But the calculation (two independent approaches) gives us the value about 250 GeV.

Indeed, that is smaller than the collision energy of Tevatron. But is it possible to create a magnetic hole at Tevatron, colliding protons and antiprotons? Magnetic field in the central point between these flying by particles is equal to zero, B = 0. But at the LHC B = 2B1.

That is smaller than the energy of cosmic rays. But look at my model with two 10-kg bottles with neutrons. You will see that the bottle, corresponding to cosmic rays, will be safe. But the bottle, corresponding to LHC collisions, will transform the town into Hiroshima.

The 250 GeV energy per colliding proton was already achieved at RHIC. Experimentalists could see collapses – fireballs – about four years ago. It is possible that those fireballs are experimental proves of magnetic holes. Those holes evaporated immediately because the RHIC collided heavy nuclei, containing many protons and neutrons. Will such holes evaporate at LHC, or will created magnetic holes begin to capture the slowly moving protons of Earth?

One of the authors of documents about the safety of LHC, Igor Tkachev, is 100% confident that at the center of our Galaxy there is a huge black hole.
I am 95 % confident that at the center of our Galaxy there is a huge magnetic hole. I think that magnetic hole, besides the magnetic field, has axial-symmetric gravity field, stretching mostly in the plane of our Galaxy. This explains the huge velocities of peripheral stars of our Galaxy. In other words, – there is no any dark matter in our Universe. Its role is performed by magnetic holes. There is no any dark energy in our Ever Young Universe. Its role is performed by cosmic background radiation. Hubble constant is not the parameter of Universe expansion, but the angular frequency of 4-d rotation of Universe. 13.34 billion years is not the age of Universe, but the time of one full 4-d rotation of Ever Young Universe. Energy sources of stars in Ever Young Universe are different from the sources in Big Bang Universe. Our energy sources can be described by corrected formula of Hawking. This formula must contain the square root from Dirac’s big number. This formula describes the luminosity of stars, but not the black holes evaporation. In our model there are no black holes, but there can be extremely rapid gravity collapses, ending by disappearance of gravity funnel and huge gamma-burst. Gravity collapse is the final part of magnetic collapse if the mass of the magnetic hole is sufficient and if its configuration is correspondent.

Astronomers, show me, please, black holes.
No?
But, I can to show you the picturesque magnetic hole.
Here it is: http://darkenergy.narod.ru/sn1987.jpg

Magnetic holes explain us the cause of several astronomical pulses: gamma-bursts, huge radio jets, the annihilation lines of electron-positron pairs, huge velocities of remnants of cosmic catastrophes, the absence of civilizations which are older, than those, who can build powerful colliders.

People, please, stop powerful colliders immediately.
Collisions with energy, more than 100 GeV must be banned by international law, otherwise our Solar system will look like SN 1987A.

Somebody asks: Is it possible you are wrong with your theories. Is it possible?

If I was not confident, I would not fear LHC, I would sleep calmly, but, as can you see, I am in shock now.

Somebody asks: How have you determined, with such certainty, that your right?
You still have provided no proof at all that you are correct.

Two mathematical proves. Dozen of supplementary arguments.

Somebody asks: Is it possible that you are overly fearful and that scaring the public is a irresponsible, immoral and unethical thing to do if you have no proof at all of your theories?

I said the truth. Are bigbangers responsible and honest in their gaining the ruling position in science? Look at the open letter of anti bigbangers, signed by thousand of famous scientists, who are rejected the idea of Big Bang: http://www.cosmologystatement.org/
There is no pluralism in science now. Science was transformed into religious dogma by bigbangers. Because of this I have no job in science. Because of this the Earth can undergo the big bang, but this bang will not prove the Big Bang theory.

People, please, stop powerful colliders immediately.
Collisions with energy, more than 100 GeV must be banned by international law.

The response of Lawrence Krauss to my article: “Will Physicists Destroy the World? The Large Hadron Collider and the Threats of Catastrophe,” contains several questionable points not appropriate to a serious rebuttal

In the first place, Krauss attacks the author rather than correctly dealing with the issues. The article is a serious attempt to evaluate an experiment that many think could threaten the earth. It should not be dismissed as “silly,” or the author as brainless.

Regarding the content, Krauss equates the argument that the LHC experiments should be postponed until there is public discussion and awareness of the issues, to the abandonment of science. That is clearly wrong. There is nothing in the article that suggests all experiments should be stopped, or science abandoned. It focuses solely on the LHC experiment and clearly recognizes the importance of the scientific approach to our current circumstances and potentials.

Krauss also argues that differences of opinion among scientists should not be decided by debate, but rather by the outcomes of experiments, which determine which point of view was in fact correct. Generally, I would agree with that, but in the present case there are two possibilities: the earth is destroyed, or the earth is safe. Pushing that lever is not like tossing a coin. There is only one acceptable outcome – the safe one.

Finally, my article asserts that the issue should be openly discussed and evaluated. The people of earth acting through their informed leadership and with multidisciplinary scientific input should make the decisions about the danger and importance of scientific experiments of this caliber. To insist that only the self interested, highly motivated group of particle physicists have the authority to decide the future of the planet earth is preposterous. Basically, it carries the semi-religious sense of “because we say so.”

Lloyd B. Lueptow

We should all eschew questionable interest in human intellectual development. We only learn by new endeavor. Further, there simply isn’t enough mass on Earth to form a destructive black hole, and the other concerns are silliness.

May Dr. Lueptow never be burdened by governments, teams of researchers, the U.N., or lawyers, debating with his M.D. should the complex variables of surgery ever present alternative risks and crippling indecision.

Science IS different than sociology–fundamentally different–in that one depends for progress on social and political maneuvers which are entirely of man’s making, while the other depends on physical phenomena that care not a whit for that most destructive of all Earth’s problems, human arrogance.

This statement seems to me to be unnecessarily disrespectful of the field of sociology.