[Vo]:Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless . . . Sun?
No, not another PK Dick short story abused. The sun has no spots, unseen for a century: http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+History+First+Spotless+Month+in+a+Century/article12823.htm http://snipurl.com/3m72o [www_dailytech_com] According to data from Mount Wilson Observatory, UCLA, more than an entire month has passed without a spot. The last time such an event occurred was June of 1913. Sunspot data has been collected since 1749. more
Re: [Vo]:Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless . . . Sun?
--- Terry wrote: According to data from Mount Wilson Observatory, UCLA, more than an entire month has passed without a spot. The last time such an event occurred was June of 1913. Sunspot data has been collected since 1749. Hmmm... any forebodings there? Weather is normal. Gustav is looking more and more like hot-air-hype - even a convenient planned diversion to avert close scrutiny (and keep Bush/Cheney away as long as possible)? This probably represents the minimum in the eleven-year sunspot cycle and the start of a new cycle. As for triggering a pole reversal, there is no evidence for that so far - but the magnetic connection to this anomaly deserves further scrutiny, as sunspots are all about magnetism. I am sure political pundits, and especially Obama supporters, will try to fashion it as the start of a new era of 'spotless politics' or maybe Palin's supporters will switch to the theme of an immaculate conception ;-) Anyway, 1913 was a 'red letter' year in may ways, but it was coincidental to a spotless sun. The First Women's Suffrage protest, War in the Balkans (leading to WWI); The United States Revenue Act of 1913 reimposed the federal income tax; Ford Motor Company introduced the first moving assembly line, reducing assembly time sixfold; the Federal Reserve is created by Woodrow Wilson. We all want to look for 'signs' and omens from the stars. This one looks like it has symbolism written all over it, but don't they all? Jones
[Vo]:Sunspotless
Could a significant global cooling effect be taking place.? I notice there is a deafening silence from Pope Algore and his Church of Global Warming on this subject. It would be very inconvenient for the selling of carbon indulgences, oops... that's offsets. Nothing is made of the fact that 2007 saw the largest one year drop in average global temperature in recorded history. Didn't hear about that did you? Almost everyone who lives on the real earth, rather that the computer climate model earth, has noticed that it's been a lot cooler lately. Where I live in southern California, winter before last winter was the coldest since 1948, but of course nothing was made of that in the news. I lost 500 feet of ficus hedge because it froze to death. There was a massive die-out of native plant species in the canyons near my home as well, all frozen. The fast dancing and circumlocutory nonsense spewing forth from the Global Warming Priesthood grasping for some explanation are becoming both shrill and comical. The real reason for climate changes, solar activity, is showing us something quite the opposite of Algore's dreamworld. You know, that's the one where all of us ride bicycles and starve to death, while Algore flies about in his Gulfstream and has a special lane on the road for his fleet of SUVs while he grows ever fatter. Anyone else notice he's begun to resemble a fat Bela Lugosi? There has been a total lack of sunspots for a month. This is not good news, either for real people or Algore. This normally indicates a significant colder period on the earth, or even an ice age. We need to get really serious about energy supplies, both conventional and new, especially the new ones. We also need to quit whining about genetically modified crops. If there is a long term colder climate, agricultural output will plummet. More energy and higher crop yields in a shorter growing season will be essential to prevent the starvation of millions or even billions. Here is a link to the observations about the lack of sunspots: http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+History+First+Spotless+Month+in+a+Century/article12823.htm http://tinyurl.com/562srq M.
