! We're still here!
No shit Sherlock. Any chimp could of told you it wouldn't wipe us all out.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:39 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: EllieJP @ September 10 2008, 9:31 AM BSTYes, but apparently they messed up the first one! Did it actually get switched on now?
Yes, they did it all proper this time.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:43 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Call me Thick Jack Clot, but I was under the impression that the whole cosmic calamity thing can happen at any time now, not just at the point of switching the big Doomsday Machine on.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:44 PM GMT, Gavin said:
Quote: Graham Bandage @ September 10 2008, 9:43 AM BSTCall me Thick Jack Clot, but I was under the impression that the whole cosmic calamity thing can happen at any time now, not just at the point of switching the big Doomsday Machine on.
Thick Jack Clot.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:44 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Don't want to dampen anyone's spirits but no 'collisions' are taking place until October.
This is merely whizzing some shit round the big circular facility.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:44 PM GMT, RubyMae - Glamourous Snowdrop said:
Quote: Gavin @ September 10 2008, 9:34 AM BSTNo shit Sherlock. Any chimp could of told you it wouldn't wipe us all out.
I have to admit 30% of me was a bit worried but Stephen Hawkin said it would be safe and I trust him in a bizzare way! He is a top boffin after all.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:45 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Graham Bandage @ September 10 2008, 9:43 AM BSTCall me Thick Jack Clot, but I was under the impression that the whole cosmic calamity thing can happen at any time now, not just at the point of switching the big Doomsday Machine on.
Yeah, but essentially what they do from now is just the same thing over and over again observing it in different ways. So if it didn't happen this time... But thanks for putting a downer on it!
Oh my God. A Government minister ACTUALLY just credited this project with the invention of the internet. Tard.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:45 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Quote: Gavin @ September 10 2008, 9:44 AM BSTThick Jack Clot.
I'll roll 'em across the face of goal, Gav, and you tap 'em in.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:45 PM GMT, RubyMae - Glamourous Snowdrop said:
Besides the Aztecs said the world wouldn't end until December 2012.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:46 PM GMT, Sofa Matt said:
That's right. They are gradually turning up the power everytime they switch it on. If we assume that it is currently in 1st gear, it should reach 5th in about 18 months time.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:46 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: RubyMae - Glamourous Snowdrop at large. @ September 10 2008, 9:45 AM BSTBesides the Aztecs said the world wouldn't end until December 2012.
Let's hope they got it 6 months late, and spare us the shame of the Olympics.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:47 PM GMT, Gavin said:
Quote: Graham Bandage @ September 10 2008, 9:45 AM BSTI'll roll 'em across the face of goal, Gav, and you tap 'em in.
Thats the way I roll...Dawg!
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:47 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Seefacts @ September 10 2008, 9:44 AM BSTDon't want to dampen anyone's spirits but no 'collisions' are taking place until October.
This is merely whizzing some shit round the big circular facility.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:48 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 10 2008, 9:47 AM BST
Why is my Firefox showing the text on here to be bigger than normal.
Were you so worried about Doomsday, you thought f**k lets go mental. (And on, it not every site just this one)
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:48 PM GMT, Nil Putters said:
Have they actually fired the other one in the oppsosite direction yet (causing the collision)? I didn't think thay had.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 12:49 PM GMT, Aaron said:
I dunno. Firefox is gay? Have you accidentally zoomed into the page or something?
And no, I haven't killed anyone or anything.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 1:00 PM GMT, Gavin said:
Comaparing it to the internet is a crazy comparison though. At the minute they're not even sure what they'll discover, it's hopefully going to revolutionise physics and lead to really great things but at the minute, particles flying round tubes better then youtube? naa I dont buy it
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 1:29 PM GMT, Tuumble said:
It won't be until October till they start the collisions?
So we've got to wait around on tender hookers until Halloween? Pah!
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 1:31 PM GMT, Nil Putters said:
Quote: Gavin @ September 10 2008, 10:00 AM BSTComaparing it to the internet is a crazy comparison though. At the minute they're not even sure what they'll discover, it's hopefully going to revolutionise physics and lead to really great things but at the minute, particles flying round tubes better then youtube? naa I dont buy it
I'm hoping for a matter transporter within' 10 years.*makes Star Trek transporter noise*
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 1:36 PM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
I was watching the BBC News coverage of the event just now. Earlier on, they were talking someone who is both a theologian and an astrophysist. Now that is a dangerous collision.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 1:40 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: RubyMae - Glamourous Snowdrop at large. @ September 10 2008, 9:45 AM BSTBesides the Aztecs said the world wouldn't end until December 2012.
Yeah interesting subject, me and a friend are writing a thriller about it
Probably won't be finished until 2013 though.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 1:42 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Paul W @ September 10 2008, 10:40 AM BSTYeah interesting subject, me and a friend are writing a thriller about it
Probably won't be finished until 2013 though.
True Brits. *wipes a tear*
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 1:54 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 10 2008, 10:42 AM BSTTrue Brits. *wipes a tear*
*salutes with pride*
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 2:09 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
Quote: RubyMae - Glamourous Snowdrop at large. @ September 10 2008, 9:45 AM BSTBesides the Aztecs said the world wouldn't end until December 2012.
Wasn't that the Mayans, not the Aztecs?
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 2:11 PM GMT, RubyMae - Glamourous Snowdrop said:
You could be right.
You can't expect me to remember important things like that in the morning! I have a hard enough time remembering to put on shoes.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 2:35 PM GMT, Aaron said:
expect*
Ahem.
Oh my God, I may be about to shoot the BBC presenter in the face. She actually just said that the Internet came out of the Web. AND THE SCIENTIST GUY DIDN'T EVEN CORRECT HER.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 2:53 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
Scientist guys are used to not correcting morons.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 3:00 PM GMT, Rachel said:
*pinches self*
Still alive.
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 10 2008, 11:09 AM BSTWasn't that the Mayans, not the Aztecs?
They didn't say it was the end of the world completely, just a new age, the beginning of the current one was the Egyptians or something, so perhaps the next one is floaty spaceship time!
*calls shotgun*
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 3:18 PM GMT, Curt said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 10 2008, 11:35 AM BSTexpect*
Ahem.
Oh my God, I may be about to shoot the BBC presenter in the face. She actually just said that the Internet came out of the Web. AND THE SCIENTIST GUY DIDN'T EVEN CORRECT HER.
reverse that.That's pretty bad, but I'm glad to hear the standard of reporters haven't just dropped in Canada. I was watching one on CBC who used the word "ginormous".
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 3:31 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: Rachel @ September 10 2008, 12:00 PM BST*pinches self*
Still alive.
They didn't say it was the end of the world completely, just a new age, the beginning of the current one was the Egyptians or something, so perhaps the next one is floaty spaceship time!
*calls shotgun*
Yeah they suggested a planet (which has apparantly been discovered by NASA in the 80's but now deny it.........)
And by 2012 we'll be able to see it in the night sky.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 3:36 PM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Quote: Curt @ September 10 2008, 12:18 PM BSTI was watching one on CBC who used the word "ginormous".
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 4:12 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Curt @ September 10 2008, 12:18 PM BST
That's pretty bad, but I'm glad to hear the standard of reporters haven't just dropped in Canada. I was watching one on CBC who used the word "ginormous".
I actually heard something similar the other day. Can't for the life of me recall what it was, but I just remember sitting here thinking "No... Did he really just say that? That's not a real word, just a colloquialism!"
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 4:35 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Don't go breathing a sigh of relief, they only turned it on today. They haven't started smashing things up yet. Wasn't reassured by one of the project leaders having a Welsh accent. Wasn't reassured by the the idea of 40 Million collisions per second and TV announcements moving from "may create black holes" to "will almost certainly create black holes" - GMTV interview or R4, forget which now.
I love the idea that we're being told there's nothing to worry about the creation of black holes on Earth especially when they are probably one of the least understood and most destructive of phenomenum in the universe. The work done on these things is (by the very nature and distance of these objects) totally theoretical. They've never been observed, rather they are a postulation derived from - and attempting to explain - particular strange astronomical observations. It's not as if you can look inside one to confirm your thoughts, even if we could get close enough to them.
