Jump to content

LHC to begin testing in 24 hours!


TheKurodaVagrant

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I wonder if people ever do a time travel experiment, and it works, and they change something, if we would ever know. Maybe something really subtle, or maybe we would assume it has always been like that. Kinda like when I thought Tommy Lee Jones was in Wild Wild West, maybe he was but a time traveller altered history.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh boy.

 

The LHC Won't make black holes and gobble up the earth. You have my personal word for that. If it does end the world, then, well, I suppose I owe you a pint.

I feel a lot more comfortable knowing that I have MDK_Marshal's word that the world won't end. <_<

 

 

I think that this needs a lot more research before being activated. They don't know what it will do, and it has the potential to cause some kind of damage, so they should not be doing it, and we should not be allowing them to do it.

 

I'm not so much concerned about black holes as I am about unknown consequences of inadequate research. I don't trust these people.

 

 

ETA:

 

And if they don't know what it's going to do, (them being who they are, and you being who you are) then you definitely don't know. So cut the "read a physics textbook" ######. You don't know what it's going to do either, so you don't have to condiscend to me for not understanding quantum mechanics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I don't think the world is going to end, and I don't think there is going to be a problem, but that isn't what I'm complaining about. The problem is that they are being reckless and we are allowing them to be reckless. This device will not destroy the world, but what about the next device? If we start letting people turn on these things without understanding what they will do, we can count on an eventual catastrophy. They need to be held more accountable for actually doing the research, instead of "being almost certain" that they know what will happen. Almost certain is not certain, and it is not good enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If Brad Pitt turns into a zombie, is TKV the new Brad Pitt?

 

I vote yes.

 

Aw, thank you... :wub:

 

This thread was started as a joke, and now we're trying to dissuade someone from taking our wishful delusion of some infinitesimally small chance of destruction seriously. I love it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To expand on Xaccer's point:

 

It's an experiment. They know exactly what is going to happen but don't know what the results will be. They have a good idea (called a hypothesis) which is based on previously observed evidence and some clever maths. So they are looking for the Higgs Boson. They've devised the method of this experiment to attempt to record the existence of this Higgs Boson. They are now going to run the experiment to get some results from which they should be able to draw conclusions about it's existence and hopefully infer new experiments or theories from that. It's err... that scientific method thing again.

 

If they knew exactly what was going to happen what would be the point in doing the experiment unless it was to confirm a previous experiment in which case there would be no problem? ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Look, I don't think the world is going to end, and I don't think there is going to be a problem, but that isn't what I'm complaining about. The problem is that they are being reckless and we are allowing them to be reckless. This device will not destroy the world, but what about the next device? If we start letting people turn on these things without understanding what they will do, we can count on an eventual catastrophy. They need to be held more accountable for actually doing the research, instead of "being almost certain" that they know what will happen. Almost certain is not certain, and it is not good enough.

 

You heard it here first.

 

BAN SCIENCE, AND PUT AN END TO SLIPPERY SLOPE ARGUMENTS ONCE AND FOR ALL

Link to post
Share on other sites
This device will not destroy the world, but what about the next device? If we start letting people turn on these things without understanding what they will do, we can count on an eventual catastrophy. They need to be held more accountable for actually doing the research, instead of "being almost certain" that they know what will happen. Almost certain is not certain, and it is not good enough.

I WANT them to turn it on just because theres a chance of Halflife becoming reality. Bad science and disasterous unforseen consequences? Hell yea bring it on!

 

Can't wait for a Glados or a Red Queen!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey expvideo- did you know that probability says that you could blink out of existence at any given time for no foreseen reason? Black holes could also pop up on Earth at any time, and some say they already have with the Tunguska Incident.

 

Enjoy your day and your newfound paranoia! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever. I don't know enough about this to argue it, and I never claimed to. All I know is what I've heard, and what I've heard suggests that they should have a better idea of what will happen before they turn on this machine. That is all. Obviously I am wrong, so enjoy. I know that the world isn't going to end, I am only concerned about how accountable we are holding these people, and how much they are going to eventually push the envelope in the name of science.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Look, I don't think the world is going to end, and I don't think there is going to be a problem, but that isn't what I'm complaining about. The problem is that they are being reckless and we are allowing them to be reckless. This device will not destroy the world, but what about the next device? If we start letting people turn on these things without understanding what they will do, we can count on an eventual catastrophy. They need to be held more accountable for actually doing the research, instead of "being almost certain" that they know what will happen. Almost certain is not certain, and it is not good enough.

 

If they were certain then they wouldn't need to do the experiment.

 

Your reasoning is also fallacious. You infer that in the future scientists must inevitably create a catastrophe if they are allowed to conduct this experiment and this would be bad therefore this experiment is bad. This is simply incorrect as you show no evidence to back the assertion that this will lead to dangerous research or that there is anything wrong in principle with this experiment or that this must lead to catastrophe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Whatever. I don't know enough about this to argue it, and I never claimed to. All I know is what I've heard, and what I've heard suggests that they should have a better idea of what will happen before they turn on this machine. That is all. Obviously I am wrong, so enjoy. I know that the world isn't going to end, I am only concerned about how accountable we are holding these people, and how much they are going to eventually push the envelope in the name of science.

 

They are very accountable, you don't just give a bunch of guys several billions of dollars without checking they have a decent idea about what they are doing with it. Honestly do you have any actual evidence that the scientist involved are dangerous mavericks with no oversight, supervision or accountability?

Link to post
Share on other sites
If they were certain then they wouldn't need to do the experiment.

 

Your reasoning is also fallacious. You infer that in the future scientists must inevitably create a catastrophe if they are allowed to conduct this experiment and this would be bad therefore this experiment is bad. This is simply incorrect as you show no evidence to back the assertion that this will lead to dangerous research or that there is anything wrong in principle with this experiment or that this must lead to catastrophe.

I am so sick of talking about this. You all went nuts for my first comment, which was obviously facetious in nature, but whatever. I have my opinion, which is obviously wrong, but it's not changing, and I'm not trying to change your's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have my opinion, which is obviously wrong, but it's not changing, and I'm not trying to change your's.

 

I'm not trying to change your opinion just point out where it's wrong. By posting your opinion here you have to accept it's fair game that people may or may not criticise it.

 

On the other hand when you say something as obvious moronic as the sentence I've quoted is it any wonder? Acknowledging your opinion is wrong but keeping it anyway is well... stupid. You are of course free to do so but please remember to breathe occasionally. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cthulhu worries me more in this case. :D

 

Mind you it also worries me than the economy tanking.

 

They were not composed altogether of flesh and blood. They had shape...but that shape was not made of matter. When the stars were right, They could plunge from world to world through the sky; but when the stars were wrong, They could not live. But although They no longer lived, They would never really die. They all lay in stone houses in Their great city of R'lyeh, preserved by the spells of mighty Cthulhu for a glorious resurrection when the stars and the earth might once more be ready for Them.

 

Gibber!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.