The results of my group represent fundamental research in the 3 fields of general relativity, quantum mechanics and chaos theory. Several independent results obtained in these disciplines jointly point to a danger - much so as if Nature had posed a trap to humankind if not watching out.
The MAIN RESULT concerns BLACK HOLES and comprises 10 sub-results
Black holes are different than previously thought and presently presupposed by experimentalists. It is much as it was with the Eniwetak bomb, where incorrect physical calculations caused a catastrophe - albeit a localized one at the time. Four Tubingen theorems (gothic-R theorem, TeLeMaCh theorem, miniquasar theorem, superfluidity theorem) entail 10 new consequences:
1) Black holes DON’T EVAPORATE - they can only grow.
2) Artificial black holes generated at the LHC are therefore undetectable at first.
3) Black holes are uncharged. So the fast majority created pass right through the earth’s and sun’s matter.
4) Only the slowest artificial ones - under 11 km/sec - will stay inside earth.
5) Inside matter, a resident black hole will - via self-organization - form a so-called “miniquasar": An electro-gravitational engine that grows exponentially, shrinking the earth to 2 cm in a few years time.
6) Since black holes are uncharged, charged elementary particles conversely can no longer be maximally small ("point-shaped"). Hence space is “bored open” in the small as predicted by string and loop theories.
7) Therefore the probability of black holes generated by the LHC experiment is boosted up to about 10 percent at the energy of 7 (soon to be raised to 8) TeV.
8) This high probability was apparently not yet reached in 2010, since the originally planned cumulative luminosity was not achieved, but the higher-energetic second proton colliding phase scheduled to start in February 2011 is bound to reach that level.
9) Black holes produced in natural particle collisions (cosmic ray protons colliding with surface protons of celestial bodies including earth) are much too fast to get stuck inside matter and hence are innocuous.
10) The only exception is ultra-dense neutron stars. However, their super-fluid “core” is frictionless by virtue of quantum mechanics. Ultra-fast mini black holes that get stuck in the “crust” grow there to a limited weight before sinking into the core where they stop growing. Hence the persistence of neutron stars is NOT a safety guarantee, as CERN claims.
MAIN QUESTION: Why do the CERN representatives disregard the above results?
1.) The novelty of the above results.
2.) The limited dissemination of the above results. So far, only three pertinent papers have appeared in print, two in conference proceedings in July 2008 and one in an online science journal in 2010. The others are still confined to the Internet.
3.) The a-priori improbability that several results from independent areas of science would “conspire” to form a threat rather than cancel out in this respect. There seems to be no historical precedent.
4.) The decades long intervals between new results in general relativity are responsible that new findings meet with maximum scepticism at first.
5.) One - the unchargedness result (Ch in TeLeMaCh) - unthrones a two centuries old physical law.
6.) The embarrassing fact that the large planetary community of string theorists suddenly hold an “almost too good” result in their hands causes them to rather keep a low profile than triumph.
7.) The wanting spirit of progress in fundamental physics, whose results too often proved to be “Greek gifts.”
8.) The LHC experiment is the largest and most tightly knit collective endeavor of history.
9.) The fear to lose sponsors and political support for subsequent mega projects.
10.) The world-wide adoption of high-school type undergraduate curricula in place of the previous self-responsible style of studying has the side effect that collective authority acquires an undue weight.
Why has the “scientific safety conference” publicly demanded on April 18, 2008 not been taken up by any grouping on the planet? For nothing else but FALSIFICATION of the presented scientific results was and is asked for. Falsification of a single one will wipe out the danger. A week of discussing might suffice.
Neither politics nor the media realized up until now that not a single scientist on the planet assumes responsibility for the alleged falsity of the presented results. No individual defends his disproved counterclaims (the number of colleagues who entered the ring can be counted on one hand). This simple fact - no open adversary - escaped the attention of a media person or politician.
Neither group dares mess with a worldwide interest lobby - even though it is not money that is at stake for once but borrowed authority. So as if the grand old men of science of the 20th century had no successors, nor had the gifted philosophers and writers (I exempt Paul Virilio). Bringing oneself up-to-date on a certain topic paradoxically seems impaired in the age of the Internet.
Thus there are no culprits? None except for myself who wrongly thought that painful words (like “risk of planetocaust") could have a wake-up effect at the last minute. The real reason for the delayed global awakening to the danger lies with this communication error made by someone who knows how it is to lose a child. In the second place, my personal friends Lorenz, Weizsacker, Wheeler and DeWitt are no longer there.
I therefore appeal to the above-listed high legal and political bodies to rule rapidly that the scientific safety conference take place before the LHC experiment is allowed to resume in February 2011. Or to, in the case of a further delay of the conference, outlaw resumption for so long.
I reckon with the fact that I will make a terrible fool of myself if, at long last, a scientist succeeds in falsifying a single one of the above 10 scientific findings or 4 theorems. This is my risk and my hope. I ask the world’s forgiveness for my insisting that my possibly deficient state of knowledge be set straight before the largest experiment of history may continue.
However, the youngest ship’s boy in the crow’s nest who believes he recognizes something on the horizon has the duty to insist on his getting a hearing. I humbly ask the high bodies mentioned not to hold this fact against me and to move in accordance with my proposition: First clarification, then continuation. Otherwise it would be madness even if it in retrospect proved innocuous. Right?
Sincerely yours, Otto E. Rossler, chaos researcher (For J.O.R.) 2011-01-12
2011-01-12 | achtphasen | 22:46:23 |