I loved Brian Cox's comment on R4, the creation of mini-black holes CERTAINLY won't be the end of the planet. Why are they running the experiment? Why not just ask Cox, he seems to know it all - enough to talk in certainties.
And yep, they haven't begun real testing (or have they? conspiracy theorists amongst us) but the news reported a big earthquake in Iran. Yowser.
I don't think it's the end but arrogance seems to be a peculiar trait of all mankind. To conduct experiments where the outcome is both unknown and potentially catastrophic just because we have the capacity to do so is jaw-dropping.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 4:37 PM GMT, zooo said:
I thought ginormous was a real word!
Luckily I don't think I've ever used it written down though...
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 4:37 PM GMT, Gavin said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 10 2008, 1:35 PM BST
I don't think it's the end but arrogance seems to be a peculiar trait of all mankind. To conduct experiments where the outcome is both unknown and potentially catastrophic just because we have the capacity to do so is jaw-dropping.
It'll be fine. They all have hard hats.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 4:40 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Yeah, but does anyone really care about Iran?
Stephen Hawking said that these particles smash and shit millions of times every day in the Earth's atmosphere and nothing bad happens. That's good enough for me right now.
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 4:58 PM GMT, Loopey said:
Quote: zooo @ September 10 2008, 1:37 PM BSTI thought ginormous was a real word!
Luckily I don't think I've ever used it written down though...
ginormous
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 5:02 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Well found!
On Wednesday 10th September 2008 GMT at 5:09 PM GMT, DaButt said:
I wonder what CERN's electricity bill is like. I assume it takes ginormous amounts of energy to run that fiendish instrument of destruction.
Perhaps they could power it with poo. My city is planning to sell my own poo-generated electricity back to me:
http://news.yahoo.com/story//nm/oukoe_uk_usa_energy_excrement_odd
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:07 AM GMT, RubyMae - Glamourous Snowdrop said:
Quote: DaButt @ September 10 2008, 2:09 PM BSTI wonder what CERN's electricity bill is like. I assume it takes ginormous amounts of energy to run that fiendish instrument of destruction.
Maybe they are on a fixed rate with Powergen.
I would like to add that the Mothership is doing nothing short of wandering the streets with a sandwich board bearing the legend "The end of the world is nigh". I said about Stephen Hawkin saying it was okay and he is one of the worlds most brilliant minds and she said "That is what they said about Hitler". Now, I'm not sure Stephen has an awful lot in common with Adolf but maybe I'm missing the point.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:17 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: zooo @ September 8 2008, 7:00 PM BST
Is that better?
Ah, I like him. He makes physics cool(er).
AND he's a Northerner!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:19 AM GMT, zooo said:
So he is!
He actually sounds just like Jeremy (League of Gents) Dyson.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:37 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 10 2008, 1:35 PM BST
I love the idea that we're being told there's nothing to worry about the creation of black holes on Earth especially when they are probably one of the least understood and most destructive of phenomenum in the universe.
But aren't black holes merely theoretical?
There's no actual proof they exist is there?
I'm going to go out on a limb and says it's all a load of old horse shit.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:43 AM GMT, Griff said:
Are you confusing black holes with dark matter? Black holes are well accepted, I thought, largely due to Stephen Hawking's work: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4249192.stm
Anyway, apparently some girl in India killed herself today by drinking pesticide because she was so scared the world was going to end. So I hope all the conspiracy theory f**k-knuckles who like to pass comment on the work of top physicists despite not knowing the first c**ting thing about science are pleased with themselves for spreading all this alarm.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:45 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: Seefacts @ September 10 2008, 10:37 PM BSTBut aren't black holes merely theoretical?
There's no actual proof they exist is there?
I'm going to go out on a limb and says it's all a load of old horse shit.
Errrr.... I might be wrong mister S, but I think, rather than give John Barrowman airtime on Radio4, that the whole point of the thing is actually to contract the gap between speculation and fact.
The proof of the pudding here is actually to prove the pudding.
Griff will give you the recipie.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:46 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 10:43 PM BSTAnyway, apparently some girl in India killed herself today by drinking pesticide because she was so scared the world was going to end. So I hope all the conspiracy theory f**k-knuckles who like to pass comment on the work of top physicists despite not knowing the first c**ting thing about science are pleased with themselves for spreading all this alarm.
Yep. Anyone stupid enough to kill themselves because the world might end, is best got rid of. Darwinism.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:46 AM GMT, Marc P said:
And he almost already did.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:48 AM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 10 2008, 10:46 PM BSTYep. Anyone stupid enough to kill themselves because the world might end, is best got rid of. Darwinism.
Very fair point.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:53 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 10:43 PM BSTAre you confusing black holes with dark matter? Black holes are well accepted, I thought, largely due to Stephen Hawking's work: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4249192.stm
Anyway, apparently some girl in India killed herself today by drinking pesticide because she was so scared the world was going to end. So I hope all the conspiracy theory f**k-knuckles who like to pass comment on the work of top physicists despite not knowing the first c**ting thing about science are pleased with themselves for spreading all this alarm.
Yeah of course, but the thing with theories is they might not be true. I have no idea either way, and if this experiment works and we learn some new things - then that's good!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 1:55 AM GMT, Griff said:
*Worldwide scientific community breathes a sigh of relief to learn that Seefacts endorses their methods, after having initially denounced black holes as "horseshit" despite zero knowledge of astrophysics *
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:03 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 10:55 PM BST*Worldwide scientific community breathes a sigh of relief to learn that Seefacts endorses their methods, after having initially denounced black holes as "horseshit" despite zero knowledge of astrophysics *
Don't be a knob about it.
I'm just saying, it could well be a load of shit. What can't be denied is the fact that it's all theories. I mean they said the black holes will disappear, and they're basing that on a Hawking THEORY. Theory isn't necessarily fact. It's just numbers and letters on a page. That's a fact. No one has seen a blackhole up close have they? So that says they don't know for sure. Science is a f**king weird thing generally, so god knows what will happen when this CERN thing kicks in.
Nothing probably.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:09 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Griff and seefacts sitting in a tree
Sticking a twig in the mother fo's eye
so the mother fo can no longer see.
Astrophysics? come on, it's not rocket science is it?
Quote: Seefacts @ September 10 2008, 11:03 PM BSTDon't be a knob about it.
I'm just saying, it could well be a load of shit. What can't be denied is the fact that it's all theories. I mean they said the black holes will disappear, and they're basing that on a Hawking THEORY. Theory isn't necessarily fact. It's just numbers and letters on a page. That's a fact. No one has seen a blackhole up close have they? So that says they don't know for sure. Science is a f**king weird thing generally, so god knows what will happen when this CERN thing kicks in.
Nothing probably.
Sorry mate but
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:10 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: Seefacts @ September 10 2008, 11:03 PM BST
I'm just saying, it could well be a load of shit. What can't be denied is the fact that it's all theories.
Very few things come as a total surprise, seeing as the laws of physics are fairly well known. Anything that does come as a surprise is analyzed and subsequently verified by a revised equation and everything is right as rain.
These guys are really only trying to prove their old theories and any head-scratchers that crop up will serve as fodder for new theories.
Science and mathematics are freakin' awesome, dude!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:11 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Marc P @ September 10 2008, 11:08 PM BSTGriff and seefacts sitting in a tree
Sticking a twig in the mother fo's eye
so the mother fo can no longer see.
Astrophysics? come on, it's not rocket science is it?
I bet that gag gets used every 7 minutes in the CERN HQ.The fact that we we as a world want to learn why were here, and how we got here - is allllllll good. But it's just theories, ideas, principles and notions.
