• On BNET: 3 worst things about the iPhone 3G S
September 9, 2008 9:01 AM PDT

Don't panic: Large Hadron Collider won't spawn voracious black holes

by Stephen Shankland

Correction, 11:00 a.m. PDT: This story incorrectly reported the size of the particle accelerator. It has a circumference of 17 miles.

Remember the fear that the Trinity test of the first atomic bomb in 1945 might ignite the atmosphere? The Large Hadron Collider, a massive particle accelerator 17 miles in circumference that will begin operation Wednesday, comes with its own apocalyptic possibility: teensy black holes with gravitational appetites voracious enough to swallow the Earth.

Images: Where particles, physics theories collide

Click image for gallery on the Large Hadron Collider.

(Credit: Maximilien Brice for CERN)

But you can breathe easy, because some scientists believe that worry is just as baseless as the A-bomb's flaming atmosphere.

On Tuesday, the American Institute of Physics' news update presented evidence from Steve Giddings of the University of California, Santa Barbara and Michelangelo Mangano of CERN--the European nuclear physics lab where the LHC is housed--concluding there's no threat from little black holes. If such black holes were to be created by a chance cosmic ray, for example, their runaway growth would be most evident from feasting on the super-dense matter of white dwarfs and neutron stars, but there are plenty of those stars that are very old.

Scientists once believed black holes' inescapable gravitational forces meant they'd grow inexorably, but renowned physicist Stephen Hawking later countered with the view that energy can in fact leak away from black holes, causing them to effectively "evaporate."

Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank.
Recent posts from Cutting Edge
Lunar mapping satellite snaps first test images
Successful fueling test sets stage for shuttle launch
EC auditors criticize Galileo overruns
Killer robots can be taught ethics
Toyota thinks up mind-reading wheelchair
New solar airplane unveiled in Switzerland
Delta 4 rocket boosts weather satellite into orbit
IEEE awards prizes for tech that benefits humanity
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 9 pages (346 Comments)
by DrBradD September 9, 2008 9:51 AM PDT
Wow......the ignorance of these scientists if simply amazing. The truth is, we really DON'T KNOW what the results of the machine will be. First off, theres a high probability that black holes can be created. The stupid argument that the scientists use, "we'll be fine because cosmic rays hit Earth all the time and we're fine" is complete and utter bulls***. Cosmic rays from outer space hit STATIONARY objects on Earth, NOT OBJECTS ALSO MOVING AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT! Particles that are BOTH going the speed of light and collide does NOT happen naturally. Thats a big problem right there. Second, we're relying on black holes to disappear based on a THEORY. A THEORY!!! Thats all 'Hawking Radiation' is...an unproven theory. If he's wrong, we're all dead. Even the article states that what they believed to be true yesterday isn't true today. This means whats true today can EASILY not be true tomorrow.

If one slight calculation if off, if things dont go EXACTLY as planned, the Earth will perish.

Maybe the world wont end tomorrow, but as they increase to higher energies throughout the year I can almost guarantee something will go wrong. Cherish your last remaining moments with your loved ones and Earth....wont be around for long.
Reply to this comment
by tacit September 9, 2008 10:02 AM PDT
Wow, anti-intellectual much?

No objects produced by the LHC move at the speed of light. It's not possible for a mass-bearing particle to travel at the speed of light. Cosmic rays hit objects on earth with a greater total combined energy than the total energy produced by the LHC, and that's what matters.

It's sad to me that people are so frightened of technology and hate science so much that they will believe the most over-the-top nonsense imaginable, because it confirms their fears and hatred.

The LHC will not produce black holes. End of story.
by Cubicadam74 September 9, 2008 10:12 AM PDT
"ignorance of these scientists"... Hmm.... And what is your scientific background? And "philosophy" does not count.
by Dea-BABES September 9, 2008 10:15 AM PDT
am not been funny or owt lv.. but ii think the scientist know more than u.. have you been trained like them..? NOOO.. so shut up nd keep it to your self because they are the experts not you.. they are tryin to save our lives here not please u lv.. its going to help everyone in the long run so shut up and goo bk to what ever you do best lv.. cos we dnt wannaa hear you crap..
they know more than you so leave thm to it..
you also need to stop been ignorant against them because they are doing their best to help us all..
its not going to happen so shushh..
if people are reading this, and are really worring you are not making them feel any better you ignorant piece of crap..
now byee for now u looser HAHA HAHA..
by horiat September 9, 2008 12:10 PM PDT
couple hundred years ago, an inexplicable phenomenon happened: the Tungus Meteor (or something like this - can't remember, I was too young...)
Basically a large meteor went over the atmosphere and exploded somewhere in Siberia. Funny thing: at the place of impact a large crater was produced but in its middle the trees were still standing... Nobody were able to explain... And no trace of meteor either...
What if it was one of those mini black-holes produced by the cosmic rays colliding with the atmosphere, and then evaporating in couple milliseconds.
Can those scientists say that it never happened naturaly in cosmic rays?
Ha? Ha?
See you tomorrow...
Ha? Ha?
by nuts101 September 9, 2008 12:30 PM PDT
all i can say to your statement is: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA what the hell, ya konw its like this your as bad as chicken little telling us the sky is falling, lol shut up already and its not like you or me can do anything about stoping them so suck it up. Ps. if iam wrong and your right, you can say i told you so as we get sucked up hahahahahaha. jack ass
by Michichael September 9, 2008 12:33 PM PDT
@ tacit

Well that is kind of true and kind of false.

I have made a great study of physics. I can and will point out that while I don't agree with a lot of Hawking's theories and postulations, one of his biggest contributions, evidence that energy, and therefor mass, can and does escape from the pull of a black hole, invalidating the theory that they're gravitationally based.

Therefor, we don't know how a black hole works, but it's theorized that they form due to extremely high energy levels. If the energy level of the hole drops to a certain point, it can no longer exist as a black hole, and effectively the transdimensional energy transfer collapses. Any mass sucked into a black hole, in theory, is converted to energy - but that sucking isn't gravitationally based, it's energy based by some unknown property. So in theory if a black hole were to be made in the LHC, it would have to have energy or mass of a high enough excitement to feed the black hole - but since the LHC is kept a degree or so above absolute 0, the energy spent drawing in mass or particles would be more than the black hole could provide. Think of a black hole as a negative draw on energy that requires a certain amount of energy to function. Without that certain amount, there is no draw, and there is no black hole.

