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.



(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,

From: Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov <>
To: Louis H Kauffman <>
Cc: fis <>
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.



On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Louis H Kauffman <> 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.
Lou Kauffman

On Jan 9, 2017, at 7:17 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan < > wrote:

From Alex Hankey
-------- Mensaje reenviado --------
Asunto: Re: [Fis] A Curious Story
Fecha:  Sun, 8 Jan 2017 19:55:55 +0530
De:     Alex Hankey <>


On 5 January 2017 at 16:36, PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ < > 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!

De: Otto E. Rossler []
Enviado el: miércoles, 04 de enero de 2017 17:51
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 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 bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

______________________________ _________________
Fis mailing list bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Fis mailing list

Fis mailing list

Fis mailing list

Reply via email to