The title of this blog post is in quotes because I did not say it, my spouse did -- in response to my somewhat rhetorical questions regarding the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland, which I posed to him over breakfast Friday morning."Why are these scientists spending BILLIONS of dollars to see a bunch of subatomic particles fly around and smash into each other?" I asked him while sucking down some Cheerios. "What is that going to get us?" To which he calmly replied, "Why do little boys want to blow up frogs?"
After more than 17 years, he finally found a way to (momentarily) shut me up. And I still don't have an answer. (Btw, if anyone reading this -- Dave S.? -- knows why little boys want to blow up frogs, please do leave a comment.)
In fact, the more I have thought about it, the more I am 99.9% certain that it never once occurred to me to blow up a frog. (Men, on the other hand, are a different story.) In fact, I would hazard that most females have not given much thought to frog demolition. But I digress.
The subject I am trying to get at (or to) is the Large Hadron Collider, which, per CERN's website (see link above): "is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the minuscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe."
It could also create a tiny black hole that could quickly grow and reduce our big blue marble to a little black cinder . Pretty cool, huh?
Apparently, I was not the only NY Times reader who was morbidly fascinated and more than slightly unsettled by (What, me worry? You betcha!) the thought of the Earth being "eaten" by a man-made black hole. My favorite NY Times columnist, Gail Collins, also read the article by her colleague, Dennis Overbye, and then wrote a column about it, which appeared on Thursday.
As I already have enough to worry about, and am quick to worry (though strangely the thought of being sucked down a black hole, along with everyone I love, doesn't worry me as much as the thought of terrorists blowing up my flight to London next week or the possibility that the 757 we are scheduled to take is one of the ones American decided not to perform a necessary safety inspection of), I wasn't going to read Ms. Collins's column. But I happened to have "Morning Joe" on as I was getting ready Thursday and who should Mr. (Joe) Scarborough have on as a guest but -- you guessed it, Gail Collins. I reached for the remote to change the channel, but it was too late. I was sucked in.
I really do hope that the folks at CERN know what they are doing and that the safety inspectors aren't the same guys responsible for making sure airplanes are safe to fly. But I would feel a lot better if instead of trying to smash together subatomic particles those European scientists would have stuck to blowing up frogs (though I quite like frogs and do not wish them harm).
[For the record, my husband, who is reading this post while standing over my shoulder, just informed me that he did, in fact, once blow up a frog. Furthermore, he suggested I find an image of a frog with a firecracker in its mouth. I looked but could not find one. I am so ashamed... for so many reasons.]
Posts
12 comments:
Once again, a great, topical post! Gautier forwarded me the original article from the Times to which I too wanted to know, but what's the point of the collider? and if there is even the slightest chance of creating this earth-consuming black hole, why use it? To which DH just sighed and looked at me with pity. "There is so much to learn from it," he said. I wonder if blowing up frogs is a childhood milestone here in France too. :) Safe flight! Cat
"Maybe physics really is so weird as to not have black holes evaporate,” he said. “But it would really, really have to be weird."
Well, that's good enough for me. (Not.)
The answer to the main question is a photo finish between "Because they are there" and "Why not?"
I am wrangling children at the moment so cannot develop this further. However, for the record I have never blown up a frog.
Well Enrico Fermi and the boys specualted on whether the first atomic experiments which were taking place in the City of Chicago would destroy the city, and whether the atomic bomb would light all the air on earth on fire. And so far so good.
On Frogs, when I was a kid in Breezy Point, NY there were toads all over that boys would stick fire crackers in and blow up. I found it cruel and pointless but have only seen the aftermath, not the actual blowing up. On the other hand, what don't little boys want to blow up or light on fire? Why should the frogs get off lightly?
I never once wanted to explode a frog. I did wanna stomp on one and see what would squirt out -- and out of which orefice......
Hi, I'm back. I read somewhere last week that the possibility of generating a sustained black hole is about as small as the singularity that will be created once the LHC is switched on (or not). One scientist likened the odds as equal to the LHC producing flying magical dragons or something like that.
So take your pick - instant crushing by infinite gravity or eventual slaughter by dragons. Now, if we could get a big enough firecracker, I say we take our chances with the dragons. Looks like Kenny will have to take the lead on this one, unless tommymac has a really good pair of boots.
Thanks to JJV for pointing that out. Thought about mentioning it myself but didn't want to give readers a false sense of security when the end could be near.
As for "instant crushing by infinite gravity or eventual slaughter by dragons," I'll take the latter almost every time. Per the sci-fi/fantasy novels I've read, there's a good chance some of those dragons are friendly or that I will discover I, too, have magical powers and will, with the help of a secret band of sorcerers, conquer the evil beasts. I'm good either way. Thanks Dave. I feel much better now.
I never admitted the exploding frog incident to anyone, and for the record I'm not proud of it. And now that I've been outed, I might as well add that my 11-year old episode, did involve invoking the words of Courageous Cat's nemesis "the Frog" as we put the fire cracker into the poor frog's mouth (a cigar-chomping amphibian who spoke in the gangster style of Edward G. Robinson).
Anyone who knows me, would never imagine me as a frog exploder, and it's important to note that I did not do this solo. It was with some buddies at summer camp. So getting back to the collider, I think the key thing about it, is that it's a group activity.
In case anyone is interested, you can see "the Frog" in this Courageous Cat episode (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--cUH1Yp_iQ).
JS,
Figured I would ask for the bottom line on your black hole fears from someone in the know. Sounds like you can sleep soundly.
BTW, this university physics professor is a dear; always patient with my bumbling questions (including one's about UFO's). Don't know if he ever blew up frogs, though...I'll have to ask that question next!
Here's his response re: black hole fears:
"I think it's generally agreed by most particle theorists that a black hole isn't going to happen. Even though it's our highest energy accelerator, it's not nearly high enough. (Of course one day, and after lots of money... we might get an accelerator big enough, but it wouldn't be on the earth - it would be too big!)
Even if we did manage to form one at the LHC, it would be a tiny black hole. It would take a really, really long time to eat the Earth. It would be very tiny, which means the matter has to get pulled in to a very tiny area which is hard to do. A little like when you open the bathtub drain to let the water out. It takes a while for the water to all go down the drain.
The earth is bombarded by high energy cosmic rays - at much higher energy than LHC has. The cosmic rays are just protons like the LHC is using. They hit other protons at the top of the atmosphere. So far, no black holes have been detected!
Finally, there's a story from the Manhattan project. Someone calculated (back of the envelope) that there might be enough energy release from an atom bomb to start a chain reaction of fusion of atmospheric constituents (not just what was in the bomb). Of course if that happened, that would have been the end of the earth. Slightly more detailed calculations showed there was nothing to worry about and the project went ahead.
So, I'm not worried, but looking forward to results from LHC - we really need some experimental data to make progress in high energy particle physics.
Don't let the prospect of little black holes keep you awake at night!"
Does this mean that the dragons would be proportionately tiny? 'Cause we could deal with those, or maybe even sell them as pets.
"I Worked on the LHC and All I Got was This Tiny Flying Dragon"
I think there is definitely a market for bonsai dragons.
As to the physics professor's comment, "Even if we did manage to form one at the LHC, it would be a tiny black hole. It would take a really, really long time to eat the Earth." I would like to know what he considers "a really, really long time." And if a tiny black hole was created (as opposed to a tiny dragon) would that mean Switzerland and France would be the first to go? If so, probably wise to start stocking up on French wine and cheese and Swiss watches.
Post a Comment