OHSAS 18001 standard contains requirements that can be objectively audited and does not establish specific requirements for OH&S performance. The performance is assessed against company’s commitments documented in its OH&S policy and its compliance wit…

The vibration anomaly is in matter. Helium not becoming solid is a property of matter. So if there is anything strange it is our understanding of matter.

To say that Dr Ellis tells only half the story may be giving the physicist way more credit than anyone is due. There is no one with even that much understanding of what matter and consequently of what reality is.

Unless there is a survivable accident (or by some miracle public concern) our future what ever it could be is in doubt.

That may sound a bit rich but the fact is there is no absolute understanding of what nature is or what it will do under extreme conditions. I look at the alternate sciences which is the stuff ‘respected’ physicists wont touch.

Take vacuum energy for example. Helium will not solidify even at near zero kelvin. At the temperatures when all movement ’should’ stop it takes a further 25 atmospheres of pressure to form a solid mass of helium. Vibration is estimated to be beyond the energy of the universe to suppress.

All it takes is an inaccurate description of matter where a false level of energy can be carried within atomic structure to reverse the expected outcomes of the LHC and form a white hole or draw into existence uncontrolled levels of charge. A white hole being the backlash of exceeding as yet some untested boundary.

On a second per second basis a single particle at 51 Joules is 110,000,000 time more energetic than the 0.000,002 Joules per particle in the accelerator. However in terms of absolute numbers 300 trillion particles in collision makes CERN 3,000,000 times more powerful on a single point focus than anything in nature. That is not multiplying by 11,200 times for the crossings per second and does not take into account anything else that could get drawn into a fireball before backlash.

The Bosenova achieved 2 trillion degrees on 10,000 atoms.

On the astronomy side it is easier to see solar systems with dust rings than it is to detect extra solar planets. Some 300 light tears from us is a solar system with a sun like star trailing debris in excess of a light year. The dust ring has enough material to construct two earth like planets or a Venus Earth system and the star is much closer to dying than our sun either due to age or damage. If it is damage then my question is was it a particle accelerator or some other high end failed attempt to tap into the power of the universe.

On the plus side it is highly effective global euthanasia as the explosive result if it did come from a planet would mean no person on the planet would experience more than a few milliseconds of destruction.

I read your blog, well written. I agree, reckless and negligent.

Humanity appears to have passed its first “Global Darwin Awards” test by not destroying ourselves with nuclear weapons that we do comprehend could destroy us.

It saddens me that we may be about to fail the second “Global Darwin Awards” test because we fail to comprehend the possible danger of experimentation with forces that we do not comprehend.

Those who should know the limitations of their own knowledge appear to be either deluded or reckless.

IMHO this is not arrogant, it is blatantly criminal. Let me explain why:
(1) All their theories are either incomplete, inconsistent, or both.
(2) The energy range the LHC is addressing is not supported by ANY theory
(3) The even concede nothing to know. Taking action without knowing anything is gambling by tossing the coin.
(4) All others can not choose neither their role in this game, nor whether they are willing to take part. We are simply taken hostage.
(5) CERN is acting intentionally.
From that follows, that CErn is acting like a criminal.
Deeply unethical. On my blog I call this a “zero ethical intelligence score”.

Because CERN people are not dumb, this raises the questions about the true incentives, and the hidden agenda.
Here it may be interesting to consider the legal status of the CERN. Even the county court of Hawaii denied jurisdiction in that case. It can not be stopped taking legal action. There are completely out of control, just billions of euros are pouring into that machine. All this only to understand nature? Come on!! what’s about the military? A herd of physicists at the border of failure, running out of money, being sort of “blackmailed” by th military? Who knows…

If one does compare with the geometric setup of fission or fusion devices, spherical implosion basically, one has a model that gives that the centerpoint of the sphere is acoustically silent because all periferically originating waves negate each other at that point. In looking at an array of centrically oriented cosmic ray sources “stars” generating centrifocally cosmic rays accelerating streams of mBH:s It is obvious that at least some mBH collisions may occur at the galactic focal point by impact slowing at least some mBH:s to a standstill from their initial close to luminal velocities. This vould suggest that concentric impacting mBH flux could contribute to explaining the observed predilection for galactic centres attributed to black holes.
Suggesting thus that low speed be an actual factor in their becoming increasingly energetic through allowing their condensing interaction with surrounding matter and other mBH. In a galaxy a lot of it’s matter could be mBH orbiting at close to C velocites until coming to rest as pairs of high energy particles in diametrically opposit impacts at the galactic centre rather than as may generally be the case elswhere single high energy particles impacting low energy particles. Is this a correct assumption

Geneva, 5 September 2008. A report published today in the peer reviewed Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics* provides comprehensive evidence that safety fears about the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) are unfounded. The LHC is CERN**’s new flagship research facility. As the world’s highest energy particle accelerator, it is poised to provide new insights into the mysteries of our universe.

“The LHC will enable us to study in detail what nature is doing all around us,” said CERN Director General Robert Aymar. “The LHC is safe, and any suggestion that it might present a risk is pure fiction.”

