Aug 22, 2012

Humanity’s Invention in the Cosmos is Kindness: I request Permission to Save your Lives

Posted by in categories: existential risks, particle physics

I know I am not authorized for doing that since you do not know me. But one third of all fundamental scientists in the world (those that deal with chaos and nonlinearity) are on my side. Two thirds (those that deal with quanta and gravitation) do not believe that a chaos theorist has the right to teach them anything. Much as in economics where nonlinearity was a taboo for many decades, in fundamental physics it still is.

So I beg the planet’s general population for mercy: please, forgive the linear community in physics for their not allowing the proof of danger that lies on the table for 4 years to be discussed: such a thing does not occur for the first time in history.

Also, everyone understands that CERN “cannot” update its safety report if doing this would involve discussing a danger that would not permit their experiment to be continued before a counterproof has been found.

All I ever requested is such a counterproof ( http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/PetitiontoCERN.pdf ); http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2012/07/2012759585764599.html ). “Might is might.” Politicians have to rely on might, that is, majority opinion, and Western opinion at that. Scientists’ opinions unfortunately change all the time since new discoveries arise in a point-like fashion and spread slowly.

Here for the first time an immediate response is needed. Everyone understands that this is not possible. While this is a logical truism, I for one do not accept going under only because scientific truth takes so long to percolate up in the hierarchy.

Who loses anything if my 2008 request to check before starting and continuing (at the present time) is being heeded?

Do all citizens on the planet endorse the fact that someone saying he can save their lives is denied coverage by the media, and that chaos theory has a weaker voice than the quantum and relativistic communities?

Please, dear Tom Kerwick: do not censor this text. Please, dear “G&M”: do kindly answer why you refuse to update your 2008 “safety report.” Please, dear CNN: say a word why this “safetyleaks” scandal is a taboo for you to report on. And every citizen: forgive me for acting in your name without my being explicitly authorized to do so. I shall stop muttering as soon as the counterproof has been found or else CERN stops. Thank you.


Comments — comments are now closed.

  1. “I shall stop muttering-”

    I doubt it

  2. Otto E. Rossler says:

    Dear Gary:
    It is because I am on your side with your wonderful optimism (which I share) that I insist on someone being able to make the danger disappear with a rational argument.
    Maybe you know that someone yourself or can help me find him or her?
    Take care,

  3. eq says:

    “But one third of all fundamental scientists in the world (those that deal with chaos and nonlinearity) are on my side.”

    I am sure you can give us at least ten names of influential people dealing with dynamic systems who can be asked whether they support your claims in reality or whether your statement ist again simply born out of the megalomania inside your head.

  4. PassingByAgain says:

    GMC & “eq”, please, please, DON’T FEED THE TROLL!!! Is the urge to delve into this trash so hard to resist?

  5. Otto E. Rossler says:

    “Please, dear ‘G&M’: do kindly answer why you refuse to update your 2008 ‘safety report’.”:

    Your supporters are losing their nerves.

  6. eq says:

    No problem, passingby, Otto just demonstrated with his usual non-answer that there is in fact no support for his claim from real scientists in the field of dynamic systems etc. Just the opposite of his statement above.

    I leave again.

  7. Otto E. Rossler says:


    Three Points

    • Tom Kerwick says correctly that we do not know by what factor the magnetic field of white dwarfs is shielding them from charged cosmic rays. It may well be that this factor is large enough to explain the empirical survival of those stars from the onslaught of natural ultrafast CERN-analogous cosmic-ray generated black holes. In this case the LHC experiment is as dangerous as we always feared.

    • However, there is a loophole. If my prediction that black-hole mergers generate both charged and uncharged cosmic-ray particles (published in last years’ cryodynamics paper in “Complex Systems”) is correct, it follows that the magnetic field of white dwarfs ceases to be a safeguard against cosmic rays since the uncharged fraction goes through. In this case we are likely to be safe in view of the survival of white dwarfs.

    • Therefore a safety conference aimed at exculpating CERN makes excellent sense. So that all pros and cons are laid on the table before CERN is allowed to continue. The conference is of vital importance suddenly, not only for the continuation of the planet but also and in the first place for the continuation of CERN.