Re: [Vo]:Nature India on Bubble Fusion
On Sep 1, 2008, at 5:39 PM, R C Macaulay wrote: Hold it down to a roar Jed, we're all grown boys and girls and understand the full component of racism. I just felt the subject was not a subject for the forum. If racism is to be discussed. they can create a proper forum to address the specific issue. Sufficent to limit it to corruption and academic suppression.. whew! ain't that enough ... This is not merely a case of blatant racism, it is a case of racism affecting scientists and the science itself. It is a case of destruction of academic freedom and integrity, and it is an issue which has reached the highest levels of scientific journalism. This case is scientific infamy at an international level, and thus far apparently sanctioned by a major academic institution. This case also relates directly to alternative means of creating fusion, bubble fusion in fact, the very topic that initiated the list. It strikes me as difficult to come up with a more relevant topic for this list. It is clearly far more important and relevant than the general politics and religion issues that repeatedly creep into discussion here. In any case, racism of this kind should not be laughed off, especially institutionalized racism. I agree with Jed. Racism should be confronted. It is not a joke. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Sunspotless
One interesting point which I am surprised is not often mentioned in this polarized debate: Blow up the third chart on Michael's cited reference, and contemplate the full implication of the Maunder Minimum and the so-called little ice age ... ... and the likelihood that we could be on the brink of a repeat of this in 2008... If it turns out that what humans are doing to the environment is in fact - on the bottom line, and after all is said and done - NOT harmful in itself due to these unusual circumstance - and that wanton CO2 release is simply forestalling another little ice age then - YES - that can seen by most of us non-specialists as a *good thing*, at least in the short term. However, it does not follow that what Algore is promoting is itself unscientific. Quite the contrary. Like it or not, he IS the spokesperson for the majority of specialists in the field - although admittedly there exists a strong and vocal minority of specialists who do not go along with most of it and especially the way it has been politicized. The bigger question for the rest of us - what is the true situation? -- and the true unpoliticized risk of this situation? -- i.e. IF both Algore AND also his critics are partly correct in that yes, humans are rapidly changing the normal course of environmental change in a way which could have been harmful, BUT that change, as it turns out is not harmful at all, and in fact the short-term benefit is poised to have the (unforeseen by the polluters) effect of forestalling another little ice age Interesting moral dilemma, if nothing else ... wrong for the right reason, or right for the wrong reason? Jones --- Michael Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could a significant global cooling effect be taking place.? I notice there is a deafening silence from Pope Algore and his Church of Global Warming on this subject. It would be very inconvenient for the selling of carbon indulgences, oops... that's offsets. Nothing is made of the fact that 2007 saw the largest one year drop in average global temperature in recorded history. Didn't hear about that did you? Almost everyone who lives on the real earth, rather that the computer climate model earth, has noticed that it's been a lot cooler lately. Where I live in southern California, winter before last winter was the coldest since 1948, but of course nothing was made of that in the news. I lost 500 feet of ficus hedge because it froze to death. There was a massive die-out of native plant species in the canyons near my home as well, all frozen. The fast dancing and circumlocutory nonsense spewing forth from the Global Warming Priesthood grasping for some explanation are becoming both shrill and comical. The real reason for climate changes, solar activity, is showing us something quite the opposite of Algore's dreamworld. You know, that's the one where all of us ride bicycles and starve to death, while Algore flies about in his Gulfstream and has a special lane on the road for his fleet of SUVs while he grows ever fatter. Anyone else notice he's begun to resemble a fat Bela Lugosi? There has been a total lack of sunspots for a month. This is not good news, either for real people or Algore. This normally indicates a significant colder period on the earth, or even an ice age. We need to get really serious about energy supplies, both conventional and new, especially the new ones. We also need to quit whining about genetically modified crops. If there is a long term colder climate, agricultural output will plummet. More energy and higher crop yields in a shorter growing season will be essential to prevent the starvation of millions or even billions. Here is a link to the observations about the lack of sunspots: http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+History+First+Spotless+Month+in+a+Century/article12823.htm http://tinyurl.com/562srq M.