So, please people if you have no understanding of how the science works, let people that DO do their jobs, and quit impeding progress.
by aaroberts September 9, 2008 1:58 PM PDT
And you're an authority because you read an article once? The arrogance of the paranoid is mind boggling.
by L0VECRAFT September 9, 2008 2:12 PM PDT
I didn't believe you b ut then yuo convinced me by use of the clever argument that the scientists are "complete and utter bulls***." That convinced me because I do not like bulls*** and if those sceintistsas are completely bulls*** then I will not trust them, no, I will WRITE IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS BCCAUSE I CAN!!!! and then some people will believe me, and you, and we together will STOP THE THEORY because ALL THEORYS ARE EVIL so that shouyld do it.

Good job DRBRADD
by VestalVespa September 9, 2008 3:49 PM PDT
Sweet! We won't have to live through another Republican administration.

Lemons => lemonade.
by Stargazer69 September 9, 2008 4:17 PM PDT
If it really were dangerous do you think they'd be telling us about it ? No. the world wont end tomorrow, maybe soon but not tomorrow!
by sciencewhiz265 September 9, 2008 5:20 PM PDT
The hilarity of ignorant people is quite amusing. Just because you read the article does not give you the authority to blatently state that the world is going to end. If you are going to make that claim then atleast do so in an educated manner and not make yourself sound like someone with an IQ below 100.
by sciencewhiz265 September 9, 2008 5:21 PM PDT
The hilarity of ignorant people is quite amusing. Just because you read the article does not give you the authority to blatently state that the world is going to end. If you are going to make that claim then atleast do so in an educated manner and not make yourself sound like someone with an IQ below 100.
by patson138 September 10, 2008 12:09 AM PDT
I sense a secondary trolling account.
by Flt-Sgt-O-S September 10, 2008 2:07 AM PDT
hey ... i quite what you have said Wow......the ignorance of these scientists if simply amazing. The truth is, we really DON'T KNOW what the results of the machine will be. First off, theres a high probability that black holes can be created. The stupid argument that the scientists use, "we'll be fine because cosmic rays hit Earth all the time and we're fine" is complete and utter bulls***. Cosmic rays from outer space hit STATIONARY objects on Earth, NOT OBJECTS ALSO MOVING AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT! Particles that are BOTH going the speed of light and collide does NOT happen naturally. Thats a big problem right there. Second, we're relying on black holes to disappear based on a THEORY. A THEORY!!! Thats all 'Hawking Radiation' is...an unproven theory. If he's wrong, we're all dead. Even the article states that what they believed to be true yesterday isn't true today. This means whats true today can EASILY not be true tomorrow.

If one slight calculation if off, if things dont go EXACTLY as planned, the Earth will perish.

Maybe the world wont end tomorrow, but as they increase to higher energies throughout the year I can almost guarantee something will go wrong. Cherish your last remaining moments with your loved ones and Earth....wont be around for long.

this is actuall weapons grade S*** you are only looking at one side of the agrumant you are saying these scientist's are ignorant then you have something wrong with you. you have just proved to me that you areinfact ignorant ... any way refering to the "large hadron collider" this is an great opportunity to find out about the universe's orgins and what the world was like ... the chances of their being a black hole is significantly high but what you dont relise is that these black holes are the size of an atom ... they also have the weight of an atom ... these will also decay after a spilt second after being created.
tomany people have belived the media and their corporations and the media has potrayed this experimant as if it was to kill us all just to get their ratings up for a while ... you should never trust the media on what they say as they will always twist the truth to make it sound more intresting.

you need to look at all the evidence before making the exemptions that the scientists working on the experimant are ignorant becuase you will make your self sound ignorant!!!
by Flt-Sgt-O-S September 10, 2008 2:20 AM PDT
whoopsy spelling mistake at ... first ... meant to say "quote" my bad :))))
by willyboxc September 10, 2008 2:25 AM PDT
I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU... That WE DO KNOW KNOW!

Ive been really interested in particle physics all my life. I read everything I can about physics and love all this stuff physics is so interesting. I am hopeful that this machine doesn't create a black hole that will swallow earth. I think that it is probably 95% or more chance that it WONT, but i still agree that Hawking Radiation (though a very likely theory (it makes sense to me)) is just a theory. We do not know that it is truth. The way things change so much in physics i am hopeful that this machine does reveal secrets about the Higgs bosons, but I have to say I am very interested in someone speculating this....

Lets say Hawking Radiation is wrong (not relying on this theory) With our last data and information on black holes, what would happen if this device generated a small black hole? Would it grow to start consuming matter around it?

Now my final opinion is turn the machine on and run test. All I would like to point out is anyone that says "they know for sure that this wont cause a black hole that is dangerous" is not telling the truth.
by dazemoon September 10, 2008 2:38 AM PDT
Assuming DrBradD is just messing with us...

Firstly, two beams colliding at near light speed won't see their relative speeds greater than the speed of light, it's the collision energy that's most relevant here not just velocities themselves. Particles of even higher energies are continually colliding and near missing matter on earth as it is so I'm comfortable with this whole hole thing :) The size, stability (event horizon etc) of these black holes won't be comparable to one of stellar magnitude, combined with the immediate environment in which they'll find themselves upon creation (if indeed we believe they will be created) will give rise to very different scenarios from the stereotypical stellar versions we are 'familiar' with.

Secondly, you seem to believe the black hole creation theory that your 'ignorant' scientists came up with in the first place but are unwilling to accept their reassurances of safety based on the same scientific principles?
Granted, if the beams escape due to magnet failure etc. I'd rather not be near the Franco-Swiss border but it can only bore a few tens of meters through (any) material should it be shed in an uncontrolled manner :)

Thirdly the statement "Particles that are BOTH going the speed of light and collide does NOT happen naturally." is only true in the sense that collision in this context assumes mass which of course cannot travel at the speed of light naturally or (as we believe) otherwise - only NEAR the speed of light. The offending particles at CERN will not travel at the speed of light. Only near that speed.
by buggermenot September 10, 2008 2:54 AM PDT
wow you stupid ****
COSMIC RAYS DO TRAVEL AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT AND THE EARTH IS FKN MOVING. MORON
by bizzozeron September 10, 2008 3:10 AM PDT
Actually I think of it like this with no previous knowledge. Its a percentage of a percentage, maybe not a SMALL percentage of a percentage, but it still is one. Theres a, maybe 10% chance that this thing's plans go awry, and there's a small percentage that after that it creates a black hole (Because I'm sure other things could happen, other than a black hole emerging) Anyway, I read somewhere that the thing is to be launched at around 9:30 AM today.
Have a nice day.
by Pirargo September 10, 2008 5:44 AM PDT
I've studied this stuff and Flt-Sgt-O-S, willyboxc and dazemoon are right. But let us not forget that we do not even have proof of black holes even Existing. They, in and of themselves, are merely a theory.
by Slayers_Slax September 10, 2008 7:37 AM PDT
DrBradD, you have not a single clue about what you're talking about....
Stephen Hawking has an IQ of 280. Most people don't get over 100.
What I'm trying to say is... Don't comment on something that you haven't even bothered
trying to look into, you moron.
What's your IQ, somewhere around the 20's?
by elcriegodelcosmos September 10, 2008 8:10 AM PDT
Well, deary me. Are you really a doctor DrBradD? Or should i ask exactly what you're a doctor of. I may have no degree but i think i should perhaps be teaching you. Now, i know that a black hole is a large amount of mass compressed into a single point in space. If you're going to smash virtually massless particles together you're going to get a virtually massless black hole (which is why it evaporates so quickly). To create a black hole in space that has enough mass to actually attract and 'eat' other matter it has to have the mass of at least 11 of our suns crammed into its tiny position in space.

