Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Large Hadron Atom Smasher Reaches Near Speed of Light
The Daily Galaxy ^ | 3/30/2010 | The Daily Galaxy

Posted on 03/31/2010 12:41:00 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld

Scientists celebrated at the world's biggest atom smasher at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) near Geneva on Tuesday as they started colliding particles at record energy levels mimicking conditions close to the Big Bang, opening a new era in the quest for the secrets of the universe.

The European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) said it had unleashed the unprecedented bursts of energy on the third attempt, as beams of protons thrust around the 27-kilometre (16.8-mile) accelerator collided at close to the speed of light.

"This is physics in the making, the beginning of a new era, we have collisions at 7 TeV (teralectronvolts)," said Paola Catapano, a CERN scientist and spokeswoman, referring to the record energy levels achieved.

This, the third attempt, triggered collisions among the 20 billion protons in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at 1.06 pm (1106 GMT), creating powerful but microscopic bursts of energy that mimic conditions close to the Big Bang that created the universe.

"We're within a billionth of a second of the Big Bang," CERN spokesman James Gillies told AFP. The new stage, dubbed "First Physics", marks only the beginning of an initial 18- to 24-month series of billions of such collisions.

The LHC, which is located in a tunnel under the Franco-Swiss border, ground to halt with a major breakdown within days of its launch in 2008. But the huge scientific experiment then passed several groundbreaking milestones since it was restarted from repairs last November.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailygalaxy.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: accelerator; atomsmasher; lhc; particlephysics; physics; protons; quantumphysics; science; speedoflight; stringtheory; theoreticalphysics; universe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

1 posted on 03/31/2010 12:41:00 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove; SunkenCiv

Science ping?

Those of us that don’t know would like a percentage of what they achieved to the speed of light.


2 posted on 03/31/2010 12:45:04 AM PDT by wastedyears (The essence of training is to allow error without consequence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

According to the article, 99.99 percent of the speed of light. Its there.


3 posted on 03/31/2010 12:46:24 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Was that the same radar gun that clocked a house doing 30?


4 posted on 03/31/2010 12:47:24 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

they are messing with ‘ God stuff’
I don’t like it


5 posted on 03/31/2010 12:50:14 AM PDT by LeoWindhorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
Large Hadron Atom Smasher Reaches Near Speed of Light

Hype. The thing is completely stationary.

6 posted on 03/31/2010 12:50:43 AM PDT by Hardraade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LeoWindhorse

I like it because it may have military applications.


7 posted on 03/31/2010 12:52:12 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Heh... holding my breath! When they get to the speed of light (or over - not that it would not be worthy), let me know... Right now, I’m hiding under my bed waiting for the end of the world...


8 posted on 03/31/2010 12:52:58 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Hardraade

“Large Hadron Atom Smasher Reaches Near Speed of Light

Hype. The thing is completely stationary. “

You are moving at the same speed so it seems stationary to you :)


9 posted on 03/31/2010 12:55:26 AM PDT by mainsail that
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
You cannot travel at the speed of light. Einstein's Theory of Relativity prohibits it. You may go around it by creating a mini black hole or wormhole.
10 posted on 03/31/2010 12:57:18 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

In special relativity, while it is impossible in an inertial frame to accelerate an object to the speed of light, or for a massive object to move at the speed of light, it is not impossible for an object to exist which always moves faster than light. The hypothetical elementary particles that have this property are called tachyons.


11 posted on 03/31/2010 1:00:03 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Hah! Little do you know about physics! Don’t you know that the speed of light is just a problem with measurement? If we could actually measure the speed of light, we would let the actual speed be known! Today, they only give you a guesstimate, forget about actual speed... So, all for the Atom Smasher...go get em boys... Actually, this just may answer some questions - while in reality, will just provide more questions. All to the good I say...

For those that might get their dander up - this is a tongue in cheek - so go away...ha...


12 posted on 03/31/2010 1:06:47 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

Whatever.


13 posted on 03/31/2010 1:07:38 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Heh...just trying to be non-scientific... Sometimes it helps to make fun of science...especially if you look back on all the science of the past...

Don’t take all of this so seriously... Don’t worry, everything you know about this today will be obsolete in another 20 years or so...


14 posted on 03/31/2010 1:12:53 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

15 posted on 03/31/2010 1:17:30 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Love it! I just hope that they can learn enough to outpace the ignorance of the future... Actually, this is a great advance and I hope they do actually advance our knowledge without too much hype - (that science that seems to get involved with politics). Who knows, they may just advance beyond that 20 year envelope.. and be right 30 years from now.


16 posted on 03/31/2010 1:20:59 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Remember, Einstein was wrong on some of his statements. Never take today’s science for tomorrow’s results. Things change with knowledge (and it is ever changing).


17 posted on 03/31/2010 1:28:13 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

You are correct. Stephen Hawking(who currently holds the same seat Sir Issac Newton held) and CalTech’s Kip Thorne has proved some of them incorrect.