Re: [Vo]:Nature India on Bubble Fusion
I agree with both Horace and Jed, this is serious and should be confronted at every level possible. The initial conflict appeared to be motivated by simple professional jealousy. Now the conflict has gotten more serious because a major university cannot set proper standards for its faculty. The issue of whether the science is real or not has now become much less important. Nevertheless, the fact that apparently good science led to this sorry state points to several serious deficiencies in the system used to evaluate science. Except for popular outrage, no agency seems to be able to intervene in this mess to reach a fair solution. Ed On Sep 2, 2008, at 11:13 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: On Sep 1, 2008, at 5:39 PM, R C Macaulay wrote: Hold it down to a roar Jed, we're all grown boys and girls and understand the full component of racism. I just felt the subject was not a subject for the forum. If racism is to be discussed. they can create a proper forum to address the specific issue. Sufficent to limit it to corruption and academic suppression.. whew! ain't that enough ... This is not merely a case of blatant racism, it is a case of racism affecting scientists and the science itself. It is a case of destruction of academic freedom and integrity, and it is an issue which has reached the highest levels of scientific journalism. This case is scientific infamy at an international level, and thus far apparently sanctioned by a major academic institution. This case also relates directly to alternative means of creating fusion, bubble fusion in fact, the very topic that initiated the list. It strikes me as difficult to come up with a more relevant topic for this list. It is clearly far more important and relevant than the general politics and religion issues that repeatedly creep into discussion here. In any case, racism of this kind should not be laughed off, especially institutionalized racism. I agree with Jed. Racism should be confronted. It is not a joke. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Nature India on Bubble Fusion
The extinguished Vort membership can debate the issues till the cows come home, and that we have done. What I'd like to know is: Officially, what happens next? Legally speaking, what does Taleyarkhan do next? Or is it now in Purdue's court to respond. I've found myself wondering if Purdue is hoping they won't have to, as if they might attempt to infer it's beneath them to respond to Taleyarkhan's unflattering accusations. Perhaps Purdue is hoping this sordid mess will go away if they simply ignore it long enough. I assume that is not likely to happen. Jones, what does your past-life as a champion lawyer for the downtrodden suggest is likely to happen next. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
[Vo]:Test - please ignore
Test of gmail's odd implementation of pop access.
Re: [Vo]:Nature India on Bubble Fusion
SVJ: As far as Seth Putterman, PhD and his meddling asst. Naranjo (not the fruit AKAIK) are concerned... not to mention the politician, what's-his-name - who got involved in this soap-opera in a most inappropriate and underhanded way One of the many common law torts which comes to mind which have been used to correct this kind of situation is called: INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH ECONOMIC RELATIONS http://wps.prenhall.com/wps/media/objects/418/428941/mcinnes_law_1ce_ch11.pdf Politicians are NOT immune. Anyone's job, even at a University, is an economic relationship, as are the possibility of new businesses, and/or royalties and consulting fees ... such as those which even Putterman himself had at one time hoped to reap from a patent which could be circumvented by RT's improvements. There have been hundred million dollar verdicts awarded when this tort has been invoked, so it should not be taken lightly... Seth Putterman's weak and limited patent for a sonofusion device was granted in 1997 and will run out before he gets royalties anyway: US 5,659,173: Converting acoustic energy into useful other energy forms and he did not anticipate RT's improvement, nor the others, which could put those other inventors (not SP) in the cat-bird's seat of sonofusion if it becomes commercial ... ergo - perhaps Putterman would sacrifice disgracing the whole sonofusion technology in deference to his later crystal fusion patent; ...but it is a very complex situation, and who knows what else is involved? I do not even want to know. The whole sordid affair is utterly reprehensible and juvenile. No matter who is ultimately correct on the scientific facts - those are the important thing and are taking a back seat to the drama and professional jealousies which will soon be available on Court-TV, most likely. --- OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The extinguished Vort membership can debate the issues till the cows come home, and that we have done. What I'd like to know is: Officially, what happens next? Legally speaking, what does Taleyarkhan do next? Or is it now in Purdue's court to respond. I've found myself wondering if Purdue is hoping they won't have to, as if they might attempt to infer it's beneath them to respond to Taleyarkhan's unflattering accusations. Perhaps Purdue is hoping this sordid mess will go away if they simply ignore it long enough. I assume that is not likely to happen. Jones, what does your past-life as a champion lawyer for the downtrodden suggest is likely to happen next. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: [Vo]:Apparently growing white blobs on Phoenix strut
