|
November 2, 2011: CERN Experiment and Violation of Newton’s Second
Law Englishview
October 13, 2011: CERN Experiment and Violation of the Newton’s
Second Law Persianview
November 24, 2008: A New Definition of Gravitonview
July 10, 2007: Zero Point Energy and the Dirac Equationview
July 10, 2007: Zero Point Energy and the Dirac Equationview
June 28, 2007: Unification and CPH Theoryview
June 14, 2007: Summary of Physics Conceptsview
June 14, 2007: Strong Interaction and CPH Theory Rview
June 4, 2007: Quantum Electrodynamics and CPH Theoryview
November 30, 2006: Vocabulary of CPH Theoryview
November 17, 2006: Thermodynamic Laws Entropy and CPH Theoryview
November 17, 2006: Time Function and Absolute Black Holeview
October 14, 2006: CPH and Timeview
October 13, 2006: CPH Theory and Newton's Second Lawview
October 13, 2006: Time Function and Work Energy Theoremview
October 13, 2006: CPH Theory and Special Relativityview
October 13, 2006: Properties of CPHview
July 31, 2006: A New Mechanism of Higgs Bosons in Producing Charge
Particlesview
July 31, 2006: A New Mechanism of Higgs Bosons in Producing Charge
Particlesview
May 14, 2006: Speed of Light and CPH Theoryview
May 14, 2006: Speed of Light and CPH Theoryview
April 28, 2006: Color Charges Curve Spaceview
April 28, 2006: Color Charges Curve Spaceview
April 17, 2006: Effective Nuclear Chargeview
April 17, 2006: Effective Nuclear Chargeview
April 12, 2006: Maxwell's Equations in a Gravitational Fieldview
April 12, 2006: Maxwell's Equations in a Gravitational Fieldview
April 11, 2006: Realization Hawking - End of Physics by CPHview
April 7, 2006: Questions and Answers on CPH Theoryview
April 7, 2006: Opinions on CPH Theoryview
April 7, 2006: Opinions on CPH Theoryview
April 7, 2006: Questions and Answers on CPH Theoryview
March 23, 2006: Analysis of CPH Theoryview
March 23, 2006: Analysis of CPH Theoryview
March 21, 2006: Logical Foundation of CPH Theoryview
March 21, 2006: Definition Principle and Explanation of CPH Theoryview
March 21, 2006: Logical Foundation of CPH Theoryview
March 21, 2006: Definition Principle and Explanation of CPH Theoryview
March 21, 2006: Experimental Foundation of CPH Theoryview
March 21, 2006: Experimental Foundation of CPH Theoryview
March 19, 2006: Color Charge/Color Magnet and CPHview
March 19, 2006: Sub-Quantum Chromodynamicsview
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Day The World Didn't End |
|
| |
|
The Day The World Didn't End
|