I don't pretend to be an expert on this subject (however, i do know enough to be able to laugh hysterically at you) but this means that i try not to have too strong an opinion and certainly don't push it on to people who don't know any better.

You sir, are a fool, and your uninformed tabloid views are dangerous to the general public who rely on 'people in the know' to tell them certain things that they don't have the inclination to go out and learn themselves.
by kh-usa September 10, 2008 9:13 AM PDT
The comment by "DrBradD" is a great example of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".

I'd like to see a more rigorous proof of his assertions, like "If one slight calculation is off, ... the Earth will perish", or what he means is "if one calculation is slightly off, the Earth will perish". Either way, I'd like to see a proof so. Unfortunately, it's the ignorant scientists who will have to review this.

Oh, he can "almost guarantee" something will go wrong. Why not go to a bookmaker in Vegas? Put your money where your mouth is.
by greencoldpeas September 10, 2008 9:31 AM PDT
Well... Isn't gravity technically a theory?
by solersoM September 10, 2008 10:49 AM PDT
"If one slight calculation if off, if things dont go EXACTLY as planned, the Earth will perish. " LOL,

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL.LOL LOL ROFLMAO LOL LOL LOL 0OLOL

Ohhhhhh mercy.

No seriouslly brad, we all value you as a human being and your contributions are important.
by chillout8199 September 10, 2008 11:59 AM PDT
What we keep forgetting here, is that this is not the first particle accelerator in existence. Also that they will be firing SUB-atomic particles around this thing. We're talking about quarks and muons, which are pieces of things like protons and neutrons. The amount of energy necessary to rip the space/time fabric, which black holes theoretically do, is immense and unlikely possible to be done by just a few sub-atomic particles.

And hey, if it does create a miniature black hole, that just another theory going into effect. Charles Darwin's natural selection.
by Daniel Pitts September 10, 2008 2:50 PM PDT
A black hole in itself isn't any more dangerous than the same amount of mass elsewhere. What makes it a black hole is the fact the the mass is condensed below the schwarzschild radius. A golf-ball could be compressed this much, but it wouldn't start consuming the earth, because it still only has as much mass as the golf-ball did originally!

To make it more clear: A black hole isn't inherently dangerous!
by thedruz September 10, 2008 5:13 PM PDT
You are a FOOL & people like you are keeping the human race in the dark ages go live with the TALIBAN if thats the way you think. Ignorant People like you make me ashamed to be human.
by gatito25 September 10, 2008 5:40 PM PDT
and DrBradDYOUR ignorance is even greater, this scientists are been studing this theories since the born of the Theoretical physics, the process is so complicate that understanding is almost impossible for "regular people" only the most intelligent scientists are able to work is such fields, since Christiaan Huygens (1629) this thories are been develop and increased in calculations and mathematical models, the reason to believe that " world will end" is because you are been seeing way to many hollywood movies, to many dan brown books and to many Ted Haggard tv masses, and of course if you for an moment think out of your little scary bible apocalyptic world, you will know that the possibility of a "desaster" is minimal and it is more likely that the experiment will not work at all, but if it does will open thousands of human possibilities in several scientific fields.
about your statement "Particles that are BOTH going the speed of light and collide does NOT happen naturally" this is completely wrong this happend all the time in the deep space.
i will tell you something so you can sleep good tonight: did you read the part where it says that some people believe in 1945 the A bomb might ignite the atmosphere? well this was actually true, some people even sold all their properties because they believe that it will the end of the world, why USA continue the project? even when it was only THEORY work behind? because 98% of the scientists of the time where sure that will not happend with an A Bomb, because the temperature required for such event is not even close for an A Bomb to reach, where the got this data? in previous theory.
is there a risk is this experiment? YES of course like any other one but stadisticaly is minimal.
so don't worry we will have world for a long, long time, until we kill ourselfs or the sun destroys the earth in about 7.6 billion years so you have plenty of time to cherish with your loved ones.
by 21st_century September 10, 2008 7:28 PM PDT
Hey DrBradD! They ran the collider... looks like we're still here.
by toreduce September 10, 2008 10:22 PM PDT
Way to break out the optimism right there. Yes it is true we are not entirely sure what will happen, and yes, the predictions that the "particle accelerator is safe" is completely based off of complete theories based off of well supported, but circumstantial evidence.

However, we are also not qualified to make that judgement call either. Many of these scientists have devoted their entire lives to this project and probably know far more about quantum physics than the average techie or blogger.

Personally, this could lead to three scenarios (keep in mind the over exaggerations). The first would be just a debunk experiment and a waste of 3.2 billion dollars (highly unlikely). The second would be possibly one of the greatest discoveries and advancements of all time, quite possibly leading to a new age and stage of evolution for man, almost like Star Trek. The third scenario would be the possible annihilation of the human rase where ironically, our curiosity got the better of us, and man's possible greatest achivement lead to his downfall.

Wednesday will reveal the answer
by Dr_Zinj September 11, 2008 7:45 AM PDT
DrBradD is incorrect.

First of all, "objects" don't move at the speed of light. According to THEORY, it would take infinite energy to boost a particle to reach lightspeed. The large hadron collider will accelerate particles up to as close to lightspeed as they can, but they'll never reach that actual velocity. It would be more correct to say that the LHC will accelerate the particles up to relativistic speeds.

Second of all, cosmic rays have head-on collisions with particles moving at relativistic speeds in nature all the time, including in the neighborhood of our planet.

Third, yeah, Hawking Radiation is a theory. So is electron tunneling. Yet we use the theory of electron tunneling every single day in microcircuits like THE COMPUTER DrBradD USED TO POST THIS ON! Hawking Radiation uses the same process as electron tunneling. So how much more PROOF do you really need? Quantum black holes are a theory too. And the creation of quantum black holes and the process of Hawking radiation are linked to each other. You can't logically dispute the existance of one without disputing the existance of the other.