NASA seems to have taken an interest in the white blobs on the struts. On Sol 97, they took no less than 8 photos of the same spot, elevation 89.076, azimuth 355.518, with times varying from 02:09:16 to 03:56:48. See: http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=26263cID=268 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=26264cID=268 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=26265cID=268 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=26266cID=268 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=26267cID=268 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=26268cID=268 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=26269cID=268 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=26281cID=268 Following are other strut photos previously noted: Second strut photo: Sol 73, 13:02:13 camera elevation -25 deg, azimuth 150: http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=19371cID=209 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images/gallery/lg_19371.jpg Third strut before photo, Sol 5, 14:47:02 camera elevation -13 deg, azimuth 197: http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=1018cID=26 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images/gallery/lg_1018.jpg Third strut after photo, Sol 89, 11:45:08, camera elevation -19 deg, azimuth 197: http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images.php?gID=24843cID=247 http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/images/gallery/lg_24843.jpg Note that all the above photos are upside down. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Nature India on Bubble Fusion
For those who might be interested you can read brief bios and get photo portraits of the major stars in this drama out at: https://engineering.purdue.edu/NE/People/faculty.html Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:RF resonator: QM *and* linear behavior (news item)
Here's something very cool: Researchers Make Milestone Discovery in Quantum Mechanics Fock States on demand http://www.ia.ucsb.edu/pa/display.aspx?pkey=1822 http://www.physics.ucsb.edu/~martinisgroup/photos.shtml http://www.physics.ucsb.edu/~martinisgroup/papers/Wang2008.pdf http://www.photonics.com/content/news/2008/August/6/92776.aspx It's an RF resonator being explored with a superconducting component, and apparently exhibiting both classical tank-circuit behavior as well as quantized energy level behavior. (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3138unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]:Sunspotless
On Sep 2, 2008, at 3:07 PM, Jones Beene wrote: snip If flat earth is too extreme, even for biblical literalists; but creationism is OK to teach, then I would like to ask the various candidates who might support 'creationism,' although there is only one of that persuation, where do you draw the line between biblical truth and metaphor? Is that question unfair? This a very good question. The bigger question is why anyone needs to even ask such a question. A rational society of thinking individuals would never confuse reality with faith. We all know that many people are not rational. The problem is to determine what fraction of the population is not rational. I submit that the answer to such a question would help reveal the fraction of rational individuals that are present in a society. Apparently, according to my analysis, the level of rationally is decreasing in the US. This conclusion is not only consistent with this criteria, but it is supported by the behavior of the stock market and the government. The bigger question, is what does an individual do to protect themselves from this growing irrationally? Ed Jones
Re: [Vo]:Sunspotless
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 2 Sep 2008 14:07:51 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] Is there enough of a small asymmetry in macro magnetic effects, such that one pole can be slightly hotter than the other due to solar wind; and could that dynamic enter into the ice mass situation ?? As unlikely as this may seem at first... [snip] I think the asymmetry is primarily due to the fact that the North Pole is all sea level floating ice, while the South Pole is high altitude ice on land. That means that as Arctic ice melts, water is revealed with a very large change in albedo (promoting further warming), whereas the high altitude ice in the Antarctic doesn't get warm enough to melt at all (whereas low altitude ice in the Antarctic does melt - ice shelves disintegrating). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Vo]:Sunspotless
In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 2 Sep 2008 15:32:23 -0600: Hi, [snip] behavior of the stock market and the government. The bigger question, is what does an individual do to protect themselves from this growing irrationally? [snip] Rational behaviour is a luxury. Irrational behaviour based upon fear is a part of human basic instinct. Fear arises when people perceive their existence threatened. The cure is to ensure that it is less threatened, by improving the quality of life. This will flow automatically from the introduction of a sustainable economy based upon sustainable energy. That's where we come in. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Vo]:Sunspotless
