[Mstry4u]

Oh I doubt it would do any flipping, but the atmospheric effects I’d turn the DEMETER Micro Satellite on any day. I’m sure after that last storm licked the power generator going to the liquid helium coolant they are turning all there atmospheric toys to listen into that region of the ionosphere coupling.

[Mstry4u]

Say it generated a massive charge imbalance in the ionosphere interfering with broadcast reception, that LHC was powerful enough to generate a massive whistler like plasma bubble in the ionosphere-magnetosphere coupling, it wouldn’t be the planetary fields that would concern me, but the fields generated by LHC the very fact that the planetary field is weak by comparison may make it more subject (maybe) to the possibility of perturbation. If power-lines can create PLHR Powerline Harmonic Radiation signatures in the magnetosphere it does make me wonder if LHC would leave a trace in atmospheric plasma. Even earthquakes have pre-signatures detectable in the ionospheric plasma.

“Electromagnets at the LHC need to be this cold to be superconducting, or at peak efficiency, in order to deliver extremely high magnetic fields in the 27 km ring of 1200 giant magnets and thousands of smaller ones, at 8.33 Teslas or about 200,000 times the earth’s magnetic field strength.”

It would be interesting if the shift of magnetic north increased it’s speed due to some effect. Or imagine magnetic north centering on LHC, now that would be a trip and one hell of a ride. I had a dream years ago that I was sent back in time from the future to just before a major catastrophe to discover it’s source and there was a global communications blackout due to an electromagnetic burst being sent off the planet. However dreams are dreams right? Not reality.

I hope it works after all, I’m planning a (now postponed) party to celebrate our continued existance on our fine planet in the wake of any evaporating black holes. It will probably work fine, besides we’ve gotten plenty of research done with Tevatron without any major catastrophies.

[Mstry4u]

Here is a good discussion about Higgs and Graviton: http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=78993

I have heard that spinning a superconducting disk may reduce gravity above it forming almost a gravity shield. Perhaps some part of the inertia of mass wrapped up spacetime curvature is captured or somehow dissipated in this process, but I think gravity shielding is still under review (?). Hope that makes sense..

Climate dynamics and atmospheric electricity is a little more up my alley, high energy particle physics and BEC has been a fascination of late, so I’m still getting a grasp on concepts here.

It would be pretty wild if LCH had a fundamental flaw in its interaction with atmospheric electricity that rendered the entire experiment defunked. It would be one of the biggest and most expensive lessons (oops) in physics.

[Mstry4u]

In a BEC state material, the bosons resonate at the same quantum frequency … So say you have a barrier plane of BEC barium leaded glass … would the dimensional restriction of magnetic waves also apply to gravitational waves? I’m not sure what you mean by gravity/inertia boson? It seems to me that we might be looking at a graviton/boson interaction? And could you elaborate on the fraught topic of gravity waves. I understand that we have had trouble detecting gravity waves and have been able to do so through interferometry for example with LIGO is this what you mean?

As for CERN I have other questions … could LHC be likened to a loop antenna that when charged might create a perpendicular vector of energy transfer between the atmospheric electricity in the ionosphere and the telluric currents or earth’s core/dynamo?
Similar to electromagnetic whistler waves generated by charging a loop antenna.
I have been pondering this for days then came across an article this morning discussing it a bit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7626256.stm
It sounds as though Tevatron also experiences issues with atmospheric electricity. I don’t know if a looping particle beam of protons could count as a loop antenna, but I don’t see why not.

Curiosities abound I know … it will be interesting to see what LHC brings to the table as far as Higgs goes. Some answers take time until then we guess and play with ideas.

[Mstry4u]

In the BEC state, magnetic waves propagate simultaneously in all of three directions (up-down, forward-backward and left-right). At the quantum critical point, however, the waves stop propagating in the up-down dimension, causing the magnetic ripples to exist in only two dimensions, much the same way as ripples are confined to the surface of a pond.