Quote: Marc P @ September 10 2008, 11:09 PM BST
Sorry mate but
Go on . . .?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:12 AM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteI'm just saying, it could well be a load of shit. What can't be denied is the fact that it's all theories. I mean they said the black holes will disappear, and they're basing that on a Hawking THEORY. Theory isn't necessarily fact. It's just numbers and letters on a page. That's a fact. No one has seen a blackhole up close have they? So that says they don't know for sure. Science is a f**king weird thing generally, so god knows what will happen when this CERN thing kicks in.
I don't think you understand science, Seefacts. Saying "oh well it's just a 'theory' so therefore NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING so ANYONE CAN SAY ANYTHING WITHOUT BEING WRONG so NERR" is, well, childish crap.
The whole of science is just theories - theories that nobody has ever managed to disprove despite decades and in some cases centuries of ongoing rigorous attempts at disproof. Which far from making them wild speculation, makes them mankind's best understanding at the current day.
The fact remains that, for example, all the electronic components in your laptop - which are based on "electromagnetic field THEORY","particle THEORY" and so on - still somehow manage to work exactly as planned. (Unless they are made by Dell.) So we have some evidence that those "theories" are actually pretty good. And the theories of astrophysicists are equally well supported through careful observation and repeatable experiments. Nothing is infallible, of course. But that is a long way from the position that "anything could happen because scientists know f**k all" which is so popular with idiots.
Anyway, as Patrick Moore says, some people's ignorance of science is so complete that it is useless to argue with them. I suspect you are one of these and I will follow his advice.
And yes, people have "seen" black holes. Using radio telescopes.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:14 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:12 PM BST(Unless they are made by Dell.)
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:14 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 10:55 PM BST*Worldwide scientific community breathes a sigh of relief to learn that Seefacts endorses their methods, after having initially denounced black holes as "horseshit" despite zero knowledge of astrophysics *
Y'know, Seefacts is a jolly nice chap Griff. You may actually like him!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:16 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:12 PM BSTI don't think you understand science, Seefacts. Saying "oh well it's just a 'theory' so therefore NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING so ANYONE CAN SAY ANYTHING WITHOUT BEING WRONG so NERR" is, well, childish crap.
The whole of science is just theories - theories that nobody has ever managed to disprove despite a whole heap of rigorous attempts at disproof. Which far from making them wild speculation, makes them mankind's best understanding at the current day.
The fact remains that, for example, all the electronic components in your laptop - which are based on "electromagnetic field THEORY","particle THEORY" and so on - still somehow manage to work. Unless they are made by Dell.
Anyway, as Patrick Moore says, some people's ignorance of science is so complete that it is useless to argue with them.
And yes, people have seen black holes. Using radio telescopes.
As you can probably guess - I'm no scientist. I'm actually not all that interested in science really. I just know I don't want get blown up anytime soon!
I'm not going to bother arguing about science for god's sake, especially not with you Griff or Mr. P!
I would seriously doubt ANYONE other than scientists should even bother discussing this because it's so complex.
I know my thoughts on the matter, and you know yours. So knock it on the head will you?
Quote: Aaron @ September 10 2008, 11:14 PM BSTY'know, Seefacts is a jolly nice chap Griff. You may actually like him!
This is correct, yes.
I think they should do tests on Griff to find out why he's such a cantankerous arse.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:20 AM GMT, zooo said:
Ooh, Dr. Brian Cocks was on Jeremy Paxman. I just missed him.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:20 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: Seefacts @ September 10 2008, 11:16 PM BSTAs you can probably guess - I'm no scientist. I'm actually not all that interested in science really. I just know I don't want get blown up anytime soon!
I'm not going to bother arguing about science for god's sake, especially not with you Griff or Mr. P!
I would seriously doubt ANYONE other than scientists should even bother discussing this because it's so complex.
I know my thoughts on the matter, and you know yours. So knock it on the head will you?
This is correct, yes.
I think they should do tests on Griff to find out why he's such a cantankerous arse.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:21 AM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteI would seriously doubt ANYONE other than scientists should even bother discussing this because it's so complex.
So don't come on messageboards announcing that it's "all probably horseshit" then!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:23 AM GMT, Marc P said:
I seriously laughed out loud at this and not in a bad way at you seefacts, just because it was so funny.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:24 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:21 PM BSTWell it wasn't me who came on here pooh-poohing the work of my betters.
I don't think it's against the law to have an opinion.
I suggested black holes weren't factual - you saw this as an opportunity to jump down my throat because for some reason you like doing that.
It gets tiresome. Keep your witless jibes to comedy discussions, because it's only the where I can be arsed to discuss it.
Quote: Marc P @ September 10 2008, 11:23 PM BSTI seriously laughed out loud at this and not in a bad way at you seefacts, just because it was so funny.
*shrugs shoulders*
Fair enough.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:26 AM GMT, Griff said:
Believe me Seefacts I am happy to jump down the throat of anyone talking crap about science. It's not just you.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:26 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:21 PM BSTSo don't come on messageboards announcing that it's "all probably horseshit" then!
Why? Can I not have an opinion?
On a very basic level, it came to me that it's might not be what actually happens out there in the big old cosmos.
So I put that to Slag A.
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:26 PM BSTBelieve me Seefacts I am happy to jump down the throat of anyone talking crap about science. It's not just you.
I think that's debatable.
I'd laugh though if come October when it properly kicks off - nothing happens.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:28 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: Seefacts @ September 10 2008, 11:24 PM BST
*shrugs shoulders*
Fair enough.
But do you see why? Think of yourself, and myself, and Griff as sitcom characters and look at the post. It is, after all, the only way to live life,
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:30 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: zooo @ September 10 2008, 11:20 PM BSTOoh, Dr. Brian Cocks was on Jeremy Paxman.
BLIMEY!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:30 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Marc P @ September 10 2008, 11:28 PM BSTBut do you see why? Think of yourself, and myself, and Griff as sitcom characters and look at the post. It is, after all, the only way to live life,
What, as a sitcom?
Still, funnier than Lab Rats though!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:31 AM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 10 2008, 11:30 PM BSTBLIMEY!
Ha! Oh wow, there's an image...
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:31 AM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteWhy? Can I not have an opinion?
I thought you just said "only scientists should discuss these subjects"? You're very inconsistent.
Of course you can have an opinion, but if you're going to express an opinion on a subject you know nothing about, don't be surprised if somebody contradicts you.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:34 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:31 PM BSTI thought you just said "only scientists should discuss these subjects"? You're very inconsistent.
Of course you can have an opinion, but if you're going to express an opinion on a subject you know nothing about, don't be surprised if somebody contradicts you.
A one line opinion is very different to discussing though.
Anyway, I'm well tired so I'm off. I've got to paint my flat tomorrow so I'll bugger off from the thread!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:34 AM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteThink of yourself, and myself, and Griff as sitcom characters and look at the post
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:36 AM GMT, Morrace said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 10 2008, 1:35 PM BSTprobably one of the least understood and most destructive of phenomenum in the universe.
Sounds like my mother-in-law.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:42 AM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:34 PM BST
Not sure who's who though.
Am I Dougal? I'm happy with that!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:44 AM GMT, zooo said:
Who gets to be the Prince?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:47 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: zooo @ September 10 2008, 11:44 PM BSTWho gets to be the Prince?
Come on Zooo you've heard my voice!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:48 AM GMT, Griff said:
I originally had Seefacts as Dougal and Marc P as the Prince. But I'm now thinking it was the wrong way round. I can't decide. Maybe we should have a whole thread. "What sitcom character do other BSGers remind you of?"
Aaron is obviously 
.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:48 AM GMT, sootyj said:
I once looked over Lenny Henry's fence, he had a dug a big pit to make into a fish pond.
So I've seen a Black's Hole.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:49 AM GMT, Griff said:
Sooty of course would be
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:49 AM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Marc P @ September 10 2008, 11:47 PM BSTCome on Zooo you've heard my voice!
Ah good point. Marc P = Prince of Posh.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:52 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: zooo @ September 10 2008, 11:49 PM BSTAh good point. Marc P = Prince of Posh.
LOL
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:55 AM GMT, sootyj said:
a recent photo of my good self.
and Griff making a measured complaint about train times.
