The Metaphysical Implications of Atom Smashers

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527485.700-cern-on-trial-could-a-lawsuit-shut-the-lhc-down.html

The Metaphysical Implications of Atom Smashers L. Edgar Otto


Are our supercolliders at best useless and at worst dangerous?

This enterprise certainly fits the paradigm of the scientific method that the results of experiments can be falsified in the sense that a physical or theoretical entity such as a black hole created by our atom smashers, especially since at the frontier of research the point is to find out something we are not sure we know, some think could consume the Earth if somehow the right parameters are accessible or we stumble upon some trick in the universe's deeper design.

If this happened, quite besides the religious or moral questions raised in such pursuits, where is the intelligence in the design if there are none of us left to record and observe it?

If we had the correct theory, at least on some level of technology, why would we need the experiment in the first place? What is the point really of these economic and ideological struggles for the species- at least the cost benefits computed sacrificing individuals including the unique environs of Earth itself or one among many- the universe as experiment- if not for the sake of struggle itself?

Why try to find the laws of nature applying our ideas of such laws- sure we can legislate that pi equals three and have done so in the past but that does not make it so. Perhaps such things can be argued influenced by God or our beliefs at least there seems to be some sort of reason some of us are prone to interpret things this way including ideas of consciousness and quantum theory and so on. Beyond this is it really the best of our human spirit not to face the challenge of great risks and rewards?

For me the enterprise is almost a moral duty to build them- yet we should be cautious and honest in our scientific pursuits. We should not expect so many untruths and contradictory or paradoxical incoherent reasoning and arrogance from our scientists, especially in their ideological struggles as experts between each other. nor just have busy work projects justified by jobs and our priesthood superstition of faith in our doctors just because faith in them promotes self-healing as if by magical means. Surely there is some evidence of such mental influences that should also be a scientific concern. If the heart of our galaxy has black holes or a family of them in the many to one question then that could be an intuition that something there influences our minds and DNA and fiction writing say there is a Palleidian level of what seems sentient beings similar to thoughts that machines are intellects. We and they if they exists are those entities.

In the main nature seems to restrain the ill effects of our failed experiments as if nature herself were a design of a less foolhardy intentions of exploration- quite beside the finding of say a cosmic censure or closed limit to boundaries or some sort of teleological model adjusted in our concepts of time as the cause of some things and that prematurely ruled out. Even if our various theories have no good reason or an underlying theory that in the intelligible world works and averages its cosmologies (and cosmogonies) of finite and infinite history.

We can be rather sure or as doubtful ultimately of things as we are of our wonder of existence itself- we have the potential for wisdom as much as our self deceptions. But a good theory as science has sound limitations on its own level. We are not just naturally a hologram model of mind or universe nor artificially a fractal one- we have a unified resource of the difference in these models which in at least the phenomenal world can be imagined as geometry.

Some have said we can open the fabric of hidden dimensions to precipitate disastrous black hole creation that would indeed verify the super symmetry and those aspects of string theory and even the standard model of particles that some in the project regard as fanciful and unlikely to show evidence or are strongly expected in their obsolete model - yet they hold this enquiry as a possible discovery path as one of their justified research goals.

The anthropic argument for example nature makes so many black holes with power vastly stronger than our smaller machines that the world has not vanished already, must remain a physical and metaphysical argument confused in theory and practice thus a blend that is bad science and bad metaphysics. We need a deeper analysis of the design and mathematics by which our competing lesser cosmologies do not raise the specter of false fears and narcotics of false hopes. In this golden age of cosmology not all will be seen as a new scientific foundation for the subject in retrospect.

If by some questionable idea of quantum flux or even some absolute zero ground of discrete space and entanglement without an idea of dark energy effects or vacuum effects as real and not effectively so but virtual, we conclude that anything can pop out of a black hole although improbable, a locomotive, an Encyclopedia Britannica edition, could not a man briefly appear DNA and all? Awareness and all? But what if that man were the Messiah assuming He exists? Our science and religious ideas evidently need to be fine tuned so to transcend if we are to survive and evolve to higher states of human wisdom including the unnecessary hypothesis of some sciences promoted as if a faith in our own times.

If such a metaphysical entity as a man from a black hole came up with a life support space ship- would he be the same person or perhaps have say a failing liver. This would be a lesson that the totality can be defeated by a failing organ in its design as much as say a systemic cancer. This shows the paradoxes involved in unified theories- after all the debate today as a social one seems somewhere caught between the series Flashforward and Lost in matters of free will and determinism as a theme- so too the steady state and big bang cosmologies and the new inflation and cyclic universe modern analog models. At what point in the discrete bottom of the hologram do we say for sure that we can eliminate the wild fluctuations which I understand to be the extension of Pascal's triangle into series with negative values and positive values. My best guess is that the quasic model answers some of the fundamental questions that these competing theories have tried to explain away one way or the other- that from my view and we cannot take thermodynamic arguments totally out of the context of black holes either nor argue from no clear theory of the symmetries involved- that our atom smasher will lead to disaster. If we could make some sort of inflationary black hole it would be very useful and of vast unforeseen applications- shown it would be the result of such experiments -and really we should not use the cosmic rays as arguments for the safety of such black holes for they, just as the assumption of quasars, hence my term quasic since 63, as a creative and Hoyle like force is thought to emit them. We could build it as a sufficient distance in space to test things.