This “geometrical frustration” makes it difficult for the magnetic waves to propagate in the third up-down dimension, which leads to its two-dimensionality.

After discussing the neutrino topic on this site it is clear to me that neutrinos are less likely an issue, and after looking over a few things I’m wondering if gravity waves might be hindered by this BEC material due to the restriction of magnetic waves? However it is my understanding that matter is even more transparent to gravity waves (? ie. no mass) so how would gravity waves play across this magnetic wave/dimension restriction? none or some? Does a strong magnetic wave field affect a weak gravitational force or field wave.

I’m no PhD in Physics and come to this forum hoping for insight, I’m just a hypercurious easy going eccentric individual with no bones to pick with anybody, so nice clean discussion is more what I’m interested in here. I don’t mind doing my homework and taking a complex topic to the extent of my understanding, even if this challenges previous scientific assumptions, because this is how we innovate. And I really don’t mind being wrong either, cause that’s how we learn.

So how about it, is there any possibility that gravity waves might be hindered by a material in a BEC state? ideas?

[Mstry4u]

I guess I’m not gone that easily … I understand that we may not know each other and I’m a pretty exccentric fella whose travelled around the globe and studied a lot of oddball things in archeology / physics / art … I’m way too easy going and simpliy fascinated and curious to accept your insult … so there … you can have it back.

Now that’s done … the question still stands … can a neutrino pass through the restricted dimension of a layer of barium leaded glass in a liquid (helium) cooled BEC state, regardless of timeline.

ps: my brains are fine brian … thanx

[Mstry4u]

Now that’s just goofy. The Chinese ancients did not have liquid helium, and the material has nothing special in that way at room temp. And they had no f’ing clue about how to transmute elements. Sorry, I thought you had a brain; my mistake.

Wow, you went to the wolves quickly. First of all I said nothing about Chinese ancients having liquid helium nor do I presume to know that they had any knowledge of how to transmute metals. I think my time in this forum is over if all you have to offer is spelling corrections and insults. Nor BTW did I ever say anything about wanting to build a neutrino detector, for those who seem to think that was my MO. It really is fascinating how you all fill in the gaps that I leave bare with your own assumptions. I think I’m done in this forum as you seem to have little else to offer. Thanks so much for the insults… Sr. Member Brian … enjoy your forum

[Mstry4u]

As you like, it still facinates me that although we can’t seem to comprehend using this high tech nano material in construction that they managed to do it over 5,000 years ago. It is also interesting to note that an emporer of the time burned all the books on alchemy because they had discovered how to turn lead into gold and were concerned about it’s disruption to the financial stability. Now we all know that lead into gold is a fairy tale, but in modern physics it is possible to turn mercury into gold with a neutron source through noble metal transmutation, regardless of how picky about spelling you are I still find this amazing don’t you?

[Mstry4u]

Actually it was discovered that Han Purple an ancient barium pigment used in China could be used to coat surfaces and attained a BEC state. http://www.spacemart.com/reports/Raiders_Of_The_Lost_Dimension.html Although the low temperature limits it’s use, the intense magnetic fields produced inside a focus fusion type reactor may be enough (?) maybe not…

[Mstry4u]

So do you think that a barrier consisting of BEC Bose Einstein Condensate which has had dimensional reduction would still allow a neutrino to pass in the restricted dimention of energy transfer? Imagine a Faraday Cage of such material? Maybe sandwiched between Boron bucky paper? Perhaps I’m still dreaming…?

[Mstry4u]

Thanks for setting that straight, I much preffer the high res version. I wasn’t trying to build a home detector, but an experimental device. At KamLAND through ~180km of rock they detect about 2 neutrinos a day from the 53 nuclear reactors in Japan. Neutrinos need to be over 1.8MeV to be detected by KamLAND. So I kind of found the answer I was looking for, it’s just that I like details and none of the info I was getting here was high res. although the DPF regulation for controlled fuel and neutrons was good info.

