LHC Facts

    

I am a professional gambler.  And from this unique perspective I speak with a certain wisdom.  I have strong feelings about the CERN LHC experiment and in my view, it is completely obvious that CERN is making an unwise gamble.  I don’t think the scientists have any understanding of the negative side of Expected Value.  In poker you must ask yourself, “If I played this exact scenario over and over again, ad infinitum, will I come out ahead or behind?”  And in blackjack, the so-often mistaken strategy is to double down each successive hand until you gain a win.  In the long run this strategy fails every time because it has a -ev.

 

If it turns out the LHC has a -ev and they collide particles ad infinitum, then we may all be doomed. 

 

My understanding of the science involved is limited by comparison to others, but I believe that Walter Wagner and James Blodgett have laid out a strong and credible case that the LHC is taking risks the public would not accept.  And that they have laid out this case using strong deductive reasoning based on statements by credible scientists.  CERN is only able to defend their experiment using weak inductive reasoning.  This is a clear advantage for the side of safety.

 

All anyone really needs to know about this debate is the difference in strength between deduction and induction.  Please go to Wikipedia and search these two topics.  If you can understand them, you will understand the widom of what I say.  If Walter Wagner and James Blodgett’s premise is correct, then their conclusion MUST be correct.  This is ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE with CERN’s arguments.  Their arguments support their conclusions, but do not entail them!

 

It is also clear to me that the scientists of CERN are trying to keep this discussion within the realm of hard-to-understand science.  And they are desperately avoiding the subject of risk.  This may be because they don’t understand risk, but more likely, it is because risk can be understood by the average man while their science cannot. 

 

In conclusion, I believe that we have the upper hand.  More work is desperately needed as this issue MUST become public knowledge.  But once it does, we will see safety prevail.  Because the human race is not self-destructive, no matter what the odds or Nobel Prize rewards.

   

Another