Here's what didn't happen on Sept. 10th:
The world did not end. Switching on the
world's largest and most powerful particle accelerator
near Geneva, Switzerland, did not trigger the creation
of a microscopic black hole. And that black hole did not
start rapidly sucking in surrounding matter faster and
faster until it devoured the Earth, as sensationalist
news reports had suggested it might.
Of course, because you're alive and
reading this article today, you already knew that.
Currently the accelerator, an underground ring 5 miles
across called the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), has been
shut down for repairs. But once the immensely powerful
machine starts back up, is there a chance that the
doomsday scenario could still occur?
Relax. As Mark Twain might have said,
reports of Earth's death have been greatly exaggerated.
"There never really was a danger from
the accelerator, but that sure didn't stop people from
speculating that there might be!" says Robert Johnson, a
physicist at the Santa Cruz Institute for Particle
Physics and a member of the science team for NASA's
Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope, which launched in June
to study gamma rays from many phenomena, including
possible evaporating black holes.
There are several reasons why the world
did not come to an end on Sept. 10th, and why the Large
Hadron Collider isn't capable of triggering such a
calamity.
First of all, yes, it is true that the
LHC might create microscopic black holes. But, for the
record, it could not have created one on its first day.
That's because the physicists at CERN didn't steer beams
of protons into each other to create high-energy
collisions. Sept. 10th was just a warmup run. To date,
the collider still has not produced any collisions, and
it is the extreme energy of those collisions up to 14
tera-electron volts that could potentially create a
microscopic black hole.
Actually, once the LHC is running again
and begins producing collisions, physicists will be
ecstatic if it creates a tiny black hole. It would be
the first experimental evidence to support an elegant
but unproven and controversial "theory of everything"
called string theory.
In string theory, electrons, photons,
quarks, and all the other fundamental particles are
different vibrations of infinitesimal strings in 10
dimensions: 9 space dimensions and one time dimension.
(The other 6 space dimensions are hidden by one
explanation or another, for example by being "curled up"
on an extremely small scale.) Some physicists tout
string theory's mathematical elegance and its ability to
integrate gravity with the other forces of nature. The
widely accepted Standard Model of particle physics does
not include gravity, which is one reason why it does not
predict that the LHC would create a gravitationally
collapsed point a black hole while string theory
does.
Many physicists have started to doubt
whether string theory is true. But assuming for a moment
that it is, what would happen when a black hole is born
inside the LHC? The surprising answer is "not much."
Even if the black hole survives for more than a fraction
of a second (which it probably wouldn't), most likely it
would be flung out into space. "It would only have the
mass of a hundred or so protons, and it would be moving
at near the speed of light, so it would easily have
escape velocity," Johnson explains. Because the tiny
black hole would be less than a thousandth the size of a
proton and would have an exceedingly weak gravitational
pull, it could easily zip through solid rock without
ever touching or sucking in any matter. From the
perspective of something this tiny, the atoms that make
up "solid" rock appear to be almost entirely empty
space: the vast space between the atoms' nuclei and
their orbiting electrons. So a micro black hole could
shoot down through the center of the Earth and out the
other side without causing any damage just as easily as
it could shoot up through 300 feet of the Swiss
countryside. Either way, it would end up out in the
near-vacuum of space, where the odds of it touching and
sucking in any matter so that it could grow into a
menace would be smaller still.
So
the first thing a micro-black hole would do is leave the
planet safely behind. But there are other, even stronger
reasons why scientists believe the LHC poses no threat
to Earth. For one, a black hole created in the LHC would
almost certainly evaporate before it got very far, most
scientists believe. Stephen Hawking, the physicist who
wrote A Brief History of Time, predicted that black
holes radiate energy, a phenomenon known as Hawking
radiation. Because of this steady loss of energy, black
holes eventually evaporate. The smaller the black hole,
the more intense the Hawking radiation, and the quicker
the black hole will vanish. So a black hole a thousand
times smaller than a proton should disappear almost
instantly in a quick burst of radiation.

"Hawking's
prediction is not based on speculative string theory but
rather on well understood principles of quantum
mechanics and particle physics," Johnson notes.

Despite its strong theoretical foundations, Hawking
radiation has never been observed directly. Still,
scientists are confident that any black hole created by
the LHC would pose no threat. How can they be so sure?
Because of cosmic rays. Thousands of times per day,
high-energy cosmic rays strike the Earth's atmosphere,
colliding with molecules in the air with at least 20
times more energy than the most powerful collisions that
the LHC can produce. So if this new accelerator could
make Earth-devouring black holes, cosmic rays would have
already done so billions of times during Earth's long
history.
And yet, here we are. Let the collisions begin!
Science @ NASA
Source: http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1586017/the_day_the_world_didnt_end
LHC Images - click on thumbnail for larger
image
[Full CERN collection here]

Tunnel Schematic

Tunnel for real - sector 81

Tunnel for real - sector 81

Overview schematic
shows the four main experiments and the two ring structure
of the LHC

Overview of CERN's acclerator layout

The key element - the 1232 dipoles bend the
beam around te 27 km circumference

Joining things up
Once in place the magnet have to be connect - a very
complicated task.

Views of tunnel - mostly empty!
3d images from Peter McCready (Atlas
and the ring)

Source: http://lhc-machine-outreach.web.cern.ch/lhc-machine-outreach/lhc_in_pictures.htm
Micro Black Holes
Black holes are fascinating! They merge
together completely different fields of physics: From General
Relativity overthermodynamics and quantum
field theory, they
do now also reach into the regime of particle and collider
physics.