Fourth. What would be the velocity of the quantum black hole, assuming one was produced, relative to the Earth and the solar system? The speed of light is roughly 186,000 miles per second. The diameter of the Earth is 7,926 miles. Unless the particles are the same mass and exactly opposite velocities, they are going to impart motion to any black hole they create. Since they are moving at relativistic velocities, it is reasonable to assume, by the law of conservation of momentum, that the black hole will have a resultant of relativistic speed. Escape velocity for Earth is about 7 miles per second; or about 4 one-thousandths of a percent of the speed of light. Escape velocity for the solar system is about 1030 mps; about a half a percent the speed of light. In other words, even if a quantum black hole were created, it would shoot right off the planet before absorbing even one or two atoms, and would in fact, leave our solar system.

I HATE when people who obviously slept through high school science classes, or skipped them all together, try to come up with objections to science. Ignorance can be cured with education, stupid is just plain permanent.
by FrameofReference September 12, 2008 6:19 AM PDT
DrBrad obviously doesn't understand the most basic physics concepts... For example, frame of reference - two objects, no matter their speed, can never have a closing speed of greater than the speed of light. So, a cosmic ray travelling at 99.999% of c towards a stationary particle has the same closing speed as two particles travelling directly at each other at 99.999% c. And the energy from the cosmic ray collisions can actually be much higher than LHC's. At least read "A Brief History of the Universe" before you pose as a physics expert.
by duderii September 12, 2008 1:26 PM PDT
Now I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, I'm certainly not an astrophysicist but, "Particles that are BOTH going the speed of light and collide does NOT happen naturally."
So this means that ALL particles moving at the speed of light only travel one direction? Are there not trillions and trillions of particles moving at the speed of light in all directions?
by duderii September 12, 2008 1:56 PM PDT
First of all I'm not an Astrophysicist, but "Particles that are BOTH going the speed of light and collide does NOT happen naturally." So this means that ALL particles moving at the speed of light only travel in one direction? Are there not trillions and trillions of particles moving in all directions at the same time? Law of averages say that in the history of existence there should have been at least one collision by now, right?
by mattumanu September 13, 2008 8:33 PM PDT
I have one thing to say. The "scientists" made a rap video... That's enough to convince me their all morons.
by ATruism September 20, 2008 12:03 PM PDT
Think about it. It will be fun. You will get to witness the end of civilization first hand!! Cool.
by dascha1 September 9, 2008 9:53 AM PDT
I think one thing is certainly clear about it - they won't know what they've really created until after the experiment is over. How will it make $ though?
Reply to this comment
by Someone-else September 9, 2008 10:02 AM PDT
Does everything need to make money?
It's for science.
But maybe it does make some money in the future with tech innovations with discoveries made on the LHC
by fgoldstein September 9, 2008 10:08 AM PDT
Is DrBradD a troll, a satirist, or just out of his mind?

Let's see, first he says that scientists are ignorant, but he's got the answers. (I wonder if he views dentists the same way and does his own root canals.) We've got the creationists' favorite misuse of a word with multiple definitions, "it's only a theory". (By the same measurement, canola is a felony.) Plus we have ignorance of relativity, wherein he postulates that two things moving at each other near the speed of light are going to hit double-hard. Relativity, of course, means that the relative speed of any two objects cannot exceed the speed of light; adding together impact speeds doesn't work when you add in the Lorenz contraction. Plus you have ignorance of what a black hole is and what gravity is. Gravity is a function of mass, and a wee tiny thing has wee tiny mass (and thus gravitational pull) even if it's crunched down so small that it forms a wee wee tiny black hole. Such black holes are extremely unstable and thus radiate away in a microjiffy or so. But hey, that really big thing in the center of the galaxy is a black hole, and it's scary, so all black holes must be equally scary, right?
Reply to this comment
by proppig1222 September 9, 2008 11:02 AM PDT
you forget that when an object nears the speed of light its mass increases exponentially! Those wee tiny things could pack a serious punch. But I do not think we are going to die! When the first atom bomb was detonated some scientists thought the chain reaction would never stop and would destroy the atmosphere!
by amstarnes September 9, 2008 12:29 PM PDT
I trust you, fgoldstein, you seem knowledgeable enough.
by FudRucker21 September 10, 2008 3:43 AM PDT
Well, firstly, DrBradD is right that we don't know the results. If we did, there'd be no point in building an LHC unless we knew it would do something we needed. So, there are the "Why build" and "We already know what will happen" out of the way...

I don't think the world will perish because of some slight miscalculation. There's hardly enough information to make a reasonable calculation. This goes back to the above. Will the world perish because someone switched on the LHC? I don't know for the same reason. No one really does know, or if someone does, he or she is keeping very quiet.

The now ubiquitous Hawking Radiation argument I find a bit weak. This is a new theory in comparison to the first. Dr. Hawking is undoubtedly a very clever man, but his first view of the radiation named after him was that it did not exist. The fact is, we do not know whether Hawking radiation exists. It's never been observed even in large black holes. So, it is just a theory and not a panacea.

There's a very big difference between upper-atmosphere hadron collision and those produced in the LHC. As far as I'm aware, no one still uses upper-atmosphere collisions as a suitably comforting analogy.

As for the speed of light/relativity comment, I'm not sure what "double-hard" means in this context. First, the particles in question cannot even travel at the speed of light, much less faster than light. They can only nearly do so. Nevertheless, mass increases as velocity approaches the speed of light in accordance with the very same fairly-well-proven theory that the speed of light is a cosmic limit. "Hard" implies mass and velocity and therefore kinetic energy and momentum to me in this scenario, so while "double-hard" isn't entirely accurate, there is a difference in the mass of the particles and the vector component of velocity: In the upper atmosphere, it's thought statistically very unlikely, or negligible, that two particles would collide "head-on". The LHC tries to accomplish just that. The difference now is that rather than producing a black hole careening off at nearly the speed of light, LHC black holes (if indeed the black holes are created either in the atmosphere or the LHC), is that an LHC black hole should be comparatively slow by everyone's calculations.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that an enormous black hole is going to be created in the LHC. The issue is that a slow, small black hole may be created and able to capture or consume a nearby particle, thereby increasing its own "size". If Hawking Radiation doesn't save us, that could be quite a problem.

Of course something will go wrong eventually if given enough time. Will that something result in the destruction of the Earth? Who knows? No one. That's the real problem and partly why there are so many forum discussions on the topic.

