LHC : when is it being turned on.

barnicles

Well :-S

Spear

Their press release says the first beams are to be fired up in August, and they're currently awaiting the cooling of the segments.

Mahatma coat

They're doin Press releases now, great, got a link?

does it give a specific date this time??

Spear

Mahatma coat wrote: »

They're doin Press releases now, great, got a link?

does it give a specific date this time??

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2008/PR05.08E.html

I don't think they can be that precise, since they're left waiting on the segments to cool to 1.9K above absolute zero.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

so what's going to happen if they don't find what they're looking for?

Professor_Fink

Princess Innocent Knickers wrote: »

so what's going to happen if they don't find what they're looking for?

Well, then things get very interesting, and we move from verifying theoretical predictions to trying to come up with a new theory to explain these new results.

twasantis

Professor_Fink wrote: »

Well, then things get very interesting, and we move from verifying theoretical predictions to trying to come up with a new theory to explain these new results.

do u thinks its possible that they are capable of saying"we are wrong" if they they dont get the desired results from this??

Professor_Fink

twasantis wrote: »

do u thinks its possible that they are capable of saying"we are wrong" if they they dont get the desired results from this??

There isn't a giant conspiracy in particle physics. If the Higgs particle isn't found, for example, then this will be a very interesting result. Not finding it is probably even more important a result than actually finding it.

It seems to be a misconception that scientists somehow benefit from maintaining they were right. Sure, if you are wrong because you made a mistake in the maths, then that doesn't reflect trerribly well on you. On the other hand if you show that we should expect to see something based on our current understanding of physics, and we don't see it, then you have helped find new physics, which is absolutely fantastic.

Lastly, even if a particular scientist or group of scientists refused to admit their pet theory has failed to make correct predictions, you can be sure that the field will move on without them. Science has experts. but no authorities.

Kevster

Here's a good article about it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm

It would appear that it is quite unimaginably cold at this stage! ... ...better get the scarff out.

jessconr

heres a good link about the LHC that you may find interesting

http://quicksilverscreen.com/watch?video=32803

ressem

It looks like they're going to try accelerating protons this weekend.
They're aiming for the 8th of August, if http://www.lhcountdown.com/ is anything to go by.


Then if all works, smashing stuff together in September.

Conor108

Some really great pictures of the LHC here

Conor108

That LHC Countdown website keeps going down :mad:

Professor_Fink

September 10th

Dave!

http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn14493-worlds-most-powerful-accelerator-set-to-switch-on.html?feedId=online-news_rss20

Bout frickin time 'n all :pac:

ZorbaTehZ

The end is nigh

LHC testing begins tomorrow.

Conor108

Isn't only a test of the yoke though?

Cern have a great rap about the LHC:D:D

barnicles

I heard they were showing live coverage on radio 4 so dats why i asked

Is this thing safe, I can't see how a bunch of magnets can contain such an amount of power when it fires and when they get the two protons to collide.

Professor_Fink

hellboy99 wrote: »

Is this thing safe, I can't see how a bunch of magnets can contain such an amount of power when it fires and when they get the two protons to collide.

The are only supposed to contain the beam. When it collides the particles pass through the detectors, where most of them are absorbed.

I was watching a program today about it and I really don't like the idea of this thing up and running, the scientists involved with it aren't even sure themselves what will happen, thats really reassuring.
I'm all for science and better understanding but I think this is a step too far.

Professor_Fink

hellboy99 wrote: »

I was watching a program today about it and I really don't like the idea of this thing up and running, the scientists involved with it aren't even sure themselves what will happen, thats really reassuring.
I'm all for science and better understanding but I think this is a step too far.

If they knew what would happen with any experiment, then there would be now point in doing it. That's the whole reason for doing experiments: to explore the unexplored. They do know what won't happen though. Cern poses no threat to anybody. The type of collisions that the LHC will be looking at happen all the time due to cosmic rays interacting with matter. In fact, astronauts see the paths traced out by such particles inside their eyeballs when trying to sleep in space. The only thing new about the LHC is the detectors, which are very cool. The reason an accelerator is used is so that we have more control over when, where and in what parameter range particles collide.

:|

Professor_Fink wrote: »

In fact, astronauts see the paths traced out by such particles inside their eyeballs when trying to sleep in space..