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 2 Sep 2008 10:25:15 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] The bigger question for the rest of us - what is the true situation? -- and the true unpoliticized risk of this situation? -- i.e. IF both Algore AND also his critics are partly correct in that yes, humans are rapidly changing the normal course of environmental change in a way which could have been harmful, BUT that change, as it turns out is not harmful at all, and in fact the short-term benefit is poised to have the (unforeseen by the polluters) effect of forestalling another little ice age Interesting moral dilemma, if nothing else ... wrong for the right reason, or right for the wrong reason? [snip] It's even possible that CO2 based global warming may trigger a state change in the climate leading to regional global cooling (e.g. failure of or drastic change in the Atlantic conveyor). IOW the changes we are experiencing may not be an either/or situation (the Sun or human influence), but rather due to both combined (an and situation). It's possible both are working in concert, rather than in opposition. however it's also possible that the sunspots will pick up again. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Vo]:Sunspotless
On Sep 2, 2008, at 3:41 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 2 Sep 2008 15:32:23 -0600: Hi, [snip] behavior of the stock market and the government. The bigger question, is what does an individual do to protect themselves from this growing irrationally? [snip] Rational behaviour is a luxury. Irrational behaviour based upon fear is a part of human basic instinct. Fear arises when people perceive their existence threatened. The cure is to ensure that it is less threatened, by improving the quality of life. This will flow automatically from the introduction of a sustainable economy based upon sustainable energy. That's where we come in. I agree, Robin. The problem is having an irrational society make rational choices that would reduce the fear. This same problem confronts every individual in a society. The greater the fear a person has, the greater the chance they will make an irrational decision. I think Obama is right when he observed that in the time of fear, people tend to turn to religion, i. e. God, to protect them. While this can be beneficial in reducing fear, a problem is created when the power structure uses this attitude to gain more power. That is what got Bush elected the second time and is being used to get McCain elected this time. In other words, the greater the faith in God, the greater the susceptibility to manipulation. This is where the level of rationally becomes important. If the level of faith in religion is high, the possibility of an irrational decision is high. Unfortunately, I don't think we will solve the energy problem in time to reduce the fear to sustainable levels. Too many people are benefiting from the fear and too many people are out to generate more. Ed Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Vo]:Sunspotless
Ed wrote: The problem is to determine what fraction of the population is not rational. I submit that the answer to such a question would help reveal the fraction of rational individuals that are present in a society. Apparently, according to my analysis, the level of rationally is decreasing in the US. This conclusion is not only consistent with this criteria, but it is supported by the behavior of the stock market and the government. Well, actually I was going to write the same sort of thing about spreading irrationality in my anti Yank piece of a couple of hours ago but I held back because I think exactly the same thing has happened in Britain. Not quite as much as in the good ol' US of A with your talk radio and Rush Limbaugh types but who's counting? Not quite sure if it is as bad in mainland Europe?
RE: [Vo]:Sunspotless
Sounds scary. But why are sea ice levels still reported to be so low in the arctic if it's getting colder? Why is NOAA saying this July was the 9th warmest globally on record? http://www.noaa.gov/stories2008/20080815_ncdc.html What do sunspots have to do with global climate? Noctilucent clouds not forming? Do they matter? I know there's some coincidence between low sunspot cycles and colder climate, but how good is that circumstantial data? Better than the data associating warming with human greenhouse gas output? One thing is very certain: we do not have any possibility of predicting a global 'trend' either way in the absence of any real handle on the actual causes of such trends. That otherwise rational people have concluded that human activity is a significant climate change driver based on untenable models and theories is very sad, especially when false 'solutions' are proposed, even demanded and *legislated*, right at the time when real solutions such as you mention below are actually called for. I wouldn't want to repeat that mistake with sunspots or anything else until we really know what we're talking about. What might look like blood in the water could really just be an algae bloom due to global warming.g But you're right when you imply that dealing with climate change means