As for the "breathe easy, because some scientists believe" attempt to comfort with which the article started, I just don't find that especially comforting. Some scientists believe lots of different things, including the contradictory argument to varying degree that black holes will be created and they will consume the planet. That's why we have the entire issue of the risk of the LHC before courts now at the instigation of "some other scientists".

I breathe easy because I don't know what will happen. Nevertheless, I though it better to post this now just in case, for whatever reason, I can't do so later...
by supergreek50 September 10, 2008 1:18 PM PDT
fgoldstein, regarding your claim that "wee-tiny" black holes having "wee-tiny" mass: You have missed the quality of density. Though the theoretical black hole would be very small, mass is determined by the density of it rather than the volume. With this in mind let us not forget that, again theoretically, the centers of all black holes are infinitely small, with infinitely increasing density and mass. As you stated, gravity is a function of mass, so with this infinitely increasing mass and density, the gravity would in turn grow to a point where the influence of the black hole could increase in magnitude, and become a serious problem. I am a Christian, but without even bringing my religious beliefs into the argument, I disagree with this experiment because it is simply not ethical. I am all for the use of science to enhance mankind as a whole. However, if there is even the smallest chance, even "infinitely small" as one scientist who worked on the LHC described it, to end or severely damage the earth and mankind, this decision to turn it on should not be left up to a few physicists who may or may not be wrong. Error is part of humanity, even those who think they know it all.
by Kibblez October 1, 2008 11:50 AM PDT
Thank you for telling off this ignorant wannabe for me. He pretends he's a scientist and knows more than anybody. And what's this BS about "high probability" for a black hole? I'm sure no one is sure what the percents are for creating a black hole, or creating a new universe, or for nothing to happen at all. Everyone is over exaggerating everything out of fear.
by CmdrRickHunter September 9, 2008 10:09 AM PDT
Its true, they're dealing with the unknown. it is POSSIBLE that they could get burned. I think the logic of "These are created all the time with cosmic radiation" is valid. All we can say is "we expect to see more of the same, and statistically they're safe"

For those who say otherwise, please, don't dare breathe... you'll increase your risk of cancer.
Reply to this comment
by Renegade Knight September 12, 2008 7:39 AM PDT
That is the one and only argument that works in favor of the collider. Carefully controlling what's already happening in our atmosphere but which we can't easlly view.
by oneoclock September 9, 2008 10:09 AM PDT
"How will it make $ though?"

it's not meant to make $
Reply to this comment
by September 9, 2008 1:55 PM PDT
As I understand it, the experiments will attempt to get us a very good understanding of gravity. If we fully understand that, it can open options to engineer ways around it, or manipulate it better. That will generate plenty of money.
by ponderthisyall September 10, 2008 5:51 AM PDT
endless possibilities, solve the land fill crisis imagine it a blackhole in every home sending trash into no-where's land
by Observ September 10, 2008 12:15 PM PDT
Actually your find its 50% purpose is to make "$" they have'nt just built this to "understand the universe" but to also "cure cancer" and "make radioactive waste more safe" which I doubt they provide for free
by Coyoteguard December 10, 2008 7:13 PM PST
Ponderthisyall:: Do you realize how much of a threat that that could be to people in general??? People could put other people inside of the hole and there would be nothing to prove!! Mothers who are bad could stick their babies down there jus tto get rid of them. And they could never know if the baby truely did get kidnapped or the mother put the baby in the hole. That is just one example of many!!
by September 9, 2008 10:16 AM PDT
16 miles in diameter??? Oh wow, this is an all time low for editing on CNet. Keep up the good work .
Reply to this comment
by Rants&Raves September 9, 2008 10:38 AM PDT
Yeah, that would be the circumference (27 km or 16.7 miles)
by Jon Skillings September 9, 2008 11:12 AM PDT
We've corrected the story to give the right dimensions for the LHC.
by mcfc2607 September 9, 2008 10:18 AM PDT
do you realy think if there was any danger ENGLAND, USA , RUSSIA, CHINA would let it happen.
Reply to this comment
by Rants&Raves September 9, 2008 10:40 AM PDT
Right ... because none of these nations ever invested in massively destructive innovations ?
by soveliss September 9, 2008 4:33 PM PDT
Well they let the Atomic bomb happen... ... ... ... And that was obviously safer... ;-|
by drtuite September 10, 2008 5:42 AM PDT
Exactly. This thing has been constructed over years and there has been every oportunity to destroy it if devastating implications are likely. Trouble is people who have little knowledge listen to and read warnings from other people who have little knowledge and the media then gets in for a story. See you all in ten years time. We should be worrying about the Earth as it is and all the people in it. For some it may be better to destroy the Earth as they are living in terrible conditions with reference to hunger and repression, war and abuse of all kinds. I wish people would worry more about the real problems and not concentrate on sensationalism. I do think that scientists should explain their work more fully to avoid misunderstandings and that would help those without the knowledge (not taxi drivers) to have a balanced opinion on subjects. We can't all know everything and I feel there should be more openess.
If it was that dangerous the superpowers would be down there now stopping it. Chill out and have a good decade.
by Pirargo September 10, 2008 6:05 AM PDT
yes
by Outside_opinion September 10, 2008 12:38 PM PDT
But really, who is willing to Stand up to France and Switzerland?
by CaptainMooseInc September 9, 2008 10:21 AM PDT
Black Holes eat everything in their path. Why exactly would we even wish to create a TINY one here on Earth?

Scientist: "Ohhh look, a tiny black hole. Isn't it a little cuite?"
*black hole giggles and grins, then proceeds to eat the Scientist's face.*
Reply to this comment
by ncflyboy91 September 10, 2008 10:28 AM PDT
I think you've been reading to many tabloids. No-one has ever been able to study a "black hole" so how can you say they eat everything in their path. A black hole isn't some super natural power floating around. just as with anything else in our universe it has a reasonable explanation and definable characteristics and I highly doubt that includes eating the earth. I am a Bible believer and the Bible says the world won't end for at least 1007 years. So all this worry about scientists destroying the earth is useless. Instead of thinking when you're going to die think about if youre ready to die. Will you be going to Heaven or Hell
by solersoM September 10, 2008 11:01 AM PDT
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!

everyone be on the look out for scientist walking around with dark spots of infinte mass where their faces should have been! CLICK THIS LINK TO SEE WHAT THEY MIGHT LOOK LIKE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnJtN33zTrw&feature=related
by thedruz September 10, 2008 5:00 PM PDT
You are a FOOL & people like you are keeping the human race in the dark ages go live with the TALIBAN if thats the way you think. Ignorant People like you make me ashamed to be human.
by mattumanu September 13, 2008 10:00 PM PDT
TheDruz... Don't you know how to have fun?
by Kibblez October 1, 2008 11:54 AM PDT
Well let's see. If black holes really are as powerful as you say, and we have a black hole in the center of our galaxy, then it is a reasonable statement to say that we don't exist, and that we never did. The black hole surely would have swallowed us up by now, its been a few billion years. No, I think you're just stupid and ignorant of facts. I can guarantee that plenty of hydrogen atoms have collided at nearly the speed of light already. And I can assure you that even if a tiny black whole were made, it wouldn't be around long because all of the energy would just leave it, as stated in the article.
by fdaz September 9, 2008 10:30 AM PDT
hi, when are they supposed to be starting up this experiment? like that time on wednesday, UK time preferably, thanks
Reply to this comment
by Spudstaa September 9, 2008 11:34 AM PDT
its meant to be at about 7 pm on wednesday the 10th of september mate
by thadeuss September 9, 2008 10:32 AM PDT
"How will it make $ though?"

