Baby Bang Experiment could Open Door to New Dimen

[wa1ex]

Baby Bang Experiment could Open Door to New Dimension:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=325&objectid=10400645

Our Story begins at CERN...

The project team is aiming at answering numerous questions
about the secrets of the universe...

So what do they do? they build a 27 Kilometer circular
particle accelerator, that will smash protons into
one another at speeds faster than the Roadrunner or Speedy gonzales!

The beams will have large amounts of kinetic energy and will be slammed
into one another to create a collision, so its results can be studied
and new information gathered.

They were called "Mini bangs" per Brian Cox of Machester University....
AND I WILL CALL IT "MINI BANG"

New Dimensions Could be discovered, imagine the possibilities....

Now the best part of the article in my opinion:

Dr Cox dismissed worries that by adventuring into
the unknown and creating tiny black holes, the machine could even
destroy the planet.

"The probability is at the level of 10 to the minus 40," he said.

Ok the risk of destroying the earth is:
a 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 chance.

So are you feeling Optimistic or Pesimistic today?

Optimistic George:
- CERN Experiment A Success!
- Dark matter mystery Solved!
- Mass is finally understood!
- CERN is finally able to explain why there is far more matter than antimatter in the universe!
- And wikipedia IS FINALLY updated for the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsolved_problems_in_physics

Pessimistic George:
- Umm remember the movie event horizon?

 

[RainmanTime]

Hi wa1ex,

Dr Cox dismissed worries that by adventuring into
the unknown and creating tiny black holes, the machine could even
destroy the planet.

"The probability is at the level of 10 to the minus 40," he said.

Now this smells very much like a mis-use and/or abuse of statistics. I, for one, would like to see the analysis that resulted in this number... Especially given the fact that no one has, as yet, created a "Baby Bang" which means that the "confidence factor" in this unbelievably low number is certainly less than 50%.

When a new commerical airplane goes through its automatic landing certification program, the FAA requires failure modeling and simulation of the final design to show that the probability of loss of aircraft performing an automatic landing is less than ONE IN A BILLION (1E-9), and I know how exceedingly hard it is to meet that number, much less 1E-40!

I wouldn't trust Dr. Cox until I could review his analysis, and I am sure there are some "simplifying assumptions" in it somewhere that could easily be called into question.

RMT

 

[wa1ex]

Re: Baby Bang Experiment could Open Door to New Di

Now that you mention it, are you telling me that
an airplace can land itself by enabling the control systems?
How Easy is it for a high School kid to do it?

But going back to the Numbers he gave. Yes, the probability is low.
I just dont know how they managed to measure the outcome
of a phenomenon that is not fully understood.

An Another Thing now that you Mention coincidences in a prev post
notice the simmilarity of the CERN particle accelerator to that in the picture
of that movie Event Horizon made in 1997...

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: Baby Bang Experiment could Open Door to New Di

Hi wa1ex,

Now that you mention it, are you telling me that
an airplace can land itself by enabling the control systems?
How Easy is it for a high School kid to do it?

In general, for most commercial airplanes with automatic landing capability, a human still needs to do three things while the airplane is airborne in order to make it land itself: (1) Arm the automatic approach/landing system by pushing a button and entering a nav radio frequency for the airport, (2) Put down the slats and flaps as the airplane decelerates, and (3) Put down the landing gear prior to landing. But yes, with all of that done by a human, it can land itself and stop itself at the end of the runway.

As for a high school kid... AAMOF, when I was working on the MD-11 and B-717 automatic pilot and autoland systems, I brought my nephew (who was a senior in high school at the time) into our flight simulator and showed him how to "fly the autopilot" and set-up the aircraft for and engage automatic landing. It takes a bit of training (several hours, and you need to understand some basics about how airplanes fly), but yes it is do-able by someone that young.

I just dont know how they managed to measure the outcome
of a phenomenon that is not fully understood.

That is exactly my point. Even for aircraft automatic landing, we can "predict" what the probability of loss of aircraft is even before the airplane flies, but that is because we understand (and can mathematically model the systems and build simulations of) how the airplane has to work. In this case, the results are unknown (for they will be the subject of the experiments!), and so the "confidence factor" in his 1E-40 probability is shakey, at best. I can guarantee his confidence in that number is LESS THAN 50%.

RMT

 

[creedo299]

Re: Baby Bang Experiment could Open Door to New Di

They built forty versions of Rainmantime in the future.

Somewhere the computer programmers, for the finite allegory cascade brains, within the android versions, learned to dance.

Rainnman, or his cloned of sons, would often sit in embarrassment in New Los Angeles dance establishments.The audiance sat, as the beef-caked versions of Gorgeous Ray, was bootlegged into the thousands, as illegal dance models.

There were low-fi versions of Wonderful Dancing Ray.This, at places, such as Bill's Lust Pub. To where the not so smart versions of Dancing Ray, would often walk offstage, with many greenbill credits stuffed within their g-strings.