Talk:Large Hadron Collider

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Physics (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Europe (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Switzerland (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Switzerland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Switzerland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

This article has an assessment summary page.
News This article has been mentioned by a media organisation:

could we see a collision?[edit]

I'm trying to get my head around the relative intensity of these collisions. If I was a "ghost", and could stick my head in the collision zone and observe, would I see nothing? Very faint sparks? A blinding flash? What? Pb8bije6a7b6a3w (talk) 00:45, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

The maximal power at the interaction point was about 900 W so far, leading to a very intense stream of high-energetic particles that would probably look very bright, independent of the viewing direction as the particles just go through a human head. Related: Anatoli Bugorski --mfb (talk) 10:18, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Nonsense in the first paragraph[edit]

The third sentence in the lead is wrong. It states "Its spreads in an area of 27 km." This is complete nonsense since "27 km" cannot be an area! Please fix. CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 22:46, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

This appears to be fixed. Delamaran (talk) 05:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

No history of origin of LHC[edit]

There is no mention of pre-operational history of the LHC or origins of the project. "It is made to seem as though it dropped out of the sky in 2008." — as already been stated in page talk by anonymous. — andrybak (talk) 00:33, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

The (featured :)) German article has a section about the history, including some English references. That can be used as guideline. --mfb (talk) 14:08, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Safety of particle collisions[edit]

The first sentence of the section reads 'The experiments at the Large Hadron Collider sparked fears that the particle collisions might produce doomsday phenomena, involving the production of stable microscopic black holes or the creation of hypothetical particles called strangelets.' But there is no explanation of why either event might be considered dangerous. 86.144.179.132 (talk) 17:46, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, there is no explanation, that is correct. Maybe "because some people are actively looking for something to fear", but that is speculation and has nothing to do with the LHC. --mfb (talk) 18:19, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Higgs boson[edit]

In the introduction it says the LHC will "[...] particularly prove or disprove the existence of the theorized Higgs boson[3]." I thought it was proven and that even a Nobel Price was given for its discovery. Does it need an update? Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 00:53, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

See the following sentence for the current status. A particle has been discovered that agrees with the predictions for the standard model in every observation so far (more than 50 papers with experimental results about it now). Some seem to wait for a magical "it is the SM Higgs!" moment which will never come as measurements just get more and more precise over time. --mfb (talk) 09:40, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Does the LHC experiment prove the existence of Intelligent Creation[edit]

One of the most important conclusions of the Higgs boson LHC experiment may be on the borderline of Physics and Philosophy, subjects that were always close. Einstein stated the now accepted scientific rule, that the speed of light - 300,000 km/sec - is an absolute constant. That is represented by the letter C in his famous equation E=MC (squared). The speed cannot be surpassed by any scientific means. One of the conclusions of the LHC experiment is to back the Big Bang Theory previous speculation, that the BB (Big Bang) occurred in a portion of a second, and that most galaxies reached their locations, within the newly created universe, in that tiny time period (a split second, literally). We also know that the universe is constantly expanding. For the galaxies to be both created by the BB and move to their locations, most of which are millions of light years away from where the BB occurred, they must have moved at speeds exponentially greater than 300,000 km/sec; in fact the speed could reach C to the nth power, n being infinity . One must conclude that Einstein's rule about the speed of light's constancy, though certainly true, was shown to have been broken by the LHC experiment. This applies only to the BB and the emergence of the universe. And this beyond-Physics one time event could only have been executed by a force beyond the natural laws of Physics. Is this the proof that a creator exists, i.e. God? The Big Bang itself certainly bears uncanny resemblance to the first verses of Genesis ("Let there be light"), and one does not have to be religious to see this. It seems a plausible conclusion, that one creator was able to surpass natural law, as defined by Einstein. If one reaches this inevitable conclusion, he/she does not become religious, but admits extra-scientific facts as they are now proven to be.

Ariep88 (talk) 08:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Arie PachCite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

Sources: articles about the LHC experiment, Einstein's theories.

@Ariep88: Please see WP:NOR, WP:NOTFORUM. This is not the place to discuss your speculations. --NeilN talk to me 11:43, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
YES! Just like thunder proves the existence of Zeus. Going back at repairing my toaster. (I don't know how it works though....OMG! Goddidit! -BatteryIncluded (talk) 01:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
You misunderstand the Big Bang theory. Nothing moved faster than light, the contradiction you try to see is just a misconception you have. This has nothing to do with the LHC, and even if it would, Wikipedia pages are not the right place to discuss it. --mfb (talk) 12:09, 29 April 2015 (UTC)