My version of the image works.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 2:56 AM GMT, Griff said:
(1) your top photo doesn't work pls fix
(2) are trimes trains
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:04 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
[quote name="sootyj" post="259863" date="September 10 2008, 11:55 PM BSTa recent photo of my good self.
[/quote]
So is the one in your avatar a bit old now?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:05 AM GMT, sootyj said:
Nah thats how I look with a shave and a haircut.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:05 AM GMT, Griff said:
Sooty - all I get is an "Image hosted by Angelfire" logo??
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:06 AM GMT, Graham Bandage said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:49 PM BSTSooty of course would be
Drink! Feck! Brown! Mugabe!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:10 AM GMT, sootyj said:
Very funny, actually it is.
Well with my deathray a bust, here's my latest to take over the world!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:11 AM GMT, zooo said:
Right click, copy URL and paste into browser!
Honestly Griff, I thought you knew about science...
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:13 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: zooo @ September 11 2008, 12:11 AM BSTRight click, copy URL and paste into browser!
Honestly Griff, I thought you knew about science...
He's only partically informed.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:14 AM GMT, sootyj said:
And hey spoiler fans, BSG's new cartoon about Griff and Seafacts!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:16 AM GMT, zooo said:
Anyway, surely there are better things to argue about in this world than a Large Hagrid Collider...
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:17 AM GMT, sootyj said:
eh?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:20 AM GMT, zooo said:
See! That's better. Nonplussedness beats bickering.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:23 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: zooo @ September 11 2008, 12:20 AM BSTNonplussedness
Word of the month.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:23 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
No it doesn't.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:24 AM GMT, zooo said:
Fine! Bicker away!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:26 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: zooo @ September 11 2008, 12:24 AM BSTFine! Bicker away!
But I have a plan. You know they say the best thing about bickering...
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:26 AM GMT, Griff said:
What happens when you post Sooty's URL (http://www.angelfire.com/anime5/saiyanknights/images/fatbuubad.jpg) into your browser zooo?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:28 AM GMT, roscoff said:
Been busy busy so haven't been on much. Can anyone confirm after the BSG meet up. Is Sooty's avatar actually of him? If so he's not what I expected.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:28 AM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteHe's only partically informed.
It's getting there... only another few iterations to go.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:29 AM GMT, zooo said:
I get a pink blob with a pointy penis coming out of his head.
You?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:30 AM GMT, Griff said:
I get that Angelfire logo. I blame the Higgs Boson.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:30 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: Griff @ September 11 2008, 12:28 AM BSTIt's getting there... only another few iterations to go.
I'm on the case.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:30 AM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: roscoff @ September 11 2008, 12:28 AM BSTBeen busy busy so haven't been on much. Can anyone confirm after the BSG meet up. Is Sooty's avatar actually of him? If so he's not what I expected.
No, that's a pig wearing some lipstick.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 3:37 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:48 PM BSTAaron is obviously
Quote: sootyj @ September 10 2008, 11:48 PM BSTI once looked over Lenny Henry's fence, he had a dug a big pit to make into a fish pond.
So I've seen a Black's Hole.
Quote: Griff @ September 10 2008, 11:49 PM BSTSooty of course would be
Quote: Griff @ September 11 2008, 12:30 AM BSTI get that Angelfire logo.
Me too.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 4:24 AM GMT, Badge said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 10 2008, 1:12 PM BST
It wasn't BoJo saying "fantabulous" was it?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 4:33 AM GMT, Aaron said:
No, we're all used to Boris's quirks and turns of phrase. This was an actual reporter, and as I was paying enough attention to be able to notice, probably on a fairly important story too.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 4:39 AM GMT, Badge said:
Ok. Fantabulous is ok for the BSG. At least that's consistent with prezunctly.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 4:49 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
Can I just derail this slightly to point out to everyone that a scientific theory doesn't mean it is just a guess?
In everyday use the word theory means a speculation or conjecture. But in science it means a model of what happens that explains the known facts, can be tested and also used to make predictions. Things don't actually become scientific theories until they are generally well understood and supported by experimental observation etc.
So, someone saying, "I think the moon is made of green cheese," would be a hypothesis which would need supporting data from experiments or be able to explain known data. Saying, "I think atoms aren't actually solid but are mostly empty space," is a theory because it explains an observed fact (Gold foil experiment) and makes a prediction which can be tested - relevant to this thread in that it could be tested once particle accelerators were invented.
It's pretty rare for a proper scientific theory to be thoroughly debunked. Usually what happens is that they are refined or expanded upon or where there are conflicitng theories, quite often another underlying explanation that encompasses both is found.
I guess what I'm saying is that a scientific theory is our current best explanation for something which covers all the known facts and gives us pointers of what else to look for
The theoretical predictions and the observed data point to black holes existing. What we don't know is exactly how they work. We can theorise - again based on what we observe and what we already know of the Universe with reasonable confidence of being correct. (Spending 5 billion quid and 20-odd years building the LHC is a good indication of the level of confidence that can be had in these things!)
Mind you, black holes are so extreme that there is still a chance that they are much weirder than expected and it could be that quantum mechanics and general relativity BOTH break down within them.
And getting back on track: Apparently I am sometimes like Manny from Black Books.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 4:52 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Very well explained!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 4:56 PM GMT, Ian Wolf said:
Has anyone listened to The Genuine Particle? I thought it was quite good, and an amusing twist at the end of the story.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 6:06 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
I missed that last night. I'm probably going to Listen Again it this evening.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 9:33 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Hawkings only confused me.
If these collisions occur all around us, all the time, then we surely cannot be recreating the much-trumpeted conditions a billionth of a second after the Big Bang but simply any old thursday, at 16:03?
Hawkings can't argue from both sides. If they're recreating the moments after the Big Bang, these collisions can't be happening now because they were specifically dependent on the intense conditions existing directly after the Bang.
But if these collisions happen now in ordinary universal conditions, why spend £5 billion recreating conditions that aren't needed for these types of collisions?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 9:37 PM GMT, zooo said:
Ha!! Eat that Hawking!!!
Slagg's on the case.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 9:41 PM GMT, Gavin said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 11 2008, 6:33 PM BSTHawkings only confused me.
Is it the voice box?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 9:55 PM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteIf these collisions occur all around us, all the time, then we surely cannot be recreating the much-trumpeted conditions a billionth of a second after the Big Bang but simply any old thursday, at 16:03?
Hawkings can't argue from both sides. If they're recreating the moments after the Big Bang, these collisions can't be happening now because they were specifically dependent on the intense conditions existing directly after the Bang.
But if these collisions happen now in ordinary universal conditions, why spend £5 billion recreating conditions that aren't needed for these types of collisions?
Well, there are many resources on the Internet that explain the experiment in detail, so if you want to understand, go and do some reading. But for starters, even if there are identical atomic collisions to this going on all around us all the time (which is not what he is saying), they're not going on in controllable environments where not a single unwanted particle of matter or twinkle of electromagnetic energy is present, and from where we can monitor every single subatomic interaction and record exactly what happens.
But more to the point, and this is where I have to just stop talking to the sceptics and walk away, do you really believe that after a few minutes consideration you have spotted a reason why this whole experiment is unnecessary and redundant, when thousands of highly trained physicists who have devoted their lives to studying subatomic particles have spent decades coming up with the experiment they think would be most useful (to them, at least) ? I mean if you really have found a flaw in their logic, phone the newspapers and tell someone. You'd make a fortune in TV appearances.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:04 PM GMT, zooo said:
He was asking a question, Griff.
You really need to stop taking this so personally!
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:05 PM GMT, Griff said:
He said "Hawking can't argue from both sides".
This implies that Hawking has made a mistake, which SlagA has spotted.
Doesn't it? The subtext of his post was that "these scientists are talking rubbish". I'm sticking up for the scientists. Nobody else does.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:10 PM GMT, zooo said:
Quote: Griff @ September 11 2008, 7:05 PM BST
Doesn't it?
I don't know. Does that question mark you used denote a question?