As explained in the intro about extra
dimensions, in the presence of additional large
compactified dimensions, it would be possible to produce
tiny black holes at future colliders. In this case, we would
be able to experimentally test Planck scale physics and the
onset of quantum gravity with the Large
Hadron Collider (LHC), which is scheduled to
start next summer. The formation of black holes is a fairly
robust prediction and one of the most general expectations
that one can have, even though the details are still subject
to research. For me, it is quite amazing to see how this
field has evolved during the last decade. Starting from a
smiled upon speculation, it has by now become a widely
accepted scenario for physics beyond the standard model,
which is included in simulations of LHC events.
1. Micro Black Holes in Large Extra
Dimensions
In the standard 3+1 dimensional space-time,
the production of black holes requires a concentration of
energy-density which can not be reached in the laboratory.
But in a higher dimensional space-time, gravity becomes
stronger at small distances and therefore the
event horizon is
located at a larger radius. This radius can be so large that
we could bring particles closer together than their horizon.
A black hole could be created.
The presence of extra dimensions results in
a modification of the predictions of the standard model,
which become important from a certain energy scale 'the new
fundamental scale', and which might be accessible at the
LHC. Due to the Heisenberg
uncertainty, it
requires a large energy to get particles into a small
volume. Only energies close by the new fundamental scale
would be sufficient to produce a black hole out of this same
energy. For collider physics one is therefore interested in
the case where the black hole has a mass close to the new
fundamental scale. This corresponds to a horizon radius
close to the inverse of the new fundamental scale, which is
much much smaller than the radius of the extra dimensions.
To a good approximation, this tiny black hole just does not
notice that the extra dimensions are compactified, and one
can neglect the boundary condition. (The
higher dimensional Schwarzschild-metric
for this case has been derived by Myers
and Perry in '86)
On the other hand, for astrophysical objects
we expect to find back the usual 3-dimensional description.
In this case, the horizon radius is much larger than the
radius of the extra dimensions and the influence of the
extra dimensions is negligible. Those two case are depicted
in the figure below. We will be interested in the case
depicted on the right side. R is
the radius of the extra dimensions (all of them have the
same radius) and RH is
the horizon radius of the black hole

2. Production of Black Holes
Let us consider two elementary particles,
approaching each other with a very high kinetic energy in
the center-of-mass system close to the new fundamental
scale. At those high energies, the particles can come very
close to each other since their high energy allows a tightly
packed wave package despite the uncertainty relation. If the
impact parameter is small enough, which will happen to a
certain fraction of the particles, we have the two particles
plus their large kinetic energy in a very small region of
space time. If the region is smaller than the Schwarzschild
radius connected with the energy of the partons, the system
will collapse and form a black hole.
The production of a black
hole in a high energy collision is probably the most
inelastic process one might think of. Since the black hole
is not an ordinary particle of the standard model, and its
correct quantum theoretical treatment is unknown, it is
commonly treated as a metastable state, which is produced
and decays according to the semi-classical formalism of
black hole physics. To compute the production details, the
cross-section of the black holes can be approximated by the
classical geometric cross-section Pi R2. A common
approach to improve the naive picture of colliding point
particles is to treat the creation of the horizon as a
collision of two shock fronts in an Aichelburg-Sexl geometry
describing the fast moving particles.

Looking at the figure on the left, we also
see that, due to conservation laws, the angular momentum of
the formed object only vanishes in completely central
collisions with zero impact parameter. In the general case,
we will have an angular momentum, and the black hole might
also carry an electric charge.
Another assumption which goes into the
production details is the existence of a threshold for the
black hole formation. From general relativistic arguments,
two point like particles in a head on collision with zero
impact parameter (the b in
the figure above) will always form
a black hole, no matter how large or small their energy. At
small energies however, we expect this to be impossible due
to the smearing of the wave functions by the uncertainty
relation. This then results in a necessary minimal energy to
allow for the required close approach. This threshold is of
order of the new fundamental scale, though the exact value
is unknown since quantum gravity effects should play an
important role for the wave functions of the colliding
particles. Using the geometrical cross section formula, it
is now possible to compute the differential and total cross
sections for black hole production. This also allows us to
estimate the total number of black holes, that would be
created at the LHC per year. Inserting the expected
technical details for the collider, one finds a number of
approximately 109 created
black holes per year! This means, about one black hole per
second.
3. Evaporation of Black Holes
It was shown by
Hawking in '75 that
a black hole emits particles with a temperature that is
inverse to its mass. This means, the smaller the black hole,
the hotter it will be. Since we are talking about really
tiny black holes, they are very hot. The typical temperature
of the micro black holes is about 200 GeV or 1016 Kelvin!
The evaporation rate (massloss per time) of the higher
dimensional black hole can be computed using the
thermodynamics of black holes. Once produced, the black
holes will undergo an evaporation process whose thermal
properties carry information about the number and the radius
of the extra dimension. An analysis of the evaporation will
therefore offer the possibility to extract knowledge about
the topology of our space time and the underlying theory.
The evaporation process can be categorized in three
characteristic stages:
1. Balding
phase: In
this phase the black hole radiates away the multipole
moments it has inherited from the initial configuration, and
settles down in a hairless state. During this stage, a
certain fraction of the initial mass will be lost in
gravitational radiation.

2. Evaporation
phase: The
evaporation phase starts with a spin down phase in which the
Hawking radiation carries away the angular momentum, after
which it proceeds with emission of thermally distributed
quanta until the black hole reaches Planck mass. The
radiation spectrum contains all Standard Model particles,
which are emitted on our brane, as well as gravitons, which
are also emitted into the extra dimensions. It is expected
that most of the initial energy is emitted in during this
phase in Standard Model particles.