Seriously? That's pretty cool

AtomicHorror

hellboy99 wrote: »

I was watching a program today about it and I really don't like the idea of this thing up and running, the scientists involved with it aren't even sure themselves what will happen...

What would be the point of doing it if they did know? Just because the outcome of an experiment cannot be predicted does not mean that one of the probable outcomes is the end of the world. Do you panic every time someone rolls a die?

AtomicHorror

AtomicHorror wrote: »

What would be the point of doing it if they did know? Just because the outcome of an experiment cannot be predicted does not mean that one of the probable outcomes is the end of the world. Do you panic every time someone rolls a die?

Well maybe the program I watched didn't help matters when it said there may be mini black holes created and they were trying to recreate the big bang.

Carsinian Thau

Professor_Fink wrote: »

The type of collisions that the LHC will be looking at happen all the time due to cosmic rays interacting with matter.

But isn't there going to be a difference in the speed of anything created in our collision compared to the speed of what's created by the cosmic ray collision?
Could that do anything?

Professor_Fink

wrote: »

Seriously? That's pretty cool

Yes. Apparently it makes it very difficult to go to sleep.

Professor_Fink

Carsinian Thau wrote: »

But isn't there going to be a difference in the speed of anything created in our collision compared to the speed of what's created by the cosmic ray collision?
Could that do anything?

Many cosmic rays have much higher energies then the LHC will create, which gives us a huge margin. Quite a few do have LHC scale energies though, so we can be completely confident that this isn't going to swallow up the world.

AtomicHorror

hellboy99 wrote: »

Well maybe the program I watched didn't help matters when it said there may be mini black holes created and they were trying to recreate the big bang.

At the most we could say that they are trying to recreate the sort of collision that might have occurred during the big bang, not the big bang itself. It's a but like the difference between analyzing the ballistics of a piece of masonry under controlled conditions versus detonating a hydrogen bomb in a city. Except that the difference in orders of magnitude is unimaginably greater in both directions.

Based on your description alone, it sounds like a pretty crappy documentary I have to say.

JIZZLORD

The amount of crap being bandied about is ridiculous. I'm a physics undergrad, and while we havent covered the complex stuff relating to particle acceceleration i think that the media has it all wrong. there hasn't been as much crap since the tabloids claimed eastern europeans were eating our swans
4 things could happen
1. It'll work grand - most likely result, nobody will pass any notice
2. it'll blow up - Billions down the drain.
3. it'll blow the world up - it's not as if we'd notice
4. it'll blow Switzerland up - they're boring cheese eating clockmakers....

:|

JIZZLORD wrote: »

The amount of crap being bandied about is ridiculous. I'm a physics undergrad, and while we havent covered the complex stuff relating to particle acceceleration i think that the media has it all wrong. there hasn't been as much crap since the tabloids claimed eastern europeans were eating our swans
4 things could happen
1. It'll work grand - most likely result, nobody will pass any notice
2. it'll blow up - Billions down the drain.
3. it'll blow the world up - it's not as if we'd notice
4. it'll blow Switzerland up - they're boring cheese eating clockmakers....

haha yeah thats why they built it there(besides cern being there) it was either that or luxembourg :P

Professor_Fink

JIZZLORD wrote: »

4 things could happen
1. It'll work grand - most likely result, nobody will pass any notice
2. it'll blow up - Billions down the drain.
3. it'll blow the world up - it's not as if we'd notice
4. it'll blow Switzerland up - they're boring cheese eating clockmakers....

We've been over this and over this. Only the first one can possibly happen.

JIZZLORD

Professor_Fink wrote: »

We've been over this and over this. Only the first one can possibly happen.

Of course number 1 is the only possible answer, i was taking the piss

thebman

/revives thread with news article.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/0826/1219679949884.html

Tony Broke

It will be on below on Sept 10

http://webcast.cern.ch/live.py

I wonder if they have secretly ran it already?

If like most major investments, it would have been tried and re-tried before the public ever get to see it.

Anyway imo this Atom smasher will only prove there was no stupid Big Bang and the Universe may not be expanding.

Professor_Fink

Tony Broke wrote: »

If like most major investments, it would have been tried and re-tried before the public ever get to see it.

The public doesn't get to see anything. It's a giant underground facility that outputs an enormous amount of data. You can't watch the beam or the collisions. The data would be completely incomprehensible anyway.