Oh look there's one in Slag's post too.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:12 PM GMT, Griff said:
Not on the bit that says "Hawking can't argue from both sides" there isn't.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:12 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
I'm starting to wish the world HAD blown up now.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:14 PM GMT, zooo said:
Just cos Hawking is a scientist doesn't mean we can't voice our opinions on what he's said.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:21 PM GMT, Griff said:
Right I'm off to get a cup of tea.
You guys keep an eye on these meddling scientists while I'm gone.
QuoteJust cos Hawking is a scientist doesn't mean we can't voice our opinions on what he's said.
No of course not. Why should anyone need to know anything about science before saying "Ooh that Stephen Hawking's got his facts wrong", "black holes are all a load of horseshit" etc? It's elitism, that's what it is. Hawking is nothing more than an oppressor. Scientific matters should be decided by a public vote. That would be fairer, I think.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:23 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: Griff @ September 11 2008, 7:21 PM BSTRight I'm off to get a cup of tea.
You guys keep an eye on these meddling scientists while I'm gone.
No of course not. Why should anyone need to know anything about science before saying "Ooh that Stephen Hawking's got his facts wrong", "black holes are all a load of horseshit" etc? It's elitism, that's what it is.
Don't drag me into it.
We're entitled to believe what we like, whether it frustrates you or not. So knock it on the head.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:26 PM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: Griff @ September 11 2008, 6:55 PM BSTBut more to the point, and this is where I have to just stop talking to the sceptics and walk away, do you really believe that after a few minutes consideration you have spotted a reason why this whole experiment is unnecessary and redundant, when thousands of highly trained physicists who have devoted their lives to studying subatomic particles have spent decades coming up with the experiment they think would be most useful (to them, at least) ? I mean if you really have found a flaw in their logic, phone the newspapers and tell someone. You'd make a fortune in TV appearances.
I hear ya, Brother. The same goes for people who are always spouting off about how to fix the economy, win the war/election/game, save the planet, etc. It's human nature to want to offer an opinion, but you have to remember that you're trying to offer a simplistic solution to a complex problem that is understood far better by experts. And when all is said and done you have to assume they have a better handle on it than you'll ever have.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:32 PM GMT, Nigel Kelly said:
Does anyone know how to wire a plug? I could do with some advice.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:33 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: Nigel Kelly @ September 11 2008, 7:32 PM BSTDoes anyone know how to wire a plug? I could do with some advice.
Bash it against a wall for 20 minutes then give up and cry.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:34 PM GMT, zooo said:
All the science bods on this thread have been verrry pompous.
YOU'VE PUT ME OFF SCIENCE FOREVER!
What will science do without one of the most fabulous minds in history, eh...?
It's a sad day.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:34 PM GMT, Nigel Kelly said:
Quote: Paul W @ September 11 2008, 7:33 PM BSTBash it against a wall for 20 minutes then give up and cry.
I take it we're still talking about plugs?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:35 PM GMT, zooo said:
No, Stephen Hawking.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:35 PM GMT, Paul W said:
Quote: zooo @ September 11 2008, 7:34 PM BSTAll the science bods on this thread have been verrry pompous.
You mean the "science bods" are pompus and have access to wikipedia?
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:35 PM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteDoes anyone know how to wire a plug? I could do with some advice.
I find it's best to arrange the wires based on aesthetic considerations. Sometimes the earth wire looks best on the right, sometimes on the left. What colour are the plug casing and the pins?
QuoteYou mean the "science bods" are pompus and have access to wikipedia?
*pompous
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:41 PM GMT, Nigel Kelly said:
When I said 'wire a plug' I meant I am looking to send a Beano character in for some undercover work.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:44 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Griff @ September 11 2008, 7:21 PM BSTNo of course not. Why should anyone need to know anything about science before saying "Ooh that Stephen Hawking's got his facts wrong", "black holes are all a load of horseshit" etc? It's elitism, that's what it is. Hawking is nothing more than an oppressor. Scientific matters should be decided by a public vote. That would be fairer, I think.
Blimey Griff. He was simply making an observation that, as far as Hawking seemed to be explaining it from what he saw, Hawking was saying two opposing things at once. He wasn't actively criticising the 'facts' of it.
Quote: DaButt @ September 11 2008, 7:26 PM BSTI hear ya, Brother. The same goes for people who are always spouting off about how to fix the economy
Well that's quite simple. Cut the wages of the working classes. If you don't need to pay them as much, then the cost of the raw materials which they prepare and distribute goes down, and thus does the finished product. Anti-inflation. o/
Quote: zooo @ September 11 2008, 7:34 PM BSTAll the science bods on this thread have been verrry pompous.
YOU'VE PUT ME OFF SCIENCE FOREVER!
What will science do without one of the most fabulous minds in history, eh...?
It's a sad day.
THE most fabulous mind. Obviously.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:45 PM GMT, SlagA said:
I should have read all the thread to make sure I wasn't dragging up bad feelings but I didn't think Cern would cause as much anxiety and dissent as "Gavin and Stacey". Apols to Griff.
I'm not out to make a fortune or score points of anyone (either BSG or as in Hawking' case, non-BSG). I admire people like Hawking but it won't stop me asking dumb questions when I see a dumb question, no matter how big their reputation. 'tis the only way I'll learn. If he was here now, I'd ask him the same question, confident he'd swat me away with his intellect.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 10:48 PM GMT, Griff said:
Nah, if you were face-to-face with Hawking, you'd bully him into trying out all the comedy voices on his voice synthesiser. That's what I'd do, anyway.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 11:08 PM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteAll the science bods on this thread have been verrry pompous.
Thanks zooo.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 11:13 PM GMT, zooo said:
I love you really.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 11:17 PM GMT, Seefacts said:
Quote: zooo @ September 11 2008, 8:13 PM BSTI love you really.
And so do I.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 11:31 PM GMT, Griff said:
I bet you (both) say that to all the pompous science bod cantankerous arses.
I suppose what I should have done in the face of all this luddite nonsense was gone and wrote a sketch about all this to get the irritation out of my system. They do say "write about what makes you angry", which gives me more scope than just about anyone alive.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 11:32 PM GMT, Marc P said:
That's the trouble with particle physics,no one knows the whole of the argument.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 11:34 PM GMT, Griff said:
Dude it's not happening. I generally love your work but that joke is not happening. Was that a (black) hole pun in there too?
Sometimes, despite what the scientists tell you, less is more.
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 11:39 PM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: Griff @ September 11 2008, 8:34 PM BSTDude it's not happening. I generally love your work but that joke is not happening. Was that a (black) hole pun in there too?
Sometimes, despite what the scientists tell you, less is more.
Nah sometimes more is more, and if you are not trying to make money out of it, amusing yourself is just... you know worth it, my partner really hates my ability to be genuinely, usually alcohol assisted, amused at the lame shit I come out with.
Oh and of course not, I never do puns
On Thursday 11th September 2008 GMT at 11:49 PM GMT, Rob0 said:
Quote: Griff @ September 11 2008, 7:48 PM BSTNah, if you were face-to-face with Hawking, you'd bully him into trying out all the comedy voices on his voice synthesiser. That's what I'd do, anyway.
Mean, but so true.
Despite my ignorance: In response to one of the posts before: Subatomic particles may very well collide all the time in space, but how do you detect them? For example, neutrinos have almost no mass, and basically pass through the Earth barely interacting with it, so to detect them all the background noise and radiation (supposedly left over from the original Big Bang) has to be removed. Hence why such detectors are deep underground.
As for the particle accelerators at CERN, it's a controlled environment where particles can be accelerated to near light-speed and smashed together, and the results detected and analysed.
Anyway, I just think it's pretty amazing that thousands of people from round the world have got together and built such a complex machine, and that this can possibly prove or disprove whole theories put forward for the universe and all matter in it, the laws of physics, etc. If they find anything, it could open up a whole new understanding of how things work, and why.