It's not meant to make $ is meant to make ?. This is an european project so all the money will go to them...Our money are 'safe' in Iraq and Afganistan ;)
Reply to this comment
by Pirargo September 10, 2008 6:06 AM PDT
it is not meant to make $!!!!
by george612 September 9, 2008 10:53 AM PDT
How stupid are these people!! If there is even a slight chance of it destroying the earth then Dont use it!!!!!
Reply to this comment
by L0VECRAFT September 9, 2008 1:43 PM PDT
OMG!!! U R Rite! These People R Stupid!!!

Also stop DMHO !!!

This is serious business folks!!!!!


Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the unstable radical Hydroxide, the components of which are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol.

What are some of the dangers associated with DHMO?
Each year, Dihydrogen Monoxide is a known causative component in many thousands of deaths and is a major contributor to millions upon millions of dollars in damage to property and the environment. Some of the known perils of Dihydrogen Monoxide are: Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities.
*Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
*Excessive ingestion produces a number of unpleasant though not typically life-threatening side-effects.
*DHMO is a major component of acid rain.
*Gaseous DHMO can cause severe burns.
*Contributes to soil erosion.
*Leads to corrosion and oxidation of many metals.
*Contamination of electrical systems often causes short-circuits.
*Exposure decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes.
*Found in biopsies of pre-cancerous tumors and lesions.
*Often associated with killer cyclones in the U.S. Midwest and elsewhere.
*Thermal variations in DHMO are a suspected contributor to the El Nino weather effect.

Please read more:
DHMO facts (http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html)
http://www.dhmo.org/
by Nardolen September 10, 2008 7:07 AM PDT
I assume you use the same logic in all things and do not use an automobile or electricity. I'm not sure how you entered this comment. After all, we know pollution has at least a slight chance of destroying the earth and using electricity generates pollution.
by thedruz September 10, 2008 5:01 PM PDT
You are a FOOL & people like you are keeping the human race in the dark ages go live with the TALIBAN if thats the way you think. Ignorant People like you make me ashamed to be human.
by 21st_century September 10, 2008 7:30 PM PDT
Hi 5, LOVECRAFT!
by majikbus45 September 11, 2008 9:33 AM PDT
There is a chance everyday that you will die in a car crash, but I bet you drive daily as well. There is also a chance of getting cancer from erroneous sources, but I bet you don't live in a bubble. Life without risk is merely existence. To progress forward there is always a chance of danger.
by Spudstaa September 9, 2008 10:54 AM PDT
why even conduct the experiment
putting the world at risk just for this
it's stupid
it really is the most stupidest thing i've ever heard
these are scientists for heavens sake
as if anyone really wants this experiment to happen
there's no words to describe it except for wreckless and stupid
Reply to this comment
by Pirargo September 10, 2008 6:07 AM PDT
"Most stupidest" makes you sound like the most stupid or stupidest person on here.
by albertadad September 10, 2008 8:04 AM PDT
If we used this logic in the genisis of civilization as we know it today, we wouldn't be flying in airplanes, driving cars, using computers or discovering our universe. We have to wait to see what the preliminary results are before we going panicking like chicken little. Keep an open mind...it will serve you well.
by lkearly September 10, 2008 11:09 AM PDT
"Most stupidest"-seriously? Are you kidding? What a mentality to take with progress. How would we have gotten anywhere without some risks? And putting the world at risk just for this? Countries put the world at risk every decade for things far less than scientific advancement. Further, it seems obvious that someone wants this experiment to happen or else they wouldn't be conducting it. These things don't just happen overnight.
by thedruz September 10, 2008 5:01 PM PDT
You are a FOOL & people like you are keeping the human race in the dark ages go live with the TALIBAN if thats the way you think. Ignorant People like you make me ashamed to be human.
by Balrob September 13, 2008 11:09 AM PDT
Ok Spudstaa,
like others in this list of comments, you are responding to the hype without having read any details.
Here's a general rule for you: if something is important - don't rely on Cnet, or any other media that sells headlines, to get the real information.

The purpose of the LHC is not specifically to create black holes. That is not what they are attempting. For decades now, scientists have been smashing particles into one another to break them apart - so see what they are made of. This is a continuation of that research, and uses higher energy.
However, as another commenter (with a brain) has said - the total energy involved is less than some cosmic ray strikes on the earth or it's atmosphere - and we are still here.

Our satellites, and the probes we have sent to meteors, asteroids and other planets in the solar system are constantly bombarded by cosmic rays - so we have an understanding of them. However, measuring the impact on individual sub-atomic particles requires a lab environment where we can control which particles are involved and how much energy they have - and then have them collide in an area swarming with measuring equipment. Hence the LHC.

So don't sweat it.

High Energy Physics is the domain of physicists - and most non-physicists only have the faintest notion of the theories involved and the math & prior research that support them. That is why you need to read more than this article before you can contribute in a meaningful way to any debate on the subject - and this web page isn't a debate - it's more like a bunch of drunks at a party all trying to speak louder than everyone else.
by Kibblez October 1, 2008 11:57 AM PDT
"most stupidest"
I hope you're talking about yourself. Learn proper English, then tell us the world is going to end. If there was a large possibility for something truly dangerous to happen, the UN would have stepped in and stopped it. I'm sure destroying the Earth is against the Geneva Convention.
by TJH1991 September 9, 2008 11:09 AM PDT
lol im 16 and have my whole life a head of me, but im not scared if any one mentions it to me i just laugh

man has created black holes before in more dangerous experiments, but they were so small and insignificant that one lasted 1 million billion billionths of a second, thats not very long

if this experiment does create black holes im guessing these will last the same, if there was a big problem why is there no wide spread panic? becuase people dont want every one on mankind to panic over nothing, the world would end anyway becuase we as humans would think we were gunna die so whats the point. if there was really a major risk they would say so atleast everyone knew

if you think your gunna die then so be it but you will be laughing on thursday
Reply to this comment
by WraithAscendant September 9, 2008 11:19 AM PDT
Rather nieve to think they would tell you.
Especially if there was a chance nothing would happen.
It's called "Need to know". And they would try to keep order even if there was a chance it was suicide.

