Why large hadron collider can never be activated

[makc]

This theory comes from comments to recent bird conspiracy thread on slashdot:

this theory has actually been proposed: That activating the LHC would actually destroy the universe, that is, the whole universe, even reaching back into the past. That would mean that the only possible universes are ones in which the LHC is never activated, which means that if we keep trying, implausible events will continue to occur, preventing the LHC from activating- after all, we're here now, right. That's _proof_ that the LHC will never be activated!

Sounds logical to me. What about you?

[Chris Peterson]

Sounds logical to me. What about you? :)

A similar argument is used against time travel. The suggestion is that if you allow time travel, somebody will go backwards and change things, eventually to a state of the Universe where time travel is never developed- the only stable state.

However, the failure in this LHC argument is the bit about it somehow working backwards in time. There's no justification given for that rather extreme assumption. If the Universe is destroyed, the Universe is destroyed.

Since these energies are present naturally, and we might reasonably assume that other civilizations in the Universe have built their own high energy colliders, the Universe should have long since been destroyed. Doesn't seem to have happened. The argument about the LHC will fail, of course, when it actually does go on line and start operating at high energies in the near future.

[neufer]

Large Hadron Collider is being sabotaged from the future.

[BMAONE23]

I believe that the PAST is cast in stone...so to speak... and any event that happened in the past cannot be changed. If you try to stop Kennedy from being shot in Nov'63 you might succeed but he would have a stroke or heart attack instead and Oswold would have been killed in a mugging. As to the Hadron bringing about the destruction of the universe in the Past...since it hasn't happened, it couldn't happen...the Past is Cast

[neufer]

I believe that the PAST is cast in stone...so to speak...and any event that happened in the past cannot be changed.

<<People expressing flexibility say that their ideas or rules are “not cast in concrete,” meaning they have not hardened into rigidity. You cast concrete in a mold by pouring it in and letting it set; so the expression can also be “not set in concrete.” A similar expression is “not carved in stone” (like the Ten Commandments).

People frequently mix these two expressions up and say things like “It’s not cast in stone.” They may be influenced by the unrelated Christian saying, “Don’t cast [throw] the first stone.” >>

If you try to stop Kennedy from being shot in Nov'63 you might succeed but he would have a stroke or heart attack instead and Oswold would have been killed in a mugging. As to the Hadron bringing about the destruction of the universe in the Past...since it hasn't happened, it couldn't happen...the Past is Cast

What about the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics?

What about the fact that you can edit your Asterisk posts after the fact?
(They're not cast in cyberspace.)

[BMAONE23]

I believe that the PAST is cast in stone...so to speak...and any event that happened in the past cannot be changed.

<<People expressing flexibility say that their ideas or rules are “not cast in concrete,” meaning they have not hardened into rigidity. You cast concrete in a mold by pouring it in and letting it set; so the expression can also be “not set in concrete.” A similar expression is “not carved in stone” (like the Ten Commandments).

People frequently mix these two expressions up and say things like “It’s not cast in stone.” They may be influenced by the unrelated Christian saying, “Don’t cast [throw] the first stone.” >>

If you try to stop Kennedy from being shot in Nov'63 you might succeed but he would have a stroke or heart attack instead and Oswold would have been killed in a mugging. As to the Hadron bringing about the destruction of the universe in the Past...since it hasn't happened, it couldn't happen...the Past is Cast

What about the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics?

What about the fact that you can edit your Asterisk posts after the fact?
(They're not cast in cyberspace.)

There would be no need for "Many Worlds" if the past weren't Cast in Stone. The different outcome would create the different world future but these worlds don't co-mingle. They are themselves cast in stone and unalterable. Attempted alteration will result in the creation of another divergent different world. But all would eventually lead (in reverse) to the original beginning point.

You can edit Asterisk posts unknown to others until the next post is placed on the thread and known to all until a thread is locked but you can't erase the unaltered post from the memory of any who had read it prior to your edit.

[Orca]

This seems to be a great place to interject with Occam's razor. Isn't it far more likely that the problems are due to the level of difficulty of the project? Isn't it reasonable to assume that at least a few set backs are bound to occur as they are symptomatic of most projects of vast size and complexity?

One might have suggested that Hubble's initial mirror-induced failures were caused by direct interference by God to prevent us from observing the early stages of the universe.

[neufer]

No Viagra.

[apodman]

Time travel gives me a headache. Tea gives me a headache. In fact, all of you give me a headache. I'm going to bed, wake me for the second reel with some coffee.

[neufer]

What about the fact that you can edit your Asterisk posts after the fact?
Especially if one is an Asterisk moderator.
(They're not cast in cyberspace.)

[makc]

No Viagra.

sigh... chris and bystander made this comment obsolete

[Chris Peterson]

No Viagra. :wink:

sigh... chris and bystander made this comment obsolete

For a reason... the entire discussion was being blocked by the nanny filters at my school. Given that this site probably gets a fair bit of traffic from schools and libraries with such filters, it seemed reasonable to fix the misspelling.

[bystander]

No Viagra.

sigh... chris and bystander made this comment obsolete

Art's post still has the appropriate title. I missed the pun, also, before Chris pointed out the spelling.

