Following on from the news that there has been a magnet failure and liquid helium released, I've been watching these LHC webcams which are pretty good quality
LHC Webcams
LHC Webcams
Large Hadron Collider
- Thread starter Lysander
- Start date
Older than Jesus.
Real shame about the delay - was hoping that next month would bring some more exciting news/developments/endoftheworld ...
Oh, what does everyone think will happen when the particles collide? I was talking to my Physics teacher about it, and he said that there would be a lot of force involved, considering the speed and mass. Most likely an explosion, maybe?
Oh, what does everyone think will happen when the particles collide? I was talking to my Physics teacher about it, and he said that there would be a lot of force involved, considering the speed and mass. Most likely an explosion, maybe?
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 7,004
- Location
- Thessaloniki
Dang...
Where they not going to halt it over the winter period anyway...? Not sure.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 14,081
- Location
- Between Realities
you've seen it here first. proof of more than 4 dimensions. and not only that, mavity can use them.
source?
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 378
you've seen it here first. proof of more than 4 dimensions. and not only that, mavity can use them.
source?
It's a basic principle of string theory. And no you didn't "see it here first". Physicists have been working on string theory for decades. Use wikipedia if you want to know more about the basics. Look into 'open' and 'closed' strings.
As for hard, undeniable proof, there is none as of yet; we have not been able to probe with sufficient energy to validate the predictions of string theory. The LHC may or may not provide the first concrete proof. The closest thing we have so far is an experiment using neutrinos. The prediction of quantum mechanics (which works in 3 dimensions plus time) did not appear, but the predictions based on string theory were remarkably accurate. The implication is that these 'sterile neutrinos' are taking shortcuts through extra dimensions (interacting only through mavity).
http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.c...LEID_CHAR=9D2C5D4D-2B35-221B-6C9DB167634A6DDB
Further proof, or otherwise, of string theory (which is still a 'work in progress' itself) will come in time. However one thing is known with absolute certainty: That quantum mechanics and general relativity are not mutually compatible. Virtually all theories attempting to unify them utilise (and even require) more than 4 dimensions. This has been known for quite some time now.
Last edited:
source?
Dr_Fartypants said:
That's my point
Just because string theory migh tbe the best atm, that certainly doesn't mean it's right. I hate it when people spout 'X' as fact when it's no-where near proven. I know nothing gets absolutely proven, but c'mon, there's got to be more evidence than there is currently to start stating things like that!
Last edited:
0.9r?
You cant buy 0.9r, that would be like trying to buy a large enough treadmill for a plane delivering sandwiches of two halves to people who have been disected vertically with a katana.
There are many particle colliders throughout the world already.
The LHC isn't even the first collider on the CERN site, it used to be the large electron positron collider and (from memory) was first started back in the 60s
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 378
A basic consequence of string theory. Look it up.
For one thing, I said "what seems the most likely scenario", so don't get anal about 'absolute proof'.
As for "c'mon, there's got to be more evidence to start stating things" and "nowhere near proven"; you consider a near-complete theoretic framework, being worked on by thousands of the best minds around the world, with tens of thousands of academic publications to be "not worth mentioning?"
We know that the two theories we have to describe the 4-dimensional universe we live in are incompatible. We know that we need to account for higher-dimensions in order to couple mavity with the other three basic forces. We know that to obtain direct observations of the behavior of higher dimensions, in order to PROVE the theoretical framework correct, will take more energy than we can currently generate. There is no proof because we do not yet have the tools powerful enough and sensitive enough to probe the small lengthscales and high-energies required. This is the whole reason that we build devices such as the LHC.
Just because you don't understand something, or don't want to believe it, doesn't mean you should become a luddite.
Stop criticising things you don't understand, and try to find me even the basics of just one theory of quantum mavity which DOESN'T have mavity existing in higher dimensions. If you're convinced it does not exist, and that you know better than the entire theoretical physics comuinity, then go prove it. Otherwise shut up.
Last edited:
This is a bit of a ridiculous statement to make, because the next leading contender for a quantum mavity model is LQG, which is setup on a 3+1 dimensional manifold.