But. Like I said.
Better not to live in fear of possibiliies and move forward.
by Ultifighter September 9, 2008 6:25 PM PDT
The problem is you haven't done your research. They Will circulate beams on Wednesday but NOT collide them.
The Estimated 1st collision date is October 21st, 2008.. then we will have to worry if it will be safe or horribly wrong..
Personally I wish it not to happen but we will see on this day for sure, unless the date is advanced or postponed.
by Jonnyrocked September 10, 2008 5:24 AM PDT
Ummm, TJH1991, you do realiase that "1 million billion billionths of a second" is actually 1 million seconds...
which equals out to be 11.5 days

-Jonnyrocked
by ponderthisyall September 10, 2008 6:04 AM PDT
you may be content to let a scientist decide the date of the end of your existence and everyone else's for that matter but u gotta understand that some people like existing. Never forget that smart people can be wrong and that the more complicated the science the less chance anyone has of truly understanding it. sleep tight child.
by majikbus45 September 11, 2008 9:38 AM PDT
uh jonnyrocked, with the "ths" at the end of million billion billionths of a second that actually is 0.0000000000000000000000001 of one second. know your math terminology before you think you have a slick reply.
by WraithAscendant September 9, 2008 11:11 AM PDT
All this overblown doom and gloom AND all overblown assurance of safety aside.
Wouldn't it be hillarious if all this turned out to be nothing and NOTHING at all happend when they flipped it on?

But seriously, we ARE unsure as to what it will do. Assurances based off of theoretical models are little more than trusting that "God" will save us in the end if you think about it, though admittingly less "safe".

But it's no reason to go off screaming into the hills about the end of the world. And if the world is destroyed tomorrow. Sounds to me like the universe's ultimate Darwin Award for a race. =)
Reply to this comment
by deusXmchna September 10, 2008 10:20 PM PDT
best answer I've seen today out of the thousands of bone-headed comments I've wasted time reading. thanks for the giggle:)
by rcrusoe September 9, 2008 11:28 AM PDT
I love it when scientists tell us to "breathe easy", or when they tell us to worry, or when they are absolutely sure about anything. In my lifetime alone, I've seen a great number of "scientific truths" disproved.

When I graduated college, a couple of decades back, we were being told we were headed into a new ice age. Today we are being told we're going to die from global warming.

If this "infernal machine" doesn't end the world, it won't be because of any scientist "knowing" what was going to happen.

The only way they are ever sure of anything is by looking back at results - they same as the rest of us.
Reply to this comment
by Art Dir September 11, 2008 12:46 PM PDT
I know it sounds contradictory, but as I understand it one possibility of global warming is the very rapid onset of the next ice age in the northern hemisphere once a critical threshold occurs. As global warming melts arctic glaciers, cold fresh water will mix with salty warm water brought by the Gulf Stream to the North Atlantic. The result may be that the Gulf Stream shuts down. It brings warm surface water from the equator to northern regions which makes the climate there warmer than would be possible without it. The system is driven by an exchange of energy due to varying salinity levels and water temperatures between the North Atlantic and the Pacific. As warm surface water from the equator is brought north by the Gulf Stream, it evaporates and becomes slightly more salty. The now cooler, saltier water is more dense and sinks to lower levels and continues to drive the system. The effect is to create the "Great Conveyer Belt" that continually warms the northern hemisphere. Without it, climate models predict the next ice age could happen in as little as three years once the Gulf Stream ceases to flow as cooler fresh water from glacial melts shuts down the engine in the north part of the system.

Global Warming = melting Arctic glaciers = more uniform temperatures and salinity in the North Atlantic = damage to the "engine" that drives the gulf stream = cessation of warm water from the Equator brought north = Ice Age.
by diamondfootprint September 9, 2008 11:48 AM PDT
People say ice age is coming and global warning as scare mongering. To kick people into action to help save the planet.

Its not just one scientist saying its safe, its the most respected scientists who have only done good with the use of science, people need to stop scare mongering and thinking that this is the end.

Countries have countless amounts of nucular warheads and chemical weapons that could kill us all no problem, and there has always been scare mongering about this, but the same will happen here, nothing will happen tomorrow because the mass of the hadron is too small to kill a fu***** planet!

if it creates a black hole, as they say! it will be small. People need to have faith in science, and stop pathetic scare mongering for no reason.
Reply to this comment
by WraithAscendant September 9, 2008 11:55 AM PDT
hEh.
Have FAITH in science.
Isn't like having FAITH howlee scripturs..
I give faith when faith is earned and not to some person trying to tell me they know the possibly unknowable. A healthy amount of skepticism is good for EVERY thing. Not just what suites you.

No matter what community puts stock in what they say.

P.s.: Hee hee you used the f word. Woo wooo. =)
by jkowto September 13, 2008 6:46 AM PDT
Why should we have faith in scientists? because we have done SO well thus far??? I'm sorry, but people (scientists) have in the past been irresponsible with their advanced technology. Who was responsible when we were racing Japan to create the first atom bomb...only so we could drop it on them? When we dropped the atom bomb on Japan, no one was quite sure of all the damage that would occur and we certainly didn't know of the after-effects.

Also, don't act like you know what kind a power a black hole has. Just because the black hole will be "small" doesn't mean Jack. Obviously you don't realize what a black hole is or what one is capable of doing.

No offense, but you are arguing about something you are clueless about. At least give names of these so-called "responsible" scientists....and back up what you are saying....maybe site something....because i am CERTAINLY not going to take YOUR word, Diamondfootprint!

Give me a break!

Also odds of 10^-40 are very minute, but lets say we accelerate these particles as often as 10^40 times??? It seems like the possibility is much more likely! WHY are we risking the lives of EVERYONE? So we can answer some questions scientists are CURIOUS about??? Maybe it would be worthwhile if it weren't in vein. It pisses me off that WE weren't asked if we even wanted scientists to do this.

