Observations of X-ray binary system, without a nebula shroud, suggest a massive mass orbital partner that did not supernova.

Allowing the possibility of a “cosmic ray” created stable singularities massing onto one of the binary star mass; resulting in a X-ray binary like Cygnus X-1.

The common presence of such x-ray binary pairs in our galaxy implies a high probability of stable singularities occuring in cosmic ray collisions.

Cygnus X-1
http://blackholes.stardate.org/directory/factsheet.php?id=13

Several thousand light-years away, near the “heart” of Cygnus, the swan, two stars are locked in a gravitational embrace. One star is a blue supergiant, known as HDE 226868. It is about 30 times as massive as the Sun and 400,000 times brighter. The other star is 5 to 10 times the mass of the Sun, but it’s extremely small. The object must be the collapsed core of a star. Its mass is too great to be a white dwarf or a neutron star, though, so it must be a black hole — the corpse of a star that once resembled the supergiant.

image:
http://www.spacetelescope.org/goodies/posters/screen/cygnus_x1.jpg

X-ray Binary Stars
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l2/binaries.html

If your eyes could see X-rays rather than optical light, you would see a very different and unusual sight when you looked up at the sky. You would be overwhelmed by a few hundred very bright stars, mostly concentrated towards the center of our Galaxy. Most of these stars would in fact be X-ray binaries, where a black hole or neutron star is devouring material from its companion star.

galaxy map:
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/Images/advanced/xray/bright_binaries.gif

As said in the article an average of one high energy particle per century is the rate for a square kilometer of land. A collision produces billions of little particles of low energy by the time the scattering effect gets to the tanks being used to look for these big impacts.

Nature throws big particles one at a time every century.
CERN is throwing big numbers at one exact same spot.

Nature throws particles from one direction that bounce off.
CERN throws particles at each other (head on) from both directions.

Nothing in nature justifies particle acceleration in this manner.

Michael.

Hello James, Excellent arguments!

However I have a question about this point:

James_Blodgett wrote:On the other hand, black holes produced by colliders are produced by two particles moving in opposite directions. Their momenta cancel, so they can be moving at zero velocity. Actually the collision of consequence is the collision of the quarks, which have large and randomly directed energy. Quark energy would rarely cancel precisely, so most collider-created black holes would also be moving at faster than escape velocity from earth. However, a few would not be moving that fast. They would travel in orbits that repeatedly intersect earth. If they were slow enough, they would travel in orbits within the earth. Instead of zipping through earth in a few seconds, they would have forever to accrete.

JTankers wrote: Because head-on collider collisions can include thousands of protons or protons to anti-protons (according to physicist Hasanuddin, groups of 10,000,000,000 protons at a time might be involved in each collision), so if a micro black hole is created from a large enough number of protons, might not the randomly directed energy be expected to cancel out enough to expect possibly all micro black holes created to be relatively at rest with respect to Earth, and able to be captured by Earth’s gravity?

(The physicist that spoke of Dog piling said that up to 10,000,000,000 protons at a time might collide head-on and follow on groups of 10,000,000,000 groups of atoms could also ‘doc pile’ into any stable super dense matter created.)

The CERN representative declined to give a scientific answer, instead attacking the credibility of the physicists that proposed the idea.