18 posted on 03/31/2010 1:31:01 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Yes, he did... and many followers will continue to find different results... That to me is what makes this so exciting - ongoing changes in current science! Actually, it is a shame that it is happening so fast these days - technology is finally attempting to catch up with real science. Unfortunately, you need to be a youngster for you to be able to see and visualize the future. Damn it all...heh.


19 posted on 03/31/2010 1:36:04 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

I agree


20 posted on 03/31/2010 1:37:22 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

Not if you go back to the future.


21 posted on 03/31/2010 1:47:07 AM PDT by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DB

Heh... unfortunately, most science looks to today - little to the future. After all, they do have to attempt to prove their theories with the science of today. Forget about the future - that is for your grandchildren...


22 posted on 03/31/2010 1:51:56 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Hawking left the Lucasian seat on October last year (just a pedantic FYI).


23 posted on 03/31/2010 1:54:58 AM PDT by Moose Burger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Moose Burger

A great man with physical problems. He has contributed much to science. Hopefully, he will continue while he can...


24 posted on 03/31/2010 2:00:47 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Moose Burger

Thanks for the information.


25 posted on 03/31/2010 2:05:34 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

I agree


26 posted on 03/31/2010 2:06:21 AM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld ("I have learned to use the word "impossible" with the greatest caution."-Dr.Wernher Von Braun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
You cannot travel at the speed of light.

I wonder about that. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says you cannot know precisely the location of a particle. In principle, there is a finite, albeit remote, possibility for a particle to suddenly be on the other side of the universe. Suppose a particle improving its odds by moving near the speed of light were to occupy a point just ahead of its median position? Then it is beyond the speed of light and off to the races (relative to the observer.) More like the sound barrier then.
27 posted on 03/31/2010 3:16:49 AM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (IN A SMALL TENT WE JUST STAND CLOSER! * IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

Perhaps someone can explain this to this ignorant layman . . .

at the speed of light . . . mass would be in the direction of infinite, right????

So, why wouldn’t the earth start trying to keep that ‘toward infinite’ speck of mass as it’s new center of rotation?

I assume the answer would relate somewhat to the briefness of the flash . . .

however,

it seems to this ignorant layman that even a super brief flash of super massive anything would have some repercussions to the earth’s rotation or wobble or some such????


28 posted on 03/31/2010 3:24:31 AM PDT by Quix (BLOKES who got us where we R: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
When they get to the speed of light (or over - not that it would not be worthy), let me know...

http://www.physorg.com/news88249076.html

29 posted on 03/31/2010 4:45:16 AM PDT by Thermalseeker (Stop the insanity - Flush Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide
-- The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says you cannot know precisely the location of a particle. --

IIRC, it's that you can't know BOTH, the location, and the momentum/energy.

30 posted on 03/31/2010 4:52:47 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Thermalseeker

Ah yes... Isn’t it interesting that today, there are limitations. Tomorrow, who knows? Speed may very well be restricted as stated by Scientists today - but how about tomorrow? Seems that most of the known facts keep changing - and that is what makes this so much fun...


31 posted on 03/31/2010 4:53:27 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Quix
-- So, why wouldn't the earth start trying to keep that 'toward infinite' speck of mass as it's new center of rotation? --

The mass of a proton at 7 TeV is about 7,460 times the mass of the proton at rest. My guess is that the mass of particles being brought up to speed is on the order of grams per day, maybe pounds. I don't know how much "rest mass" is involved in each collision, but this "supermassive" event is probably like banging a pair of 1 pound weights together, at most. Hardly enough to affect the earth's rotation.

LHC machine outreach FAQ has the "energy to mass" calculation.

32 posted on 03/31/2010 5:03:03 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Ha...there you go, assuming that today’s science is correct. What if much of what you are saying is eventually proven wrong? That is what makes Science so much fun...


33 posted on 03/31/2010 5:07:00 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
Ah yes... Isn’t it interesting that today, there are limitations

Yep. On October 13, 1947 a lot of people believed that there was a sound "barrier"......

34 posted on 03/31/2010 5:17:22 AM PDT by Thermalseeker (Stop the insanity - Flush Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Quix
-- So, why wouldn't the earth start trying to keep that 'toward infinite' speck of mass as it's new center of rotation? --

The mass of a proton at 7 TeV is about 7,460 times the mass of the proton at rest. My guess is that the mass of particles being brought up to speed is on the order of grams per day, maybe pounds. I don't know how much "rest mass" is involved in each collision, but this "supermassive" event is probably like banging a pair of 1 pound weights together, at most. Hardly enough to affect the earth's rotation.

LHC machine outreach FAQ has the "energy to mass" calculation.

At 7 Tev, mass of 1 proton = Energy/c^2 = 1.2477^-23 Kg

The article notes 20 billion protons, which is unfortunately ambiguous, because a billion US is a thousand million, or 10^9, and in the UK is a million million, or 10^12. Erring on the "heavy" side, use the UK version of billion, each packet has 20*10^12 protons. The number of protons, times the mass of each proton, gives a packet with a mass of about 25*10^-11 Kg, or 25*10^-8 gram.