Plus, it's like loads of eminent scientists finally getting their papers marked to see if they got the answer right
Science book publishers must be loving it
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 2:39 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
www.hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 2:43 PM GMT, Aaron said:
Some people have far too much time and money.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 2:44 PM GMT, Leevil said:
Yep.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 5:20 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
As long as nobody thinks it was me who made that.
They've set up live webcams at CERN to watch the LHC in action:
LHC Webcam
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 5:25 PM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 12 2008, 2:20 PM BSTAs long as nobody thinks it was me who made that.
They've set up live webcams at CERN to watch the LHC in action:
LHC Webcam
Nice one.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 6:40 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 12 2008, 11:39 AM BSTwww.hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com
Has the Large Hadron Collider been operated in anywhere near its designed purpose yet?
Quote: Rob0 @ September 11 2008, 8:49 PM BST
As for the particle accelerators at CERN, it's a controlled environment.
I can understand the need for a controlled environment but that wasn't my question or the point I was querying.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 6:44 PM GMT, Griff said:
Hey SlagA, I don't want to carry on with yesterday's grumbling, but one of the questions you were asking was why it cost so much money, and a controlled monitorable environment is a very large part of it, if not indeed the entire point?
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:18 PM GMT, SlagA said:
No, my point was why do they need to create the conditions that existed a billionth of a second after the Big Bang (ostensibly to observe these collisions) when those conditions simply aren't required. Because as Hawking said, these collisions occur anywhere at anytime. If they occur now, then they are independent of the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang.
The conditions that the LHC is intended to replicate aren't even a requirement to create said collisions.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:20 PM GMT, Griff said:
Here comes the science
NB this doesn't help, it's just fun
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:31 PM GMT, Marc P said:
Actually Griff that was very informative. Good link.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:31 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
The LHC isn't a requirement for those collisions to happen but it is a requirement if they want to observe them. <insert brilliant analogy here>
Those sorts of collisions do occur naturally but we have no way of telling when or where and no way of predicting it either. You've seen the size of the detector chambers in the photos from CERN, you'd need to lug that piece of equipment to wherever the collision was going to occur and then you might only have one collision at a time, not the millions they are going to cause in the LHC.
The collisions are partly to investigate what happens when you smash things together at such high energies but also the breakdown of the particles recreates the conditions just after the Big Bang when stuff hadn't all coalesced into normal matter yet.
Hawking said the collisions happen at other times, not that the conditions were the same.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:38 PM GMT, Griff said:
BWT SlagA, where did you see that Hawking said these collisions go on around us all the time? I'd be interested to see in what context he said that. The particles are being accelerated into each other with massive amounts of energy. I'm not sure where this happens in nature apart from the centre of stars etc. (Any idea, Afinkawan?)
But really, go and read The Big Bang by Simon Singh. It tells the most incredible story. Not least, that scientists in 1948 worked out that if the Big Bang theory was true, there would have to be a background level of radiation throughout the universe of exactly 160.2 Gigahertz. In 1964, researchers using new technology at Bell Labs found that, yes, there was exactly that frequency, (and ONLY that frequency) of cosmic radiation observable throughout the universe. Not 500 GHz, or 3Ghz, or just observable here and there, but that exact frequency coming from every point in the universe exactly as predicted by pencil-and-paper calculations sixteen years earlier. Personally I find that just about the amazing story I've ever read about science, including that guy with the metal face. (Tycho Brahe?)
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:40 PM GMT, Geoff Mutton said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 4:20 PM BSTHere comes the science
NB this doesn't help, it's just fun
Excellent vid!
Anyone seen a copy of CERN's Risk Assessment and Method Statement for this project?
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:43 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Quote: Afinkawan @ September 12 2008, 4:31 PM BSTHawking said the collisions happen at other times, not that the conditions were the same.
That's my point. So when Hawking reassured us by saying these collisions happen all the time, he wasn't telling the whole truth?
Yep, I've read quite a few books on this Griff as quantum physics is something I love (The Matter Myth / Wrinkles in Time - if I remember right). I love it for its poetry and beauty but also because it makes reality seem like a poorly tuned TV channel - ghostlike and barely audible above the universal static.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:45 PM GMT, Griff said:
You'd have to point us at the quote SlagA.
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:51 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 4:45 PM BSTYou'd have to point us at the quote SlagA.
So you're beginning to understand the reason for my confusion?
BBC's Today program: "Collisions at these and greater energies occur millions of times a day in the Earth's atmosphere, and nothing terrible happens."
Is Hawking not really being truthful with the public?
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:53 PM GMT, Marc P said:
He's only giving particle story.
huzzAH
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 7:53 PM GMT, Griff said:
Well if Stephen Hawking says these high-energy collisions occur all the time in the Earth's atmosphere, I'll believe him. However if they occur five miles up, where cosmic rays interact with the Van Allen Belt or something, then they are not exactly easy to observe, and so we need CERN. Seems fair enough to me? No misleading of the public there?
On Friday 12th September 2008 GMT at 8:00 PM GMT, SlagA said:
Quote: Marc P @ September 12 2008, 4:53 PM BSTHe's only giving particle story.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:36 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Greek hackers have already broken into the computer network:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/09/12/scicern212.xml
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:39 AM GMT, Nil Putters said:
That was a good idea.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:42 AM GMT, Griff said:
I expect they used a Trojan.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:42 AM GMT, Curt said:
Quote: DaButt @ September 12 2008, 9:36 PM BSTGreek hackers have already broken into the computer network:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/09/12/scicern212.xml
Damn Greeks.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:44 AM GMT, Nil Putters said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 9:42 PM BSTI expect they used a Trojan.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:48 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 9:42 PM BSTI expect they used a Trojan.
Nice one, but shouldn't it have been posted in the contraception thread?
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:51 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 9:42 PM BSTI expect they used a Trojan.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:56 AM GMT, Griff said:
I've just sent
"Greek hackers have infiltrated the CERN computer system. Experts suspect they may have used a Trojan."
to NewsRevue and Treason to see if I can sell it as a one-liner. I guess it depends how many computer geeks they expect to have in the audience.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:57 AM GMT, Finck said:
Ah! Should have said 'entered'.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 12:59 AM GMT, Griff said:
Yeah that would probably have been a better word. Still it distracted me for five minutes from the sketch I have no idea how to end and have been staring at miserably for hours.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:00 AM GMT, Finck said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 9:59 PM BSTYeah that would probably have been a better word. Still it distracted me for five minutes from the sketch I have no idea how to end and have been staring at miserably for hours.
Aw. Just throw it in Critique? Or have a drink?
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:02 AM GMT, Griff said:
I'm too proud and precious to put things in Critique. But the drink is helping.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:02 AM GMT, SlagA said:
I'm a science based person in that I love the concepts and some of the logic but I have a realistic expectation about scientists. But am I the only one hearing alarm bells over the most expensive machine ever made, in the most delicate of operations, having hackers in the system?
I'm assured it could've been worse, they could've been French.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:05 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: Finck @ September 12 2008, 10:00 PM BSTAw. Just throw it in Critique? Or have a drink?
Stick it in here, if finck can't get the punch in a couple of goes, no one can.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:08 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: SlagA @ September 12 2008, 10:02 PM BSTI'm a science based person in that I love the concepts and some of the logic but I have a realistic expectation about scientists. But am I the only one hearing alarm bells over the most expensive machine ever made, in the most delicate of operations, having hackers in the system?
The only way to keep it absolutely secure would be to have it completely disconnected from the outside world. But it's a collaboration of thousands of scientists from around the world, so the experiment needs to be somewhat connected to the Internet.
Ever seen the results of network security experiments? Someone dropped a bunch of cheap USB thumb drives (infected with a trojan/virus, of course) in the parking lot of a business and a scary number of the "lucky" people who found the drives plugged them right into their office computers.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:09 AM GMT, Griff said:
Well, CERN isn't the only potentially dangerous system to get hacked. There's that British guy currently being extradited to the US for doing "the biggest military hack of all time" against the Pentagon cos he was "looking for information about UFOs".