For a reason... the entire discussion was being blocked by the nanny filters at my school. Given that this site probably gets a fair bit of traffic from schools and libraries with such filters, it seemed reasonable to fix the misspelling.

I'm not so sure it was a misspelling.

Circulating around the net several years ago there was a supposed study on how the mind overlooks such spelling errors.

Urban Legends: Can You Raed This?

[makc]

Art's post still has the appropriate title.

Also every other post except neufer. I guess it's just not Chris' day.

[The Code]

There are no clocks.

Time does not exist.

Yesterday was the last time we saw the big yellow thing in the sky.

What is time? Take away the sun. How do you measure time?

[bystander]

There are no clocks.

Time does not exist.

Time is not dependent on clocks. Clocks are just tools.

Yesterday was the last time we saw the big yellow thing in the sky.

What is time? Take away the sun. How do you measure time?

International Atomic Time
The Official U.S. Time

[makc]

oh man, they are trying hard

p.s,

Time is not dependent on clocks. Clocks are just tools.

yeah but the way tool works defines the concept of what it measures

[bystander]

yeah but the way tool works defines the concept of what it measures

Clocks may affect how we conceive time, but they don't affect time any more than rulers affect distance.

[Chris Peterson]

Clocks may affect how we conceive time, but they don't affect time any more than rulers affect distance.

I don't even thing that's true. How we conceive of time dictates how we design clocks (and how we conceive of distance dictates how we design rulers).

[apodman]

How we conceive of time dictates how we design clocks

Time is a jet plane

[Orca]

Clocks may affect how we conceive time, but they don't affect time any more than rulers affect distance.

I don't even thing that's true. How we conceive of time dictates how we design clocks (and how we conceive of distance dictates how we design rulers).

"When you are courting a nice girl an hour seems like a second. When you sit on a red-hot cinder a second seems like an hour. That's relativity." - Einstein

[makc]

How we conceive of time dictates how we design clocks

while it seems highly plausible at first glance, I dont think it's the case or, at least, it is not all of the story. There were studies demonstrating that concepts of time and space in children are different from those in adults, in other words any "natural" way we think of it is replaced by the way dictated by society. personally, I suspect this applies to all of these "natural" concepts (such as colors, sound pitch, etc).

[The Code]

Time is a physical thing. Time was created. Time can be manipulated. That,s all proven. But our concept of Time was designed to read the sun. Not the speed of light. Or gravity. Is there two concepts of Time? Or More. When looking for the higgs boson, will they find Time? Just like they might find the Graviton. Can space and Time be separated?

[neufer]

<<The Honourable History of Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay (1594) is
an Elizabethan era stage play, a comedy written by Robert Greene.

[In it] Friar Bacon displays a range of magical skills:
he shows Edward the romance of Lacy and Margaret in his magic glass,
and interrupts their wedding at a distance;
he magically transports a tavern hostess from one place to another;
he wins a contest of magic with a German named Vandermast, witnessed
by the Kings of England and Castile and the Emperor of Germany.

In collaboration with another magician, Friar Bungay, Bacon labors
toward his greatest achievement: the creation of an artificial head
made of brass, animated by demonic influence, that can surround
England with a protective wall of the same metal.

Yet Bacon's inability to remain awake and
the incompetence of his servant Miles spoil the opportunity.

• The brazen head speaks three times, saying:
  
  "Time is." ... "Time was." ...
  and "Time is past."
  
  — then falls to the floor and shatters.
  Miles doesn't have the wit to wake his master in time.

Finally, Bacon inadvertently allows two young Oxfordians to witness
their fathers' duel in the magic glass; in response the students
themselves duel, and kill each other. Appalled by this outcome,
Bacon renounces magic and turns to a life of repentance.
His bad servant Miles, haunted by Bacon's conjured devils,
gets a promise of a tapster's job in Hell from one of them,
and rides to perdition on the devil's back.>>

Statue of Roger Bacon in the Oxford University Museum
-------------------------------------------------­------------
"And SAM knows Miles bettern me how to work the miracle."
-- _Finnegans Wake_ p.461
.................................................................
. _The Maltese Falcon_

SAM Spade: "Miles hadn't many brains...
[but] he had too many years' experience as a detective to be caught
like that by a man he was shadowing....He couldn't have tricked MILES
into the alley like that,...[but] he'd have gone up there with you,
angel....He'd've looked you up & down and licked his lips
and gone grinning from ear to ear--and then you could've
stood close to him in the dark and put a hole through him."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp7130Bjec4
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[Chris Peterson]

How we conceive of time dictates how we design clocks

while it seems highly plausible at first glance, I dont think it's the case or, at least, it is not all of the story. There were studies demonstrating that concepts of time and space in children are different from those in adults, in other words any "natural" way we think of it is replaced by the way dictated by society. personally, I suspect this applies to all of these "natural" concepts (such as colors, sound pitch, etc).

While it is an interesting observation that different cultures may have different concepts of natural processes and principles, I don't think that I'd use children's perceptions of nature as a benchmark of "natural".