3. Planck
phase: Once
the black hole has reached a mass close to the Planck mass,
it falls into the regime of quantum gravity and predictions
become increasingly difficult. It is generally assumed that
the black hole will either completely decay in some last few
Standard Model particles or a stable remnant will be left,
which carries away the remaining energy.

To perform a realistic simulation of the
evaporation process, one has to take into account the
various particles of the standard model with the
corresponding degrees of freedom and spin statistics. In the
extra dimensional scenario, standard model particles are
bound too our submanifold whereas the gravitons are allowed
to enter all dimensions. For a precise calculation one also
has to take into account that the presence of the
gravitational field will modify the radiation properties for
higher angular momenta through backscattering at the
potential well. These energy dependent greybody factors can
be calculated by analyzing the wave equation in the higher
dimensional spacetime and the arising absorption
coefficients. A very thorough description of these
evaporation characteristics has been given by Kanti
in 2004 which
confirms the expectation that the bulk/brane evaporation
rate is of comparable magnitude but the brane modes
dominate.
One of the primary observables in high
energetic particle collisions is the transverse momentum of
the outgoing particles, pT(pee-tee),
the component of the momentum transverse to the direction of
the beam. Two colliding partons with high energy can produce
a pair of outgoing particles, moving in opposite directions
with high pT but
carrying a color charge, as depicted in the figure to the
right.

Due to the quark confinement,
the color has to be neutralized. This results in a shower of
several bound states, the hadrons, which includes mesons (consisting
of a quark and an antiquark, like the pions) as well as baryons (consisting
of three quarks, like the neutron or the proton). The number
of these produced hadrons and their energy depends on the
energy of the initial partons. This process will cause a
detector signal with a large number of hadrons inside a
small opening angle. Such an event is called a jet.
Typically these jets come in pairs of
opposite direction. A smaller number of them can also be
observed with three or more outgoing showers. This
observable will be strongly influenced by the production of
black holes. To understand the signatures that are caused by
the black holes we have to examine their evaporation
properties. As we have seen before, the smaller the black
hole, the larger is its temperature and so, the radiation of
the discussed tiny black holes is the dominant signature
caused by their presence. The high temperature results in a
very short lifetime such that the black hole will decay
close by the collision region and can be interpreted as a
metastable intermediate state.
Due to the high energy captured in the black
hole, the decay of such an object is a very spectacular
event with a distinct signature. The number of decay
products, the multiplicity, is high compared to standard
model processes and the thermal properties of the black hole
will yield a high sphericity of the event. Furthermore,
crossing the threshold for black hole production causes a
sharp cut-off for high energetic jets as those jets now end
up as black holes instead, and are re-distributed into
thermal particles of lower energies. Thus, black holes will
give a clear signal. A schematic picture of this process is
shown on the left.

It is apparent that the consequences of black
hole production are quite disastrous for the future of
collider physics! Once the collision energy crosses the
threshold for black hole production, no further information
about the structure of matter at small scales can be
extracted. As it was put by Giddings and Thomas, this would
be ''the
end of short distance physics''
By now, several experimental groups include
black holes into their search for physics beyond the
standard model. Ideally, the energy distribution of the
decay products allows a determination of the temperature (by
fitting the energy spectrum to the predicted shape) as well
as of the total mass of the object (by summing up all
energies). This then allows to reconstruct the fundamental
scale, and the number of extra dimensions. The quality of
the determination depends on the uncertainties in the
theoretical prediction as well as on the experimental limits
e.g. background from standard model processes. Besides the
formfactors of black hole production and the greybody
factors of the evaporation, the largest theoretical
uncertainties turnout to be the final decay and the time
variation of the temperature. In case the black hole decays
very fast, it can be questioned whether it has time to
readjust its temperature at all or whether it essentially
decays completely with its initial temperature. Also, the
determination of the properties depends on the number of
emitted particles. The less particles, the more difficult
the analysis
However, in my opinion the most crucial
uncertainty are the latest stages of the evaporation. For
hadron colliders like the LHC, the last stages with black
hole masses close by the production threshold will dominate
the signature, since most of the black holes are actually
produced out of parton collisions with a total
center-of-mass energy close by even this threshold. In
hadronic collisions there are thus very little black holes
which actually capture the total available energy of 14 TeV,
since the proton's energy gets distributed on its
constituents. Such a problem would not be present for a
lepton collider.
Source:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
@2003-2012 The CPH theory, All right reserved
|