I used to work for an anti-virus company, and I had a day in the virus lab once watching demonstrations of some of the most deadly ones out there. Dear God, what some of those people can't do to your computer once they drop a virus on it.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:09 AM GMT, Finck said:
Quote: Marc P @ September 12 2008, 10:05 PM BSTStick it in here, if finck can't get the punch in a couple of goes, no one can.
Skål!
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:12 AM GMT, SlagA said:
So two wrongs do make a right?
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:14 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: Finck @ September 12 2008, 10:09 PM BSTSkål!
OOOOh yeah.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:17 AM GMT, Griff said:
No, they don't.
But it's not easy to make a completely secure system if you need to allow thousands of people from around the world to log into it. Fortunately it seems that the hackers didn't manage to get to any of the operational control systems, just some of the web servers (unless I skim-read the article incorrectly). The same thing is unfortunately probably happening in nuclear power stations up and down the country right now. I guess I'm saying if you're going to fret about hackers causing Armageddon, there are probably scarier things to worry about than CERN.
I did a bit of "hacking" once, ie I wrote a program which sniffed around the Internet looking for unsecured mail servers (I think it was) and connected if it found one. I eventually got onto a university in Germany somewhere and it was all so boring I never bothered again.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:28 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: DaButt @ September 12 2008, 9:48 PM BSTNice one, but shouldn't it have been posted in the contraception thread?
We don't have that brand here.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:31 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 10:17 PM BSTI guess I'm saying if you're going to fret about hackers causing Armageddon, there are probably scarier things to worry about than CERN.
Knock out the electricity grid, online banking, water pumping stations and telephone networks and watch the fun begin. And it can all be done from a teenager's computer in the middle of Mongolia or somewhere.
No network is ever more than a stolen/guessed password away from bad, bad things.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:32 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: DaButt @ September 12 2008, 10:08 PM BSTdropped a bunch of cheap USB thumb drives...
I thought that you were about to say that they contained the personal details of millions of members of the British public.
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 10:09 PM BSTWell, CERN isn't the only potentially dangerous system to get hacked. There's that British guy currently being extradited to the US for doing "the biggest military hack of all time" against the Pentagon cos he was "looking for information about UFOs".
It's abhorrent that he's being sent there. I fully and wholeheartedly support the guy.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:32 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 12 2008, 10:28 PM BSTWe don't have that brand here.
I realized that was probably the case after I posted it. Trojans are practically synonymous with condoms in the United States.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:34 AM GMT, zooo said:
We all know what they are though.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:34 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 12 2008, 10:32 PM BST
It's abhorrent that he's being sent there. I fully and wholeheartedly support the guy.
Out of respect for UFO truth, hackers' rights or patriotism?
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:34 AM GMT, Griff said:
QuoteIt's abhorrent that he's being sent there. I fully and wholeheartedly support the guy.
Yeah, me too.
The extradition laws between UK and USA are outrageously unbalanced. We hand over our citizens at the drop of a hat, with barely any legal checks and balances, but when we request the same from the USA (eg with IRA terror suspects) there's no reciprocation at all. So I'm told anyway. I'm not a lawyer or anything. But I do sort of know one of the "Nat West Three" (I used to commute to work on the same train as him and chat occasionally) and the way they have been treated is appalling.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:37 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: zooo @ September 12 2008, 10:34 PM BSTWe all know what they are though.
I always giggle when I remember the classic tale and picture a condom filled with teeming invaders, desperate to breach a woman's defences and enter her castle walls.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:38 AM GMT, zooo said:
It's very true to life.
Those naughty little spermy scamps.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:39 AM GMT, Griff said:
I sort of giggle at the image of a horse wearing a Trojan.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:39 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: DaButt @ September 12 2008, 10:34 PM BSTOut of respect for UFO truth, hackers' rights or patriotism?
It was a 'crime' which was not committed in the country in which he is set to be tried ("NatWest three" ditto, I think?). The prosecuters IN that country have said they will make him "fry". Quite clearly no actual damage was done. Every account I have seen, both from him and from others, suggests that he pushed on unlocked doors. And that I wouldn't trust the British judiciary, let alone that of a country which still holds the death sentence. I could go on, but quite frankly, I can't be arsed. Basically, every single part of it stinks.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:42 AM GMT, Finck said:
Quote: DaButt @ September 12 2008, 10:37 PM BSTI always giggle when I remember the classic tale and picture a condom filled with teeming invaders, desperate to breach a woman's defences and enter her castle walls.
But if you think about it, it's a bit unfortunate to call condoms Trojans, isn't it? Considering the metaphor. Those ad men must've had a lot of fun.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:43 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 10:09 PM BST
I used to work for an anti-virus company, and I had a day in the virus lab once watching demonstrations of some of the most deadly ones out there. Dear God, what some of those people can't do to your computer once they drop a virus on it.
Dated now, but I remember being pretty impressed with sub7, allowing random script kiddies to hear you through your mic and see you through your web cam! Jeebus!
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:44 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 10:34 PM BSTThe extradition laws between UK and USA are outrageously unbalanced. We hand over our citizens at the drop of a hat, with barely any legal checks and balances, but when we request the same from the USA (eg with IRA terror suspects) there's no reciprocation at all. So I'm told anyway. I'm not a lawyer or anything. But I do sort of know one of the "Nat West Three" (I used to commute to work on the same train as him and chat occasionally) and the way they have been treated is appalling.
All of the above. (Except I didn't know him.)
Quote: ian_w @ September 12 2008, 10:43 PM BSTDated now, but I remember being pretty impressed with sub7, allowing random script kiddies to hear you through your mic and see you through your web cam! Jeebus!
I know I've never been spied on, as I'm yet to be taken to court for psychological scarring.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:45 AM GMT, Griff said:
Wikipedia has this to say about the Nat West Three case:
QuoteExtradition controversy
The extensive news coverage of the Three in Britain resulted in a large-scale debate over the merits of their extradition to the United States. In particular, a high profile campaign against the extradition was led by the The Daily Telegraph newspaper. Several arguments were raised against the extradition.
Jurisdiction argument
It was argued that the crime was committed by British citizens living in Britain against a British company based in London, the nation's capital city and that, therefore, any resulting criminal case fell under British legal and territorial jurisdiction and should be tried by a British court. However, British authorities decided not to prosecute because of lack of evidence.
Fair trial argument
Some argued that it would be very difficult for Three to receive a fair trial in Texas. The case could have taken years to come to trial (the trial was scheduled to begin in September 2006, but was repeatedly postponed to January 2008). The three accused men would be forced to remain in the USA, far away from their families in the UK. Additionally, whilst on bail they would be unable to find gainful employment in order to fund a legal defence against the charges brought against them. (In fact the Three were permitted to seek employment in the US provided they remained in Houston. )
In addition, it was claimed that the defendants would be handicapped in preparing a defence because most of the evidence and witnesses were overseas in the UK. They argued that witnesses would be reluctant to come to Texas.
Extradition inequality argument
It was alleged that the extradition arrangements between the U.S. and the UK are highly unequal. It is comparatively easy to extradite British citizens to America. In contrast it is difficult to extradite Americans to Britain -- for example there are still PIRA terrorist members who fled to the USA in the 1980s after being accused of terrorist crimes who still cannot be extradited. There has been much criticism of the fact that the Americans do not have to produce a prima facie case - or even any "reasonable case" to extradite UK citizens, whereas there is no comparable facility to extradite U.S. citizens to the UK. Despite this, the head of Britain's Serious Fraud Office, Robert Wardle, has claimed that there would have been enough evidence to extradite the Three to the US even under the old extradition arrangements. He expressed astonishment that the men had become a "cause celebre", and expressed confidence that the Three would get a fair trial in the US.Supporters of the Three claim that when the extradition law was passed in the wake of September 11 the UK government stated that it was only to be used in the so-called war against terror and if the treaty was ratified by the US. However, neither of these conditions was written into the text of the extradition law, and neither had been fulfilled in the case of the Three at the time of their extradition (the treaty was subsequently ratified by the US in September 2006).