That's a quarter of a microgram, a quarter of a millionth of a gram, AT SPEED. Rest mass is 1/7,460th of that.

Nevermind that no way do all of the protons collide, only a minute fraction of the 20 billion are involved in collisions, most fly by in near-hit incidents. And too, perhaps the "billion" in the article means 10^9, which results in reducing the mass of the collision by a factor of 1,000.

Even at speed, the mass of material involved in collisions is minute. 0.000 000 250 grams

35 posted on 03/31/2010 5:19:13 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove

As always it’s good to watch the live webcams:
http://www.cyriak.co.uk/lhc/lhc-webcams.html


36 posted on 03/31/2010 5:20:43 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
-- there you go, assuming that today's science is correct. What if much of what you are saying is eventually proven wrong? --

Well, that would change everything, of course! It could even change human nature!

But seriously, the observations of rest mass and increasing mass due to obtaining relativistic velocity are nearly perfectly reliable observations. Just like the bill for electricity from running the LHC is going to be "correct" with sufficient precision - they know how much energy is being pumped in, etc.

37 posted on 03/31/2010 5:26:11 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mainsail that

lol....true


38 posted on 03/31/2010 5:28:50 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide

Problem with that is what constitutes a “particle” is a lot stranger than you think. That line of thinking just doesn’t work that way near such boundary conditions.


39 posted on 03/31/2010 5:30:21 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
as they started colliding particles at record energy levels mimicking conditions close to the Big Bang,

What, there was a Large Hadron Collider at the beginning of the universe, and it caused a universal explosion, and now we are trying to replicate it?

40 posted on 03/31/2010 6:02:08 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hardraade

But the lights are all emitting photons at near-light-speed. Or something.


41 posted on 03/31/2010 6:02:53 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

Should we be scared if they show only blackness?


42 posted on 03/31/2010 6:08:04 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

OK, I got them working now, and my joke isn’t quite as funny.


43 posted on 03/31/2010 6:09:01 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido
Was that the same radar gun that clocked a house doing 30?

LOL. You didn't hear about the turtle that was running so fast its shell caught on fire?

44 posted on 03/31/2010 7:32:10 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (Remember in November. Clean the house on Nov. 2nd.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt; Alamo-Girl; betty boop

So then,

it’s NOT TRUE that things approaching the speed of light are similarly approaching infinite mass?


45 posted on 03/31/2010 8:04:59 AM PDT by Quix (BLOKES who got us where we R: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt; Alamo-Girl; betty boop

Much appreciated.

What I’m understanding from all that is that

the Einstein thing about mass approaching the speed of light is wrong and does NOT likewise approach infinite mass.


46 posted on 03/31/2010 8:07:41 AM PDT by Quix (BLOKES who got us where we R: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Quix
-- the Einstein thing about mass approaching the speed of light is wrong and does NOT likewise approach infinite mass. --

No, he was right. The fact that the mass of the proton mas increases by a factor of 7,500 is fairly amazing. If a 100 pound weakling made the same speed, he (or she) would weigh 375 tons. Granted, that's not "infinite," but it's also not going the speed of light in a vacuum.

The fact that the mass increases is why it takes so much energy to impart more speed, once one gets to relativistic velocities. At this velocity, slight increases in velocity create significant increases in mass.

Said another way, the "TeV" limit results in a mass (and corresponding speed) limit. It would take infinite energy to obtain infinite mass.

47 posted on 03/31/2010 8:15:18 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

OK.

I *THINK* I understand, now.

The mass is increasing dramatically . . . but only because of the dramatic amount of energy used to speed the protons up. And, still, though they are at a higher end of such speed-ups than ever before achieved, the percentages left between their highest and truly the speed of light are still significant distances to cover . . . and would require more or less infinite energy to get there—at least as we currently seem to understand things.

Is that close to right?


48 posted on 03/31/2010 8:43:43 AM PDT by Quix (BLOKES who got us where we R: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Quix
-- though they are at a higher end of such speed-ups than ever before achieved, the percentages left between their highest and truly the speed of light are still significant distances to cover --

That's about it. Even though the distance between the speed achieved and "c" (the speed of light in a vacuum) is small as a matter of percentage of "c," the distance is infinite in terms of mass or energy (energy = mass times a factor).

Once relativistic speeds (say, 90% of the speed of light) are achieved, large energy inputs result in large mass increases, but small speed increases.

99.9999991% of the speed of light is not 99.9999991% of the way to "infinite mass." 99.9999991% of the speed of light in a vacuum results in a mass multiplier of about 7,500.

49 posted on 03/31/2010 8:57:56 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: sonofstrangelove
The last statement issued by CERN before the formation of the black hole:

"My God, it's full of stars!"


50 posted on 03/31/2010 9:01:55 AM PDT by COBOL2Java (Big government more or less guarantees rule by creeps and misfits.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson