Supernova From Experimentation At Fermilab

i would like to save you the trip because it seems that all the greatest physicists in the world all seem to agree on the same thing, climate change included.
you may as well go back to bed now and continue doing exactly what your told
try not to let the door hit you in the face as you leave.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

We'll get to this, but suffice to say that it is a semantic argument. QGP has the same properties whether you call it a liquid or a plasma, but it turns out plasma is more accurate.

Wrong. Things we do know about the early universe is that it was hot and dense and we can trace back with certainty to a fraction of a second after the BB so the QGP phase of the universe is universally (ho ho) accepted. This argument is akin to saying there's no value in using the top 40 to chart musical success because I don't know what the first number one was.

This is not really true either. The purpose of the LHC is to test our currently untested theories of physics, most notably the Higgs sector of the standard model (or lack thereof). The heavy ion collisions are more to test the methods we've been using to compute things about quark gluon plasmas.

This goes under the same banner as the one black hole a minute or whatever the headline grabbing "proposal" was. These predictions are based on highly conjectural theories dreamed up by people with even less of a link to the real world than myself (which is not a lot, as I'll get to)

I know there are plenty of people reading this thread that would be able to understand the details and many others who would like to see a proper discussion even if the details went over their head. Lets have the more involved considerations please.

Does this produce the correct proportion of elements that we observe? If it doesn't we can throw it in the bin straight away. Incidentally, contrary to your assertion that QGP is actually a liquid, Myself and collaborators have shown that when you put QGP on an expanding space it doesn't behave like a liquid at all, so calling it a liquid is dependent on what background you are in. If you want a link to our paper send me a PM.

Remember that the early universe was both very hot and very dense so, even though space was expanding quickly particles had enough time to interact a lot, as proven by the isotropy of the universe. The fact that we don't see strangelets now is because the are less energetically favourable than normal matter, and since that is true the LHC can't turn the earth into a strangelet.

You don't see any reason to get the LHC going because you aren't a researcher in physics. The LHC is needed to test for the existence of the Higgs, and despite what Fermilab thinks there is no way to prove or disprove it's existence in any other way appart from building a big collider.

You realise that scaremongering is responsible for more deaths than the LHC, even though it's a large and complicated building project where accidents can happen? What do you have to say to that?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think it's important that Walter responds to the above post. If his position can't even stand up to the scrutiny of an internet message board then in my opinion he and the other LHC scaremongers have commited manslaughter.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This is the typical method employed by people who don't know much ab out mainstream physics but none-the-less disagree with it. I've seen it over on PhysOrg when 'discussing' things with Sywlester. They whine how a liquid was predicted by a gas or plasma was seen, because two news articles they've read used different words, utterly ignoring the fact that they all fall under the same umbrella in terms of state phase and when you're dealing with the kind of things which RHIC does there's no clear cut distintinction. The notion of a critical point in terms pressure and temperature whereby liquid and gas are the same is lost on them.

The RHIC experiments and the QCD predictions involved charged objects (ie quarks, charged under the strong force) no longer being locked togehther in well defined bound states, baryons and mesons, but forming a single flowing structure. Whether you call that flowing structure a liquid, a gas, a fluid or a plasma (since plasmas involved charged fluids) is mostly irrelevant in terms of how you quantify particular properties. Walter (and Sylwester) just have to throw in their "oh look, scientists were wrong" tupence.

 

As I recall, the researchers at RHIC referred to the behavior as acting like a liquid, rather than as the plasma as they had expected. Gee, I had no idea that using their terminology would offend. I had been in the habit of referring to the collisional debris as a 'plasma' which is what they had been referring to it as prior to that RHIC experiment [google "quark gluon plasma", or qgp]. In any event, they concluded that it existed in that state [whatever you want to call it] for a period of time far longer than they had expected; and hence they used the analogy of it being viscous like a liquid, rather than gaseous like a plasma, to convey the idea of it lasting far longer than they had anticipated. Personally, I don't like any of those terms, as they apply to nuclear matter at the electron shell ev and Kev energy ranges [i.e. solid, liquid, gas, and ionized gas or plasma]; whereas the RHIC experiment was many orders of magnitude greater in energy, breaking the strong-force bonds between quarks, etc. Why don't you coin a new term to describe nuclear matter that is at the phase obtained at RHIC if you don't like the term used by those researchers? And yes, we scientists do understand the difference, but we sometimes try to convey those ideas to people who don't have as a strong a background as us.

 

There is never much point in termonology arguments, but I have heard the term "soup of quarks" or "quark soup" used for this pre-condensed to baryons state of the universe, and like it.

 

It was the fact you decided to try and be a pedant, when the distinction is very much a matter of preference. If you're well versed in condensed matter physics or even basic state physics you'd know that many substances possess critical points in their phase diagram past which there is no distinction between liquid and gas. The high temperature, high pressure region is precisely the area RHIC is interested in.

Do you think Prom and I aren't aware of RHIC experiments and theory?

I'd wager they use such terminology more for press reports and science news than in papers on the quantitative publication side of things.

Depends on how you define your terminology. A fluid can be defined along the lines of a substances whose constituent parts are not in a set lattice formation and where their kinetic energy is easily more than enough to overcome any inter-particle forces. This would cover both the eV level notion of a fluid, where Van der Waals forces or Hydrogen bonds are overcome when you vapourise or liquidise something but it'd also cover the case when you overcome inter-nucleon forces or even inter-quark forces. In the RHIC experiments the quarks go from being locked into baryon groups, their 'solid' state, to being able to flow around around, in a single collection. This can be viewed as the baryons 'melting'. Infact, you'll find a fair amount of work on 'meson melting' in papers talking about the AdS/CFT correspondence. Put a black hole into an AdS background and you have the dual of a non-zero temperature gauge theory. Below the Hawking temperature the mesons 'melt' into the background.

I don't see anything wrong with their terminology like 'deconfined', 'superchromodynamical flow' or 'freeze out'. I think I speak for Prom too when I say it's your attempt at pedantry when it's not appropriate which is what the issue is. Part of that is because of what you say next :

You seem to be trying to imply you're familiar, on a 'scientist' level, with the quark-gluon plasma concept and model, via your use of the word 'we'. I do not regard your level of knowledge in this area as sufficiently good for you to regard yourself as inside the community of people who do grasp the QGP model. Being a nuclear safety technician in a hospital doesn't really teach you must about non-perturbative QCD methods. I know Prom knows about it, he's gt work to his name in that very area. I've doen a bit of work in it (paper in the process of being written), though not as much as Prom. You don't even know QFT, so I struggle to see how you're in the scientist community with regards to this stuff.....

 

If you still need some more convincing that we are safe, here is the latest reassurance: 0907.1667

 

BillyT:

I've heard that term too, but it sounds too 'thin'. So, offering others the opportunity to coin a term, but no takers, I hereby coin the term "quark stew", or simply "stew", to define that state of matter/energy obtained by colliding two high-Z nuclei together at RHIC energies or higher.

What is interesting is that the researchers conducting the experiment at RHIC made a prediction for the lifetime of that stew which was way off. They termed that discovery of a much longer expected lifetime as being a "complete surprise" (if memory serves me well as to their quote). However, that is what others (persons I've had communication with) had been predicting.

What is also of interest is that the stew that is formed at RHIC (and the more massive stew intended to be formed at the LHC) does not occur anywhere in nature that we are aware of. In other words, there are no high-Z cosmic rays impacting high-Z nuclei on the moon (or sun's outer gases, where there are some high-Z nuclei) at the COM energies of the RHIC and beyond. All of the cosmic ray impacts that are at RHIC COM energies or higher are of low-Z cosmic rays, as observed thus far.

So, observational science cannot be relied upon to predict safety, once we've exceed what occurs in nature.

Now, it has been 'argued' that a stew is a stew, no matter whether it is created by two colliding low-Z nuclei, or two high-Z nuclei, if the energy is the same. But again, that is simply a theoretical argument, not based upon observation.

What we do know is that the RHIC stew creates strange quarks (the kinetic energy is converted into quark mass. etc.), because we've observed single up-down-strange particles emerging from the stew after it disintegrates/falls-apart, etc. Under some theories, by increasing the mass of the stew with higher-energy collisions, longer-lived radioactive strangelets could emerge. Again, I don't know whether this is true, and all we can do is make theoretical predictions. Some posting in this thread claim to "know" that strangelets won't form, but others do plan to search for them at the LHC (under the presumption that they are highly radioactive, have insufficient time to interact with normal matter, and are therefore harmless).

So, anyway, let's call it a "stew" from now on, shall we?

 

Ah, the good old stick-your-fingers-in-your-ears-and-hope-the-people-arguing-with-you-will-go-away method of debate. How does it feel to know almost nothing about the topic your pontificating about Walter? How does it feel to be responsible for the death of another person Walter?

As I said before, the early universe would have contained quark gluon plasma in great abundance, and we see no stranglets now at all. Game over for that argument.

You are quite wrong - since we don't observe stranglets they cannot be stable, as shown above.

If there is a flaw in the argument you should be able to point out exactly where it is. "It's a theoretical argument," is not good enough.

Lets not. I'll continue to call it quark gluon plasma like the rest of the people that actually know what the stuff is. You can continue to play semantic games if you like - most crackpots start with that kind of thing.

 

BillyT:

As a follow-up to our discussion, here's the wiki link for a plasma:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_(physics)

We know that for the other three phases of nuclear matter [i.e. solid, liquid, gas], the electrons are bound to the positive nucleus, and we have a very good quantum description of the electron orbitals, which take very interesting shapes [they are actually probability functions for the 'location of the electrons', which I'm sure you recall]. This 'shell structure' is well detailed, and gives discrete energy levels for electrons jumping from shell to shell [hence discrete X-ray energies at the inner shells for high-Z nuclei].

So technically, to talk of solid, liquid, gas and plasma is to talk of positive nuclei and electrons [free or in orbitals]. That is why I do not like the term 'plasma' to describe the liberation of bound-quarks during high-E collisions of nuclei. It's talking apples and oranges as if they are the same thing.

There are some analogies, though. For example, we know that the up and down quarks in a nucleus have a 'similar' shell structure [again, probability functions], though moderated by the strong force, not the electro-magnetic force as for electron shells, because we can see discrete energy emissions when the quark shell drops from an excited state to a ground state. Perhaps the most widely utilized nucleus which undergoes that kind of a strong-force internal nuclear decay in which the quarks shift from one shell state to another is for the artificially made nucleus of Technetium. We make Technetium on a daily basis [or, at least we have been - we're running out of good reactors to make it for commercial usage, though Australia recently applied to begin making pharmaceutical grade Tc.]. The Tc nucleus that has the quarks in an 'excited' state is called Tc-99m; and it 'decays' into Tc-99 with a typical radioactive half-life, which is about 6.01 hours, emitting a discrete gamma of 140.5 KeV. [There is also some beta decay into another nucleus, but that is a different decay mode than the 'normal' Tc-99m to Tc-99 decay.] The parent nucleus [Tc-99] is also radioactive, and does a beta decay, but with a very long [almost stable] half-life of 2.13E5 years.

Yet that is where the analogy seems to end.

We know next to nothing about the 'shapes' of the internal shell-structures of the nuclei, other than that they are composed of up and down quarks; unlike the shell-structures for electrons in orbit about nuclei.

Certainly, the collisions at the RHIC, and the intended collisions at the LHC, are not designed to determine those shell structures. Instead, they are designed to 'deconfine' the quarks, liberating them from each other [this is the analogy of a 'plasma', as in a plasma the electrons are liberated from their bound state to the positive nucleus] within the confines of the nucleus. However, we know that they are not fully deconfined as with electrons and positive nuceli, which can be fully deconfined [fully ionized]. Wilczek obtained a Nobel Prize for theorizing that the farther apart the quarks are separated, the stronger becomes the force between the quarks, precluding them from ever being fully deconfined.

Instead, I refer to them as becoming 'loosened up'; and at the same time the huge kinetic energy of the colliding nuclei can allow strange quarks [from the same "Dirac Sea" that allows for protons/anti-protons to emerge] to emerge. By recombining, the nucleus is broken apart, but the quarks simply recombine with others while in that 'loosened up' state.

And that is why I believe it is appropriate to give it another name - a "quark stew", to distinguish it from a plasma, which is considerably different. A Plasma is a normal state of matter [most of the matter of the universe is a plasma]. A "quark-stew" is generated when a star goes supernova, and in high-E collisions of nuclei. We've actually made very low energy quark stews for decades, such as when we began firing neutrons at nuclei to 'transmute' elements, allowing the quarks of the nucleus to merge with the quarks of the target, forming a new nucleus.

But now we're planning to make a quark stew that will also have huge numbers of strange quarks added. A possible breeding ground for a strangelet, according to many theorists.

