Dear Otto,
On 11 Jan 2017, at 12:05, Otto E. Rossler wrote:
Dear Plamen:
I love your response.
But: it misses my point: The fact that I have provided a proof since
9 years' time (often published) as to why the experiment represents
a sizeable risk. Everyone in physics is invited to invalidate my
proof.
I am not against taking unknown risks in science. I am only opposed
to acting against known risks.
But as convincing as this may be, it is still not my main point. My
main and real point is: CERN refuses to update its official safety
report LSAG for exactly as long.
But there is an even more disturbing point. IF an organization
openly refuses to contradict evidence of committing a crime (even
the biggest of history), it is very very strange in my own eyes at
least that no one in the world, from the media to the profession,
from Europe to Africa to America to Asia, is even able to spot this
fact as deserving to be alleviated or at least publicly discussed.
Can anyone in this illustrious round offer an excuse or explanation
for this historically unique phenomenon?
Is it really unique? I'm afraid it might be a rather common attitude.
As a different example, we know, since a very long time that the
prohibition of drugs does not work at all: it augments the consumption
of drugs, in the worst unqualified conditions, and benefits immensely,
and *only* to the international crime and terrorism.
Concerning hemp all the papers showing that there is a serious danger
have been shown, since long, containing elementary errors in logic and
statistics, or having delirious protocols, but prohibition continues,
and the number of people suffering directly from it has grown and is
quite huge. All the literature is available, but nothing changes.
I could say much more on this, as I have studied the human-lies
phenomenon and the drugs fields is a nest of human lies, but it is now
a bit of topic (but not quite unrelated to information and
communication, through the notion of (purposeful)
misinformation,miscommunication and propaganda).
I think that the prospect of blowing up the planet is just a non-
concern for some lobbies, and that with fake religion we just accepted
fake science, and that there is no more free markets nor free-thinking
because all powers are concentrated into the hands of few bandits,
dispersed in rotten clubs, rotten politicians working for petrol or
pharma interests, etc.
I am alas very well placed to know that a part of the academical world
is itself hostage of those bandits.
So I am not so much astonished that nobody will give attention to
anything going against the special interest of a small community of
very influent people, influent by force and not by reason.
It is not so much astonishing, as we have not yet transformed,
accomplished the Enlightened Period. All sciences have come back to
Academy, except the most fundamental one (theology), with the result
that it stays in the hand of the charlatans. We are just still in the
Middle-Age, and the only difference is that it is a nuclear Middle-
Age, which is indeed a bit frightening. We are just not rational (yet?).
Having said this, I would also be happy to understand how some small
black hole could not evaporate. The math still eludes me.
Of course, I am not an expert in particle physics, and I cannot
pretend to even been convinced, through pure personal insight , why
black holes exist and should evaporate "in reality", as opposed to
simplification where the math is feasible, but where my intuition is
not solid enough to see if the math can be applied. But I am with you,
Otto, when asking why nobody tries seriously to answer your question,
as it is indeed a rather important one, locally.
Best,
Bruno
(Understanding is sometimes more important than surviving -- right?
Forgive me the pun.)
Can you kindly distribute this response of mine?
I am very grateful for the discussion,
take care, everyone,
Otto
From: Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov <plamen.l.simeo...@gmail.com>
To: Louis H Kauffman <lou...@gmail.com>
Cc: fis <fis@listas.unizar.es>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 6:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] A Curious Story
Dear Louis, Pedro and FISers,
I have been knowing Otto for about a litle less than 10 years now.
What I have learned from him is that he has a very subtle sense of
humor and wisdom.
What I conclude about this issue with CERN's LHC is that he wishes
nothing more/less than an a priori theoretical proof that the black
hole experiments will not lead to a collaps of the Earth.
He would be more than happy if somebody provides this proof and his
concerns about our future appear ungrounded, so that the experiments
can continue without any fear about the possible end of humanity.
But as he said, nobody has done this until now. Nobody has taken
these concerns seriously. The key question for us is why do we allow
such experiments without having such a proof? Why do we play with
fire in our own kitchen without being sure that we can deal with its
breakout? If the accident occurs, then it will be too late to
prevent the danger, unless we have a time machine, which is not the
case at the moment, I am afraid.
So, I think that Otto's appeal can be considered as a challenge not
less important than the one with the proof of Fermat's last theorem.
While there was no danger from keeping this problem unsolved for
300+ years, we may have a real problem now.
So, why not trying to administer science for being performed in a
reasonable way: to not place the horses (experimental science)
before the cabin (theoretical science) - which is the case with LHC?
Otto only wishes to say: "We should not do such experients, until we
have a theoretical proof or at least to have a computer simulation
demonstrating that the chance of having such a disaster is
diminishing." And even if this is the case, we should carry a
referendum over 4+ billion people on Earth on wether to allow such
experiments or not. They are not only an issue ofr a government or
of an over-excited community of physicists. Please correct me if I
am wrong, Otto.