It came to my attention that this experimental device was somehow detectable and I was trying to figure out how it was done, I discovered that it’s NOT neutrinos, but another way.

Thanks for the clarification it helps to simply be real with what you know. I’ve had too many run in’s with blanket orthodox assumptions without good reasoning to buy anything at face value these days, so I tend to delve seeking in depth answers and examples.

[Mstry4u]

Wonderful answer, that helps a lot. So what I’m getting here is that if I plan to generate neutrons or used controlled fuel I should get a permit. Otherwise aside from electrocuting myself, have fun.

My only concern with neutrinos was detection, everything else can be shielded I know. As the future of technology progresses such as fusion research, neutrino detection from fusion sources is going to play an important role in nuclear security and accountability don’t you think? I cannot think of any reason why they would detect a neutrino signature coming from a place other than a medical facility, private research facility or university lab. If KamLAND started picking up a neutrino signature from my closet (rare), would it be a big deal? No detectable radiation, neutrons, gamma/X rays but a definite neutrino signature in my closet.

Anyhow I have a date at my local particle accelerator next week to discuss neutrinos, so I’ll let you know how it goes.

[Mstry4u]

I understand that these detectors find few neutrinos, but compared to how many bombard the earth at any given moment “few” is relative:

“Current estimates predict the detection of about one thousand such events per day in the fully constructed IceCube detector….Most of the remaining (up-going) neutrinos will come from cosmic rays hitting the far side of the Earth, but some unknown fraction may come from astronomical sources. To distinguish these two sources statistically, the direction and energy of the incoming neutrino is estimated from its collision by-products. Unexpected excesses in energy or from a given spatial direction indicate an extraterrestrial source.”

“Although IceCube is expected to detect very few neutrinos, it should have very high resolution with the ones that it does find. Over several years of operation, it could produce a flux map of the northern hemisphere similar to existing maps like that of the cosmic microwave background. Likewise, KM3NeT could complete the map for the southern hemisphere.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IceCube_Neutrino_Detector

Maybe it’s not as big of a concern as I think it is, but even one or two neutrinos from a fusion device in a residential area being classified as an extraterrestrial source is more press than I’d like.

[Mstry4u]

There are neutrino detectors in the northern and southern hemisphere including water Cerenkov detectors and liquid scintillator tanks, one called ANTERES (May 2008) and the other Ice Cube (largest in the world 2005-06) that detect neutrinos through an interaction with the ice in Antarctica, it’s half complete and will be finished by 2011. Also Los Alamos uses VLAND detectors. I think the sensitivity is ~.5 eV flux of neutrino flux background. They mention being able to detect the difference in neutrino production of a nuclear reactor such that if a quantity of plutonium is removed the reactor will give a weaker signature. Fusion devices based on cavitation have temperatures of the sun. If you are harnessing the energy of the sun or stars in a bottle, they are also going to be a significant source of neutrinos, and because neutrinos go right through the planet there is little to keep a detector on even the other side of the planet from detecting these little bits. I would love it if somebody could tell me that the signature from a sonofusion type device was not detectable, but I’m not sure and would want to make sure that any experimentation was well thought out. I think that you must have a license to play with nuclear device’s, but bubble fusion is low energy, non radioactive, clean, still experimental, and contested in the mainstream scientific community, although mathematically possible and they are starting to come around.

http://www.sc.doe.gov/production/he/np/homeland/CombatTerrorismFinal110602.pdf

These are security measures that were discussed with the Nuclear Research Community to address counter nuclear terrorism issues. I’m just not sure and would love any insight that this community might have.

Does a Focus Fusion device create a significant source of neutrinos (I’m pretty sure does), perhaps cavitation in bubble fusion produces more because of it’s design?

Either way I would love to know what regulations are around these devices and if I’m allowed to be a mad scientist in my basement without getting in trouble. Do others experiment with these freely outside of private/university lab without concern?

Thoughts Ideas? Thanks

[Author]

Posts