But some who've posted in this thread assert that that is impossible, because we don't see any nowadays left over from the BB. But if they are small and radioactive, why would we? But if you surround a small, radioactive strangelet with low-Z normal matter, perhaps it would begin growing faster than it could decay. Or so the speculation goes, and we have no experimental evidence to the contrary.

Any thoughts about that, BillyT?

 

certainly "plasma" normally refers to collecion of atoms, ions and free electons where the later two are significant enough to conduct electric current well. However for me the term can apply to any "gas-like" mix of mass with postive and in essentially equal numbers negative particles - I.e. I have no probelm calling a mix of +1/3 , -1/3 and neutral quarks a plasma, but as I said earlier, there is not much point in discussion about terms -only need for all to be clear what we are speaking of. A rose is still a rose if called a ruold. So long, as is the case here, we all know that the pre-atomic sage was quarks, it really does not matter if they are call plasma or ruold state.

 

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT CERN AND FERMILAB

As cited in the astrophysical literature, the energies resident in de Sitter space are vast enough to provide for the energies in a Type Ia Supernova.
Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)

It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy
of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential
existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived
by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de
Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron
volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de
Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon
the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of
de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3
, converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation.
This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the
sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this
order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in
the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an
immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a
public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor
R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms
smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of
universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter
space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De
Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming
an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this
formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach
in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus
releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere,
the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter
space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger
for their release.

With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.

Statistically speaking, Type Ia Supernovae are distinguished by having
much greater luminosity at point of maximum light and they are of around
1.40 solar masses or less and also show no presence of hydrogen at maximum
light as well. Should this be caused via a transition towards de Sitter
space then there should be no alteration of hydrogen towards calcium or
other elements in deflagration of Supernova Type Ia. Other types of
supernovae of I Types show presence of helium at time of maximum light.
Should there be exemplars of greater mass levels for Type Ia supernovae
this would again illustrate the artifical nature, e.g., high-energy
physics experimentation generation of a transition towards de Sitter
space. This indicates that CERN as an experimental configuration should generate a Type Ia Supernova thus supporting the work of Albert Einstein and the generalization of the Generalized Theory of Relativity
by Willem de Sitter.

http://www.google.com/search?pz=1&ne...tnmeta=searc
h%3Dsearch=Search+the+Web

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

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom..._atypical.html

Please note there is now a limited time frame to bring this supernova generation to the attention of the director of CERN
where the time of onset is now this November, 2009. May we offer our services to offer to present or debate the forthcoming destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host nearby stars via the generation of a Type Ia Supernova. Please contact at: dixon at hawaii.edu

http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

Where there is no evidence of either helium or hydrogen at maximum light for Type Ia supernova this would further support the hypothesis of a transition towards de Sitter space. This is evidence of a statistical nature.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1996PASJ...48...51S
Title: Type-Ia Supernova SN 1995D in NGC 2962: Optical V, R, and I Band
Photometry and Spectra, Sadakane, K., Yokoo, T., Arimoto, J.-I., Matsumoto, K., Honda, S., Tanabe, K., ,
Journal: Publ. of the Astronomical Society of Japan, v.48, p.51-57.
Bibliographic Code: 1996PASJ...48...51S

It may be noted in this connection that there is no trace of hydrogen at maximum light for Supernovae Type Ia, which indicates that the companion star for this model is statistically unlikely since most stars are are of an hydrogen dominant order. This observation supports the the origin of these supernovae via a transtion towards de Sitter space or other highly energetic flux. Please note:

The Golden Standard Type Ia Supernova 2005cf: Observations from the
Ultraviolet to the Near-Infrared Wavebands
Wang, X.; Li, W.; Filippenko, A. V.; Foley, R. J.; Kirshner, R. P.;
Modjaz, M.; Bloom, J.; Brown, P. J.; Carter, D.; Friedman, A. S.; Gal-Yam,
A.; Ganeshalingam, M.; Hicken, M.; Krisciunas, K.; Milne, P.; Silverman,
J. M.; Suntzeff, N. B.; Wood-Vasey, W. M.; Cenko, S. B.; Challis, P.; Fox,
D. B.; Kirkman, D.; Li, J. Z.; Li, T. P.; Malkan, M. A.; Moore, M. R.;
Reitzel, D. B.; Rich, R. M.; Serduke, F. J. D.; Shang, R. C.; Steele, T.
N.; Swift, B. J.; Tao, C.; Wong, D. S.; Zhang, S. N.