House of Commons debate
In a highly unusual move, the Speaker of the House of Commons, Michael Martin, allowed an emergency debate, on 12 July 2006, on both the treaty and the 'Natwest Three' after a request by Liberal Democrat MP Nick Clegg. During the debate, news shocked the House that a former Royal Bank of Scotland executive and FBI prosecution witness Neil Coulbeck had been found dead, after committing suicide by slitting his wrists. It had been suggested by friends and family that the FBI 'hounded' him. At the inquest into his death, Mr Coulbeck's wife stated that he had been deeply disturbed by the extradition of the Three, and it was known that he had provided a crucial statement which in part led to their extradition. On the day of his death he tried to contact NatWest's lawyers and shortly after left his home and was found dead a few days later. The FBI denied this, saying that it had interviewed Coulbeck only once, four years earlier
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:46 AM GMT, Finck said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 12 2008, 10:39 PM BSTAnd that I wouldn't trust the British judiciary, let alone that of a country which still holds the death sentence. I could go on, but quite frankly, I can't be arsed. Basically, every single part of it stinks.
I would have thought that in general no country with a residuum of manners would extradite to a country that still has the death sentence... *sigh*
Still, they all do.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:48 AM GMT, The Rook said:
Quote: Ian Wolf @ September 4 2008, 10:02 PM BSTIt was mentioned on "Mock the Week" this week that the chances of the CERN Large Hadron Collider, the largest particle accelator in the world, causing a black hole is 1 in 50,000,000.
Interesitngly, you are more likely to burn to death while you sleep (1 in 48,000,000), be murdered (1 in 30,000,000), die in a plane crash (1 in 11,000,000), be struck by lightning (1 in 10,000,000), be struck by an asteroid (1 in 6,000,000), drown in the bath (1 in 685,000) or die today (1 in 257,000).
However, death by black hole is more likely than chocking to death (1 in 120,000,000), falling coconuts (1 in 250,000,000) or shark attacks (1 in 300,000,000).
So, are you worried about CERN, or do you think it is just hype?
Wikipedia article about the Collider
I heard somewhere that there is more chance of Elvis crashing a UFO on the Loch Ness monster's head than there is of me winning the lottery. Mind you I think I'd give a lottery win to see that chain of events.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:51 AM GMT, Marc P said:
Quote: Finck @ September 12 2008, 10:42 PM BSTBut if you think about it, it's a bit unfortunate to call condoms Trojans, isn't it? Considering the metaphor. Those ad men must've had a lot of fun.
No metaphor, they were soldiers not sailors.
Quote: The Rook @ September 12 2008, 10:48 PM BSTI heard somewhere that there is more chance of Elvis crashing a UFO on the Loch Ness monster's head than there is of me winning the lottery. Mind you I think I'd give a lottery win to see that chain of events.
No you wouldn't.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:53 AM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 12 2008, 10:39 PM BSTIt was a 'crime' which was not committed in the country in which he is set to be tried ("NatWest three" ditto, I think?). The prosecuters IN that country have said they will make him "fry". Quite clearly no actual damage was done. Every account I have seen, both from him and from others, suggests that he pushed on unlocked doors. And that I wouldn't trust the British judiciary, let alone that of a country which still holds the death sentence. I could go on, but quite frankly, I can't be arsed. Basically, every single part of it stinks.
The death penalty has nothing to do with this case. Also, I don't think anyone who would face such a charge (murder, etc.) has ever been extradited here. It's common practice to get the U.S. to promise not to pursue the death penalty before handing someone over. And it should be noted that they are voluntarily handed over under the guise of international treaties and not snatched up in the middle of the night.
The guy broke into military systems shortly after September 11th and f**ked around with classified military data. He'll serve about 3 years in jail and then be released to sell his story to the tabloids for a small fortune.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:53 AM GMT, Moonstone said:
Quote: Aaron @ September 12 2008, 10:44 PM BST
I know I've never been spied on, as I'm yet to be taken to court for psychological scarring.
They probably got bored of watching you sat refreshing the General forum all day.
On Saturday 13th September 2008 GMT at 1:54 AM GMT, Aaron said:
Quote: Finck @ September 12 2008, 10:46 PM BSTI would have thought that in general no country with a residuum of manners would extradite to a country that still has the death sentence... *sigh*
Still, they all do.
Quite! Talk about depressing.
Quote: The Rook @ September 12 2008, 10:48 PM BSTI heard somewhere that there is more chance of Elvis crashing a UFO on the Loch Ness monster's head than there is of me winning the lottery. Mind you I think I'd give a lottery win to see that chain of events.
On Sunday 14th September 2008 GMT at 6:47 PM GMT, Charly said:
School on Wednesday was surreal. The year elevens were all freaking out the year sevens, saying they were all going to die. We tried to pat them on the back.
On Monday 15th September 2008 GMT at 5:25 PM GMT, Afinkawan said:
Quote: Griff @ September 12 2008, 4:38 PM BSTBWT SlagA, where did you see that Hawking said these collisions go on around us all the time? I'd be interested to see in what context he said that. The particles are being accelerated into each other with massive amounts of energy. I'm not sure where this happens in nature apart from the centre of stars etc. (Any idea, Afinkawan?)
Various places from what I understand. There's lots of high energy charged particles passing through the Earth and our atmosphere all the time. so these types of collisions do happen.
Quote: SlagA @ September 12 2008, 4:43 PM BSTSo when Hawking reassured us by saying these collisions happen all the time, he wasn't telling the whole truth?
Sort of. It's the actual collisions which might start off a micro black hole rather than the conditions that occur as a result.
and as for the Natwest Three - that trio of bastards put me in the annoying position of siding with a bunch of bankers...
On Thursday 18th September 2008 GMT at 6:50 PM GMT, oldcowgrazing said:
Could some one explain to me how they come up with hurricane names? Hurricane Ike for example, was that in relation to Tina walking into his fist?
On Thursday 18th September 2008 GMT at 6:53 PM GMT, Aaron said:
All I know is that hurricanes are named alphabetically each year. So Ike is the ninth.
On Thursday 18th September 2008 GMT at 6:55 PM GMT, DaButt said:
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutnames.shtml
On Thursday 18th September 2008 GMT at 7:07 PM GMT, swerytd said:
I am disappointed there is no 'Higgins'.
Does no-one name their hurricanes after the moustachioed acquaintance of Magnum anymore???
Dan
On Thursday 18th September 2008 GMT at 7:07 PM GMT, chipolata said:
How come no Q's and U's? I'd like to see a Hurricane Quentin or Unwin.
On Thursday 18th September 2008 GMT at 7:09 PM GMT, Curt said:
Just a note I heard an interview with the creator of the World Wide Web (basically the http) Tim Berners Lee. He is concerned with the misinformation on the internet. Specifically this misinformation about the CERN Large Hadron Collider. He was very upset about the black hole rumors on the net as they were utterly false. The guy doesn't come out very often but I thought it was interesting. He's proposing more sites that are peer reviewed along the likes of Wikis.
On Thursday 18th September 2008 GMT at 7:26 PM GMT, DaButt said:
Quote: chipolata @ September 18 2008, 4:07 PM BSTHow come no Q's and U's?
There aren't many names that begin with those letters. They retire names after major storms form and cause damage, so they'd eventually run out of Q and U names.
They rarely make it that far down the alphabet anyway.
On Thursday 18th September 2008 GMT at 9:26 PM GMT, Nil Putters said:
On Friday 19th September 2008 GMT at 2:21 PM GMT, Loopey said:
I decided to do some research into your questions on the LHC, blackholes, and " has the large hadron collider destroyed the world yet" type stuff.
found a good link on it:
http://hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com/
hope it helps.
On Saturday 20th September 2008 GMT at 3:59 PM GMT, DaButt said:
The destruction of the world has been postponed by 2 months.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/09/20/hadron.collider.damage.ap/index.html
On Saturday 20th September 2008 GMT at 8:08 PM GMT, Gavin said:
LOL! this bodes well they turn the f**king thing on and it does that. Sounds like British workman ship...or Polish