preparing for it, not making foolish attempts to mitigate it. I posted here before why it's absolutely certain that the models and notions about anthropogenic global warming are totally nonsense (not false per se, simply nonsense as in completely detached from reality). At the same time everyone can see that the climate is always changing. You either have the courage to accept science despite social and political pressures, or flee to your comforting illusions and stick your head right up where NOAA must be putting their thermometers. Since the faith based AGW movement has apparently become a government favored and sanctioned religion in violation of our Constitution, I'm inclined to engage in civil disobedience with regard to any laws or regulations based on that religion, and to oppose the activities of its zealots with appropriate actions of my own. C'mon you alternative thinkers here, join the revolution. Cells of resistance are popping up all over. Free beer while it lasts. - Comrade Rick-0 -Original Message- From: Michael Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 6:52 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Sunspotless Could a significant global cooling effect be taking place.? I notice there is a deafening silence from Pope Algore and his Church of Global Warming on this subject. It would be very inconvenient for the selling of carbon indulgences, oops... that's offsets. Nothing is made of the fact that 2007 saw the largest one year drop in average global temperature in recorded history. Didn't hear about that did you? Almost everyone who lives on the real earth, rather that the computer climate model earth, has noticed that it's been a lot cooler lately. Where I live in southern California, winter before last winter was the coldest since 1948, but of course nothing was made of that in the news. I lost 500 feet of ficus hedge because it froze to death. There was a massive die-out of native plant species in the canyons near my home as well, all frozen. The fast dancing and circumlocutory nonsense spewing forth from the Global Warming Priesthood grasping for some explanation are becoming both shrill and comical. The real reason for climate changes, solar activity, is showing us something quite the opposite of Algore's dreamworld. You know, that's the one where all of us ride bicycles and starve to death, while Algore flies about in his Gulfstream and has a special lane on the road for his fleet of SUVs while he grows ever fatter. Anyone else notice he's begun to resemble a fat Bela Lugosi? There has been a total lack of sunspots for a month. This is not good news, either for real people or Algore. This normally indicates a significant colder period on the earth, or even an ice age. We need to get really serious about energy supplies, both conventional and new, especially the new ones. We also need to quit whining about genetically modified crops. If there is a long term colder climate, agricultural output will plummet. More energy and higher crop yields in a shorter growing season will be essential to prevent the starvation of millions or even billions. Here is a link to the observations about the lack of sunspots: http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+History+First+Spotless+Month+in+a+Century /article12823.htm http://tinyurl.com/562srq M.
[VO]: Scientists sue to stop 'black hole' from sucking up Earth
The large Hadron back in the news, Richard http://www.worldnetdaily.com:80/index.php?fa=PAGE.viewpageId=74044
Re: [Vo]:Sunspotless
Howdy Jones, Now look what you've done.. trashed the world's oldest scientific organization... the Flat Earth Society. These people have proof the earth is flat and they'll send you the proof if you'd send in your membership dues. Richard
Re: [VO]: Scientists sue to stop 'black hole' from sucking up Earth
On a philosophical note just because one might have the knowledge, heat, materials and tools for producing a thing called a subatomic particle that does not establish the thing is fundamental to nature. eg. A blacksmith uses some knowledge, heat, materials and tools to produce a thing called a horseshoe, but he understands the thing is man-made, rather than god-given or natural. Harry on 2/9/08 9:20 pm, R C Macaulay at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The large Hadron back in the news, Richard http://www.worldnetdaily.com:80/index.php?fa=PAGE.viewpageId=74044 http://www.worldnetdaily.com:80/index.php?fa=PAGE.viewamp;pageId=74044
Re: [VO]: Scientists sue to stop 'black hole' from sucking up Earth
In reply to R C Macaulay's message of Tue, 2 Sep 2008 20:20:19 -0500: Hi, [snip] The large Hadron back in the news, Richard http://www.worldnetdaily.com:80/index.php?fa=PAGE.viewpageId=74044 Quote: The Large Hadron Collider will not be producing anything that does not happen routinely in nature due to cosmic rays, he told the Sunday Telegraph. If they were dangerous we would know about it already. This is wrong. Cosmic rays are stopped in the atmosphere which is a gas, and not very dense. That means that microscopic black holes have a chance to evaporate before traveling their MFP. With the supercollider however any black holes formed may collide with a solid, which has a much smaller MFP, potentially giving black holes a chance to grow before they evaporate. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