For the generation of Type Ia supernova thermonuclear explosion explanations have been proposed, none of them have withstood modern testing.
http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com...hermonuclear.h
tml
Thus the formation of a transnsition towards de Sitter space may be considereed as a viable alternative
explanatory framework. Before we take the imprudent action of testing additional energies at CERN or yet again at the Fermi Nationional Acclerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, more theoretical research should be employed to verify the safety of this research in highest-energy physics or all is lost.

An educational presentation may be provided also:
https://laulima.hawaii.edu/access/co...1010/Education
Paul W. Dixon is responsible for this presentation, Copyright 2009 Paul W. Dixon.

Consider the parameters for universe formation as being similar
to that for Type Ia Supernova generation as being very small and
vastly energetic. This may be philosophically difficult to comprehend
yet essentially vital for survival!

The parameter space of inflationary cosmology is seen in the estimate of chaotic expansion theory of the universe beginning at ~10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang, point origin of the Universe with total duration of expansion of 10^-35 seconds or thereabouts. Here the region of expansion no bigger than 10^-33 cm yielding with simultaneous inflations to reach the observable size of our Universe at l<~10^28 cm .. (Andrei Linde, Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology, La Tex Harwood, Chur, Switzerland, 1990, p39) Andrei Linde is the leading authority in this important work at the Department of Physics at Stanford University.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0503/0503203v1.pdf

Should we consider the hypothesis of the uniformity of nature as predictive of the abundance of living forms with some of them attaining the capacity to
transfer themselves to our location in the universe, what can account for their absence? We may note in this connection that there is only a short delay before a transition towards de Sitter space at CERN, Fermilab or other high-energy physics experimentation has generated a Type Ia Supernova as demonstrated in this thread. The frequency of Type Ia Supernova in the observable universe would then signal the termination of these technically advanced civilizations. A technical experimental mischance may then occur before the members of the respective civilizations are philosophically ready to accept this possibllity.

The approach of the transition towards de Sitter space at Fermilab
with the ongoing increase in luminoisty is seen:
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/now/tevlum.html
with these energies are now equivalent to those found at the point
origin of the universe. i..e. "The Big Bang."

We need to consider the increased evidence of water on Mars and the possibilty of water
on other planetary bodies as the source of life as well as intelligent life thus supporting the hypothesis
that other creatures much like ourselves can be a source of Type Ia Supernovae.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7919113.stm

It is generally agreed that the the Large Hadron Collider will provide an
empirical test for the formation of transition towards de Sitter space.
The collisional energetcis are much greater that those tested in the
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia Illinois.

"The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is being built in a circular tunnel 27 km
in circumference. The tunnel is buried around 50 to 175 m. underground. It
straddles the Swiss and French borders on the outskirts of Geneva.

The first beams were circulated successfully on 10th September 2008.
...fortunately on 19th September a serious fault developed damaging a
number of superconducting magnets. The repair will require a long
technical intervention which overlaps with the planned winter shutdown.
The LHC beam will, therefore, not see beam again before September 2009.

The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam."

The competing hypothesis which is considered even more objectionable than the transition towards de Sitter space is given in the False Vacuum solution to the Einstein de Sitter equations. Yet as can be seen in this formulation high-energy physics experimentation may serve as a trigger for this most untoward event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_vacuum

Please note in this regard that the transition towards de Sitter space is well-known in the cosmological literature. http://www.springerlink.com/content/p8377167602421t1/

An affidavit regarding the contingency of a Type Ia Supernova has been submitted as part of the legal action to bring a moratorium against such an experimental mischance.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/cou...case_id-78717/
Many thanks for the happy birthday wishes!!!

With the additional energies available at the LHC in CERN, it may also be possible to test the competing hypothesis of forming a transition to the lower condition in the Einstein de Sitter Universe. Following the formation of this transition, our Universe would drain off into the lower energy condition. This should be of a lesser probabilty of occurence yet it is still considered as a possible outcome to this research.

Please note: http://professordixon.blogspot.com

The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed at the accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is 362.37 E30.
In scientific notation, this 362.37 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 362.37 x 10 to the 41st power electron volts (362.37 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish.