Safety has been an integral part of the LHC project since its inception in 1994, and the project has been subject to numerous audits covering all aspects of safety and environmental impact. A comprehensive report by independent scientists addressing safety issues related to the production of new particles at the LHC was presented to CERN’s governing body, the CERN Council, in 2003. It concluded that the LHC is safe. This report was updated and its conclusions strengthened in a new report incorporating recent experimental and observational data that was presented to Council at its most recent meeting in June 2008. This new report confirms and strengthens the conclusion of the 2003 report that there is no basis for any concern about the safety of the LHC. The CERN Council is composed of representatives of the governments of the 20 European Member States of CERN.

The report was prepared by a group of scientists at CERN, the University of California, Santa Barbara, and the Institute for Nuclear Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The papers comprising the report have been accepted for publication in leading peer-reviewed scientific journals. The report was reviewed carefully by the Scientific Policy Committee (SPC), a body composed of 20 independent external scientists that advises the CERN Council on scientific matters. Five of these independent scientists, including one Nobel Laureate, examined in detail the 2008 report and endorsed the authors’ approach of basing their arguments on irrefutable observational evidence to conclude that new particles produced at the LHC will pose no danger. The full SPC agreed unanimously with their findings.

“The LHC safety review has shown that the LHC is perfectly safe,” said Jos Engelen, CERN’s Chief Scientific Officer, “it points out that Nature has already conducted the equivalent of about a hundred thousand LHC experimental programmes on Earth – and the planet still exists.”

Notes for Editor:

* Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics, published by IOP Publishing, covers theoretical and experimental topics in the physics of elementary particles and fields, intermediate-energy physics and nuclear physics. For further information please visit http://www.iop.org/journals/jphysg. The LHC safety report “Review of the Safety of LHC Collisions” (J. Ellis et al, 2008 J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 35 1150004) is available online.

** CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, is the world’s leading laboratory for particle physics. It has its headquarters in Geneva. At present, its Member States are Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. India, Israel, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, Turkey, the European Commission and UNESCO have Observer status.

–

CERN - Press Office

CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland

Tel: +41 22 767 2141 /3432 - Fax: +41 22 785 0247

http://www.cern.ch/Press

Press.Office@cern.ch

I assume the ‘lesser’ scientists at the CERN LHC are starting to feel the public pressure and internally , silently, between themselves are starting to discuss and raise disturbing questions and having certain doubts in what their ‘big bosses’ tell them.

But as in any profession, they have been told the irrefutable truth in years of (Mis-)education at those great Universities. But they may not have been told to think…

It’s not the argument that Prof. Roesslers or any other critics theory may be wrong or that a disaster event may actually not happen that some LHC-Fans keep pursuing, that I find so irritating. I can somewhat understand their position.

It is the fact that these ‘Fans’ are completely against a public discussion, an open communication and ‘an open and independent safety conference as Dr. Rössler calls for that is desperately needed’.

Dear LHC supporters (whatever your real motivations are) what is there to loose if you agree and support the above? A few months? A year? Maybe 2?

And what is there to win? Increased safety. Peace of mind. For if you are wrong and people like Prof. Roessler are right, what a huge burden did you load on yourself by disallowing the public discussion, the independent safety conference?

I’ve heard so many LHC supporters in so many forums and blogs say exactly the same:

‘We don’t need a discussion, we do not need to ask anybody before we turn this on, just trust us, don’t interfere! We have the right to do it all alone. And we will.’

Is this an acceptable position in so-called democratic countries? Is this the way you would like the world to be run?

Don’t you think that the simple citizen of this world has a right to know? Don’t you think that the critics arguments should be seriously discussed? Should a couple of 1000′ scientists decide on the future of humanity (and more) all alone, all by themselves?

Why do you fear a public discussion and a serious independant safety conference so much? Why is your only way to deal with critics to silence them, to make them look stupid? Have you never been wrong in your life?

admin
http://www.notepad.ch

Is it responsible to take such a risk? Do we need to take such a risk?

For comparison we know from Soviet research that it is safe to explode a 57 mega tonne fusion bomb in the atmosphere. On the same figures is it safe to assume we could safely detonate a 33,000 mega tonne fusion bomb in the atmosphere. That is the comparative risk.

I don’t know is a valid scientific answer. The scientists have quite openly stated they do not know what will happen which is an honest and valid answer. What I intend to do is to get to know as much as I can about Jesus Christ The Messiah, my personal Savior. I don’t know what you intend to do.

http://environmental-impact.web.cern.ch/environmental-impact/Objects/LHCSafety/NicolaiComment-en.pdf

http://environmental-impact.web.cern.ch/environmental-impact/Objects/LHCSafety/NicolaiFurtherComment-en.pdf

Surely it cannot be that the LHCFacts website is intolerant towards criticism of its favourite son Prof. Roessler!

Sadly, by omitting the views of the general-relativist Otto Nicolai as to whether Prof. Roessler’s work is correct or even physically meaningful, this post tells even less than half the story. By now, several relativists have shown that the Roessler ‘theorem’ does not tell us anything about physical realities, being simply a mathematical rewriting of known results, which are then misinterpreted by him.

Some of these refutations are in German

http://www.achtphasen.net/index.php/plasmaether/2008/08/13/p691

however here is one in English:

http://www.achtphasen.net/index.php/plasmaether/2008/08/08/p675

Perhaps the author of this post could try to engage with the arguments presented by Nicolai and Bruhn, rather than treating every utterance of Roessler’s as selfevident ‘genius’.