GLAST Observatory in Orbit

I see that the GLAST telescope has been launched today.

How much time might be required before analysis of GLAST data might indicate proof or rejection of Hawking Radiation theory?

This could be critical in determining the safety of the Large Hadron Collider, due to begin collisions later this year.

Unlike what CERN tells the public, the Large Hadron Collider Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) writes that current safety arguments are not valid proof of safety. Micro black holes might be created by the Large Hadron Collider, they might not evaporate, they might grow quickly and we have not been damaged by cosmic rays because cosmic rays pass harmlessly through Earth. CERN also tells the public that a new safety report has been completed, but so far the final report has not been released for review by world%u2019s scientists.

The legal complaint before US Federal Court in Hawaii demands 4 months to review this safety report and a permanent injunction if safety can not be assured to within reasonable industry standards. First hearing is scheduled for June 16, 2008.

Learn more at LHCFacts.org

And I assume that "reasonable industry standards" will ensure that earth is not devoured by a black hole?

JTankers: Troll! FUD.

Congrats to the GLAST team!! I can't wait for some results.

Although cosmic ray collisions are ALMOST the same as the LHC collisions, there is a key difference.

Any hypothetical nastiness (e.g. tiny black hole) produced by cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere is moving at nearly the speed of light, and hence passes too rapidly through the earth to cause trouble, while the LHC aims for symmetric collisions, where any hypothetical nastiness would be nearly stationary and could thus cause trouble (e.g., the end of the earth).

The solution is simple: make the LHC collisions asymmetric enough that whatever nastiness created (if any) is moving at a sizeable fraction of the
speed of light. This would make the charged and decaying collision fragments only marginally harder to study, and fact that the earth hasn't been swallowed by cosmic ray collision products would then ensure that it wouldn't be swallowed by the LHC collision products either.

Although this solution is PROBABLY not needed, it would be easier than arguing about whether probably is sufficient when discussing the fate of the whole earth.

hmm, I suspect (but cannot prove) that if the generation of black holes from high energy collisions such as those being carried out in the LHC was a likely event, we would have observed it in the cosmos by now.

gmurphy, theyre planning to do it on purpose. We already know it's possible. The black hole would be infintessimally small, and therefore only last about a trillionth of a second before evaporation, which occurs at an exponential rate for black holes smaller than the self- sustaining mass limit(however large that is)
Hopefully this math checks out though, becuse If it diddnt, youd see something strange on the horizon miliseconds before you were tore limb from limb by massive gravity differentials. if you were lucky enough, you might have time to damn those meddling scientists to hell for thier oversight. Nope, not much we could do against an accidental black hole, but I guess its a lot better than getting hit by a minivan.