By the way, i, myself, am a science graduate, so i'm not completely clueless.
by Kibblez October 1, 2008 12:00 PM PDT
Nuclear, not nucular. Thanks.
Common misconception. Even the President gets it wrong, so don't feel too bad.
by billybojangels September 9, 2008 11:50 AM PDT
Wow, people should panic. Why must we be put through unessesary risk of destroying everything. Sure the scientist want to reaffirm the idea that nothing will go wrong, after all 9 billion dollars were spent how could you not flip the switch at this point, right? and what about the 2012 prophecy, the Aztec calendar ends, Nostradamus , many other world events pointing to the significance of 2012 as the end of the world. But what could possibly cause the world to end? oh there just happens to be this thing that can cause black holes... and they may need to take a few years to get it running right so that would put us right on track for 2012.................great oh well, it?s not like they can just pull the plug, I mean they did spend 9 billion dollars so they have to do it.
Reply to this comment
by WraithAscendant September 9, 2008 11:59 AM PDT
Lovely strawman you have constructed there.
by drtuite September 10, 2008 6:03 AM PDT
The only end of the Earth to take place in 2012 is probably referring to the United Kingdom (if it ever gets the Olympic site finished ) which at the moment is looking like the end of everything. That cost about 9 billion pounds. There is more devastation in Stratford than there will be underground in Geneva. These tiny black holes exist anyway and it's not even definate that these tiny black holes will develop. Perhaps a good sport at the next Olympics will be to catch as many black holes as you can - a bit like Harry Potter. Or, perhaps they can be controlled and used to eat up cancer cells. Who's been watching too many movies?
by katiekatie1976 September 10, 2008 9:01 AM PDT
people shouldnt have to panic. They say there are chances of black holes being created to make things more exiting, there is no way a black hole can form. Honest. P.S It really is just to make people listen more and to make it sound exiting. When really it's not.
by thedruz September 10, 2008 5:02 PM PDT
You are a FOOL & people like you are keeping the human race in the dark ages go live with the TALIBAN if thats the way you think. Ignorant People like you make me ashamed to be human.
by albertadad September 12, 2008 7:52 AM PDT
Hang on a minute, before you go scare mongering to the rest of the planet, running around saying that the sky is falling, just remember that places like Korea and Iran are being governed by hair trigger leaders that could wipe us of the face of the earth in seconds for no reason whatsoever other than to serve their own agendas. 2012 is just a number like 1984, remember that? Nothing happened then and nothing will happen now, if we are to go in a ball of flames it wll be as predicted in the bible where christ will come "as a theif in the night". If you're interested in olympic sports, try out for "jumping off the deep end" or "jumping to conclusions". Life is meant to be lived, not hiding in a hole waiting for the world to end.
by Kibblez October 1, 2008 12:01 PM PDT
Wow. Ok. Let's see: The Aztecs have predicted the end of the world how many times? Too many. And they were all wrong. Want to know how I know? I'm alive. People thought the world was going to end on June 6, 2006 also. They were wrong. Stop worrying.
by horiat September 9, 2008 12:13 PM PDT
Couple hundred years ago, an inexplicable phenomenon happened: the Tungus Meteor (or something like this - can't remember, I was too young...)
Basically a large meteor went over the atmosphere and exploded somewhere in Siberia. Funny thing: at the place of impact a large crater was produced but in its middle the trees were still standing... Nobody were able to explain... And no trace of meteor either...
What if it was one of those mini black-holes produced by the cosmic rays colliding with the atmosphere, and then evaporating in couple milliseconds.
Can those scientists say that it never happened naturaly in cosmic rays?
Ha? Ha?
See you tomorrow...
Reply to this comment
by L0VECRAFT September 9, 2008 3:07 PM PDT
I saw that TV show "In Search Of..." with Spock!

So I'm pretty sure that it was a particle weapon from a UFO that hit TUNGUSKA.
Bigfoot called it down 'cause he was being chased by the UFOs not the good ones (GRAYS) but the bad ones (SAURIANS) so he called an airstrike by the GRAYS who are good, or at least they don't want to totally wipe humanity out like the SAURIANS who love to live underground JUST LIKE THE LARGE HADRON COLLIDER!!!!

Now you SEE the UFO Saurians are behind it all! They have secret tunnels that connect the Large Hadron Collider to their global network of tunnels. That is how they will direct the black hole to eat through the earth and what is on the opposite side of the globe from CERN? Washington DC!!!
by 21st_century September 10, 2008 7:36 PM PDT
You know, at the same time as the Tunguska event, Nicola Tesla was experimenting with transmitting large amounts of energy into the atmosphere, similar to the HAARP project the GOVERNMENT conducts now. Maybe the GOVERNMENT realized there was a BLACK HOLE about to DEVOUR the EARTH and they hired TESLA to BLOW IT UP!

Or maybe, the scientists who have devoted their lives to the study of physics know something after all, and the Tunguska event was really just a meteor burning out... at any rate a large meteor impact would be more devastating to the planet than a small black hole created by the LHC.
by nuts101 September 9, 2008 12:32 PM PDT
hahah @ darwin award for man kind. I can see some alien race looking down on us taking bets on if we implode ourseveles or not. hahaha
Reply to this comment
by VargheseLHC September 9, 2008 12:32 PM PDT
Long time ago they said that Neil Armstrong landed on Moon and now some of them are all set to disprove the same. Right from history we see someone coming up with a theory and someone disproving it. However, there is one undefiable fact and this fact is that all these events happen and keeps happening unto a realisation of an Ultimate Truth - God. So guys, there is nothing to worry and wish you a Good sleep.
Reply to this comment
by shroom567 September 9, 2008 2:20 PM PDT
u did not just bring god into a scientific debate! what the duck!
god is not an ultimate truth, have you seen him/her/pasta monster
by Slayers_Slax September 10, 2008 7:42 AM PDT
Christians do not belong in a scientific debate.
There is no evidence that 'God' exists, nor will there ever be any.
If you believe in a single word in the bible, you have less intelligence
than an infant.
by JesusSucks_and_well September 10, 2008 10:03 PM PDT
Sheesh! you believe in the bible AND faked moon landings. Man, I've a bridge that's a perfect fit for you. Do you know what a moron is? The guy who sleeps in your pyjamas!
by Kibblez October 1, 2008 12:03 PM PDT
It wasn't that long ago - 1969. And Armstrong DID land on the moon...
Showing 1 of 9 pages (346 Comments)
advertisement

Making sense of Windows 7 upgrades

faq The basics and the fine print on Microsoft's options for those eyeing the next operating system from Redmond.
• Full Windows 7 coverage

Road Trip 2009: Big Sky Country

CNET News reporter Daniel Terdiman takes his car full of gadgets to the Rockies and the Great Plains in search of tech, science, nature, and more.
• America's Fortress: Cheyenne Mountain

About Cutting Edge

Keep up-to-date on cutting-edge research and what's new in a wide range of areas from robotics, space ventures and general science to automobile design and solar energy.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Cutting Edge topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right