Yet there is one distinct difference between the above and the LHC. If the worst fears of the LHC prove true then those scientists are screwing themselves every bit as much as anyone else. When your own ass is on the line I suspect people have a bit more care for what is happening.
No, that is so far from the point I was trying to make, it’s ridiculous to even contemplate it. That is not at all what I was trying to say. My point is that scientists are not infallible. They make mistakes. Sometimes they make horrible mistakes. Sometimes their mistakes kill lots of people. We can’t just put blind trust in scientists just because they’re scientists.
ETA - this is in reference to the VW bug analogy.
I’m pretty sure that the scientists working on the Manhattan Project were aware that their research could potentially kill them, and I am not an expert on the subject but I’d hazard a guess that at least some of them predicted that their atomic-bomb research would lead to an age where every nation was armed with nukes and we were always just one diplomatic boner away from blowing the whole world to smithereens - and they went ahead with the research anyway.
o/ Vunce ze rockets go up Who cares vhere zey come down? Zat's not my department, says Werner Von Braun. o/
OK, lets look at that statement. Scientists design new technology based on theory and research. That technology is then tested to verify the research behind it. At some point in the testing cycle the element of human risk is introduced. In the case of aviation it is a test pilot. Many pilots died because information was lacking or incorrect. Beyond that, many civilians died because new problems arose that did not show up in tests.
Right. My point is that Argent Towers’ notion of a devil-may-care attitude among scientists is far less likely when THEY stand to get killed by what they are doing. It is one thing to invent a bomb that will be used on others and possibly, in some hypothetical, might someday be used back on them. It is another thing entirely for a scientist to invent something they think has a very real likelihood of killing them along with the rest of the planet when they push the button.
Can you quantify “very real” ? Seems to me there are scientists currently working in genetic engineering whose research has far greater potential for mass disaster than the CERN guys.
I imagine it is subjective. But there is still a difference. A genetic researcher may not perceive an explicit danger from their research although it could perhaps be used in inappropriate ways in the future. Further they have to wonder how immediate and real a threat it is to them.
If we assume the LHC could blow up the world and they calculated a (say) 10% chance it would occur would anyone pull that lever? This is more akin to them personally playing a real game of Russian Roulette. I think if scientists working on the problem identified that threat they’d be a lot more dodgy about continuing.
Here’s another way to look at it: It is quite possible that right now, there’s a vacuum instability growing in Switzerland due to purely natural processes, and that if it’s left unchecked, that vacuum instability might destroy the entire Universe. It’s likewise possible that turning on the LHC might remove that vacuum instability. Sure, it’s highly unlikely, but it’s possible. How can we justify the risk to the entire Universe from not turning on the LHC? We’d better get that thing up and running as quick as we can!
[QUOTE=Cervaise]
I mean, come on – the people who are concerned about this are, in essence, saying that one of the following laughable scenarios is true:
[list=a][li]The scientists are dummies. There they are, cheerfully assembling their machine, without any idea what they’re doing until Joe Nobody comes along and says, hey, guys, don’t you know your machine might destroy the world? Whereupon the scientists are supposed to say, “Hey, thanks for the warning, Joe Nobody! We never thought of that!”[/li][li]The scientists know very well that the machine has a good chance of destroying the world, but they don’t care; inquiries into basic knowledge are worth taking any risk. Or perhaps their egos outweigh the survival of humanity.[/list][/li][/QUOTE]
Well, they are members of the same species that takes, “Caution! Wet paint!” as an invitation.
What if the chance is 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000001%, give or take five or six orders of magnitude?
'Cause that’s more like it.
Was just an example. Do not count me among the black hole will eat the earth crowd. I think the LHC is cool and only bummed it will take them years to figure out if they’ve found what they are looking for.
Myself, I’m much more afraid that a giant asteroid might smack into the planet and kill everyone. There’s no debate whatsoever over whether that’s possible, or whether planet-killing asteroids might evaporate too quickly to lay down a smackdown!
If you don’t quake in terror at asteroids, you probably shouldn’t worry about the LHC.
A part of me is actually going to be disappointed if the the thing doesn’t destroy the planet.
I mean screaming Europeans, Switzerland turning into a molten radioactive hell before being sucked into nothingness, panicking TV announcers telling us that we are all doomed. Dooomed! The final death spasms of the planet. Humanity at its most base and vile as man turns against man. Utter chaos and carnage while a few weep that they warned us. Mankind was not meant to know, and these are the consequences for attempting to peer into the mind of God. Then the whole world collapses into itself and total nothingness.
How cool would that be?
Pretty fucking cool. For about a femtosecond. After that, it would just suck.
Maybe for you. I’ll be in Heaven
Well, right before the test of the first atomic bomb, scientists were concerned that there might be a greater than zero chance of accidently igniting the Earth’s atmosphere on fire. But then they figured out that probably wasn’t going to happen.
Not probably…they knew it wouldn’t but apparently the initial worry leaked out and caused then to have to make many assurances to those not so scientifically inclined.
Second on the bill to Love Hadron.