Tony Broke wrote: »

Anyway imo this Atom smasher will only prove there was no stupid Big Bang and the Universe may not be expanding.

It can't do that, and not least of all because the CMB is definitive proof of rapid expansion of the universe. But more mondanely because it doesn't do anything to probe whether or not there was a big bang.

meditraitor

If it doesnt prove the existence of the Higgs Boson is the Standard Model for the bin or does it just need tweeking?

Dave!

Was watching a show with Brian Cox yesterday and he (and the other scientists) said that if the Higgs boson isn't revealed in CERN then it doesn't exist, and they'll have to completely rethink alot of things, because they've been wrong!

meditraitor

Dave! wrote: »

Was watching a show with Brian Cox yesterday and he (and the other scientists) said that if the Higgs boson isn't revealed in CERN then it doesn't exist, and they'll have to completely rethink alot of things, because they've been wrong!

Good show, very insightfull. It looks like proving it doesnt exist will have much more ramifications for future physics than proving its existence.

Dave!

Yes indeed, that's what I was thinking too! It could be very interesting, as they could have been looking at things totally the wrong way all these years, so once they rethink it (ehh... might need a 21st century Einstein...) things could appear in a totally different light.

eZe^

Are they sure that if they don't discover the Higgs Boson with this LHC it definitely doesn't exist. It's quite plausible that it just means that our current technology is still not sophisticated and powerful enough to discover it. To not discover something does not prove it doesn't exist.

Conor108

So this wednesday is it chaps?

Professor_Fink

Conor108 wrote: »

So this wednesday is it chaps?

Yes

Professor_Fink

eZe^ wrote: »

Are they sure that if they don't discover the Higgs Boson with this LHC it definitely doesn't exist. It's quite plausible that it just means that our current technology is still not sophisticated and powerful enough to discover it. To not discover something does not prove it doesn't exist.

Actually we have a good idea of the energy range in which the Higgs boson should lie, and the LHC will pretty much cover that range. If the LHC doesn't find the Higgs, then it probably doesn't exist.

eZe^

Okie dokie, being a relaxed empiricist, that is all I needed to hear.



THREE CHEERS FOR THE POTENTIAL COMPLETION OF THE STANDARD MODEL!!!


Hipp Hipp.....

Dave!

It's been nice knowing y'all!

Tony Broke

Professor_Fink wrote: »

Actually we have a good idea of the energy range in which the Higgs boson should lie, and the LHC will pretty much cover that range. If the LHC doesn't find the Higgs, then it probably doesn't exist.

I don't think we'll find the Higgs with the LHC either, still less all those wonderful complementary particles they need to tie supersymmetry together.

Anyway I suspect physics took a wrong turn about a generation ago and disappeared up its own M-brane.

No, I don't have any theory of my own.I'm not a physicist. But when theories multiply constants, particles, dimensions and universes like codfish eggs, you can be sure something's wrong somewhere.

I think we ought to go back to general relativity and first-generation quantum mechanics and start again from there. Yep, go back a century and start afresh.

The LHC will be a huge waste of money imo, and will be the last supercollider that will ever be built.

Wetbench4

Have a look at this;
"German Astrophysicist Dr. Rainer Plaga who concludes in his August 10, 2008 paper “exclusion of dangerous mBHs thus remains not definite.” and “there is a definite risk from mBHs production at colliders. This final conclusion differs completely from the one drawn by G & M.”. Dr. Plaga proposes feasible risk mitigation measures including limiting collision energies until safety can be proven."
http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/spiritualottoeroessler.pdf

Now i'm a little worried.

ronbyrne2005

Do the detectors on LHC not get affected by measurement problem?

Podge_irl

Tony Broke wrote: »

No, I don't have any theory of my own.I'm not a physicist. But when theories multiply constants, particles, dimensions and universes like codfish eggs, you can be sure something's wrong somewhere.

I think we ought to go back to general relativity and first-generation quantum mechanics and start again from there. Yep, go back a century and start afresh.

The LHC will be a huge waste of money imo, and will be the last supercollider that will ever be built.

What exactly is it you think theoretical physicists do while coming up with new theories? Starting "afresh" isn't going to change any of the findings that have been made over the past century.

missingtime

Bah...i would have paid attention in phys/chem had cool experiments like this been going on.
All we ever did was drop tennis balls from a window and then we had to share the tennis balls. And the window.