I hope this helps.
All the best.
Plamen
____________________________________________________________
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Louis H Kauffman <lou...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Dear Folks,
It is very important to not be hasty and assume that the warning
Professor Rossler made is to be taken seriously.
It is relatively easy to check if a mathematical reasoning is true
or false.
It is much more difficult to see if a piece of mathematics is
correctly alligned to physical prediction.
Note also that a reaction such as
"THIS STORY IS A GOOD REASON FOR SHUTTING DOWN CERN PERMANENTLY AND
SAVING A LOT OF LARGELY WASTED MONEY.”.
Is not in the form of scientific rational discussion, but rather in
the form of taking a given conclusion for granted
and using it to support another opinion that is just that - an
opinion.
By concatenating such behaviors we arrive at the present political
state of the world.
This is why, in my letter, I have asked for an honest discussion of
the possible validity of Professor Rossler’s arguments.
At this point I run out of commentary room for this week and I shall
read and look forward to making further comments next week.
Best,
Lou Kauffman
On Jan 9, 2017, at 7:17 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es
> wrote:
From Alex Hankey
-------- Mensaje reenviado --------
Asunto: Re: [Fis] A Curious Story
Fecha: Sun, 8 Jan 2017 19:55:55 +0530
De: Alex Hankey <alexhan...@gmail.com>
Para: PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>
THIS STORY IS A GOOD REASON FOR SHUTTING DOWN CERN PERMANENTLY AND
SAVING A LOT OF LARGELY WASTED MONEY.
On 5 January 2017 at 16:36, PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es
> wrote:
Dear FISers,
Herewith the Lecture inaugurating our 2017 sessions.
I really hope that this Curious Story is just that, a curiosity.
But in science we should not look for hopes but for arguments and
counter-arguments...
Best wishes to All and exciting times for the New Year!
--Pedro
De: Otto E. Rossler [oeros...@yahoo.com]
Enviado el: miércoles, 04 de enero de 2017 17:51
Para: PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ
Asunto: NY session
----------------------
A Curious Story
Otto E. Rossler, University of Tübingen, Germany
Maybe I am the only one who finds it curious. Which fact would then
make it even more curious for me. It goes like this: Someone says
“I can save your house from a time bomb planted into the basement”
and you respond by saying “I don’t care.” This curious story is
taken from the Buddhist bible.
It of course depends on who is offering to help. It could be a
lunatic person claiming that he alone can save the planet from a
time-bomb about to be planted into it. In that case, there would be
no reason to worry. On the other hand, it could also be that you,
the manager, are a bit high at the moment so that you don't fully
appreciate the offer made to you. How serious is my offer herewith
made to you today?
I only say that for eight years' time already, there exists no
counter-proof in the literature to my at first highly publicized
proof of danger. I was able to demonstrate that the miniature black
holes officially attempted to be produced at CERN do possess two
radically new properties:
they cannot Hawking evaporate
they grow exponentially inside matter
If these two findings hold water, the current attempt at producing
ultra-slow miniature black holes on earth near the town of Geneva
means that the slower-most specimen will get stuck inside earth and
grow there exponentially to turn the planet into a 2-cm black hole
after several of undetectable growth. Therefore the current attempt
of CERN's to produce them near Geneva is a bit curious.
What is so curious about CERN's attempt? It is the fact that no one
finds it curious. I am reminded of an old joke: The professor
informs the candidate about the outcome of the oral exam with the
following words “You are bound to laugh but you have flunked the
test.” I never understood the punchline. I likewise cannot
understand why a never refuted proof of the biggest danger of
history leaves everyone unconcerned. Why NOT check an unattended
piece of luggage on the airport called Earth?
To my mind, this is the most curious story ever -- for the very
reason that everyone finds it boring. A successful counter-proof
would thus alleviate but a single person’s fears – mine. You, my
dear reader, are thus my last hope that you might be able to
explain the punch line to me: “Why is it that it does not matter
downstairs that the first floor is ablaze?” I am genuinely curious
to learn why attempting planetocide is fun. Are you not?
For J.O.R.
---------------
______________________________ _________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bi n/mailman/listinfo/fis
--
Alex Hankey M.A. (Cantab.) PhD (M.I.T.)
Distinguished Professor of Yoga and Physical Science,
SVYASA, Eknath Bhavan, 19 Gavipuram Circle
Bangalore 560019, Karnataka, India
Mobile (Intn'l): +44 7710 534195
Mobile (India) +91 900 800 8789
______________________________ ______________________________
2015 JPBMB Special Issue on Integral Biomathics: Life Sciences,
Mathematics and Phenomenological Philosophy
______________________________ _________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi- bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
______________________________ _________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi- bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
