Large Hadron Collider Risks

Getting people to talk about the risks of Large Hadron Collider coming online is a huge problem for several reasons and it is similar to the issue of the Iraq war in two senses:

1. There is an element of specialized or exclusive knowledge involved, where only access to that special knowledge gives credibility in decisions relative to public policy. Then it was, "We know secrets, and if you, the general public knew them as well, you'd understand why we know there are WMDs."

Now, when discussing the Large Hadron Collider, it's a matter of, "We know the science, and if you knew it as well, you'd need no further justification. Trust us because we know better. We have hypothesis."

But in both cases, we, the people, get to live with the repercussions. In the case of the Iraq war, the cost is a million or so dead. In the case of LHC, it could be all traces of humanity -- everything we built, everything we knew, everyone's labor -- poof after a fairly messy demise.

2. Just like in the lead up to the Iraq war, it's hard to find a news/media outlet to present both sides of the story, or even have an intelligent debate on the risks. Then the media was a cheerleader, as it is now.

We discuss media power, and media choices here constantly -- why were there no dissenting voices allowed on the tube prior to the war? Why did Donahue depart? Etc. It's a similar effect here folks.

I'm writing the following to my congressfolk, and hope that some of you might join me. I'm not a luddite, but I have worked with physicists before (as a remote tool), and am very weary because they tend to be a bit myopic in their outlook to their own detriment and those working around them.

Dear _____ :

I am writing to you today in regards to the effort of raising awareness on the operational safety concerns of the Large Hadron Collider located along the French-Swiss Border. Questions regarding its operational safety have been raised regarding the possibility that during its operation it may create a Miniature Black Hole (MBH). Although CERN has addressed such issues prior, they have relied on a theory of Hawking Radiation to model the dissipation of a MBH.

Hawking Radiation is however an unproven theory, also since the project was first commissioned new discoveries and theories have been made that question the verity of Hawking Radiation and the requirements for the creation of a MBH.

Unfortunately, without Hawking Radiation being verified we believe that the precautionary principle should take precedent until these concerns can be addressed, the danger of a Black Hole being created and it's accretion of mass pose a danger to everyone. In theory if a Black Hole did not dissipate it would continue to grow at an exponential rate. There is no accurate model that would actually predict the rate of accretion of a Black Hole, so in this scenario there are far too many unknowns to be certain.

I thank you for your time, and ask that you please look into this matter; I would appreciate any future correspondence on this issue as well.

We have about 45 days until the Large Hadron Collider comes on line at CERN in Switzerland. After that point it may be too late.


Sincerely,

Please take a moment to cut and paste, and send to your congressperson. I'm not asking that we shut down science; only to provide due consideration for the other 6.5 billion inhabitants.

we're not in the running for the Nobel Prize; just trying to make the house payments, and get the kids through college.