Please note that the return flight of the Columbia shuttle was not halted because of the false belief that the the foam shards could not cause a life threatening defect in the aerodynamic properties of the shuttle.
http://www.reuters.com/article/lates.../idUSN30568874

As a fictional work, the novel Anathem remarks on scientists tinkering with what they do not understand. To quote from the journal Nature, "Anathem is a shrewd exploration of what might happen if the fear of scientists meddling with things they were never meant to know becomes entirely justified." with space-time itself included in the list of potential problem areas.
(Jennifer Rahn, Imprisoned by intelligence, Neal Stephenson, Anathem, Opinion Nature, 456, 7221, 27 November 2008, 447-447)

It may be noted in this connection that the term Anathem refers to an ecumenical curse of severe proportions. This may be understood to mean that we are expected to take extreme exception with predjudice to the work of those who would destroy us and our children through this meddling.

Tycho Brahe's supernova, now identified as a Type Ia Supernova, shows those characteristics as predicted by the model expected in supernova from experimentation. A large Supernova has been generated leaving behind a type G star such as is found in our solar system. (Andrea Pastorello, Astrophysics, Echo from an ancient supernova, Nature 456, 7222, 4 December 2008, 587-589) The technique of light echoes was used for this identification of an historical object.

As noted in Chang, J.,et al., An excess of cosmic ray electrons at energies of 300-800 GeV (Nature, 456, 7220, 20 November 2008, pp. 362-365) could be tapping into "muti-dimensional spaces with potenially important implications for our understanding of the Universe." Similarly, we may postulate that Type Ia supernovae are expressing the energetics of an n-dimensional space
whose properties may be understood with further study.

Please note that while the Type II Supernovae have origin in 10 or more solar mass objects Type Ia Supernovae have origin in objects of some 1 solar mass.
It may be noted in this connection that the smaller massed Supernova give rise to deflagration of some 10 billion solar luminosities whilst the larger objects give rise to some 1 billion solar luminosity deflagration objects. This difference may lend support that the energetics of Type Ia Supernovae is created via an aperture formed towards de Sitter space. As also noted in this connection, there is no trace of hydrogen at maximum light for Type Ia Supernovae thus making it statistically unlikely that they have reached the Chandrssekhar limit by accretion from a nearby solar object.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/snovcn.html

The formation of Type 1a Supernovae is dependent on them reaching the Chandrasekhar limit of greater than 1.4 solar mass to implode into a Supernova according to current theory.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/snovcn.html

Yet there is evidence that the Type !a Supernova can form at one solar mass
or less thus contradicting current theory and thus supporting the alternate theory where Type Ia Suoernovae may be formed via the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space.
Probing Dark Energy with Supernovae
by Sebastian Ihle
9.6.2006

As noted in our sciforums discussion, there are a number of competing hypotheses. An empirical investigation is under way at CERN in the LHC.
Should we generate a Type Ia Supernova, this will confirm the existence of a
highly energetic topologically cobordant continuum termed de Sitter space.
So far, the astrophysical theoretical generalizations of the generalized theory of relativity have been confirmed at the 100% level. The world's largest experiment may yet create a tragic confirmatiion of Albert Einstein's theory.

Please recall that the energies now proposed for the LHC at CERN will be some 7 times greater that those employed at FERMILAB. As is well-known, the energies in use at FERMILAB approximate those predicted for those found at the point origin of the Universe. Thus even from a Common Sense perspective we may penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space
thus releasing the force of Type Ia Supernova on our planet with the increaased energies to be employed at the LHC. Please note:

Philosophy and Common Sense (Frances)

"Not every philosophy professor takes philosophy seriously in the sense
that she thinks that some purely philosophical theories that go against
common sense have a good chance to be true. These philosophers respect
anti-commonsensical theories, in that they admit such theories are very
important in the pursuit of philosophical understanding. But they also
think that there is no real chance that they are true. If you have a valid
argument based not on scientific but purely philosophical reasoning, and
that argument concludes with something against cross-cultural and timeless
common sense, then at least one of the premises isnt true, or so they say.
It might be tremendously difficult to identify the mistaken premise, but
we can start our investigation off assuming that our assumption that the
conclusion is false is safe. These philosophers take philosophising
seriously, of course, but they dont take seriously the idea that purely
philosophical (so not empirical, not mathematical) theories have a good
chance at overthrowing parts of common sense."

A videotaped presentation of this statement is under preparation. Link to this will be provided as soon as it is made ready. This should provide a more interesting source. We welcome any suggestions you may have in this connection for illustrative material. Please let us know what Malcolm Perry would indicate regarding the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space via highest-energy physics experimentation.

Highest energy physics is an empirical science as noted below. We may then discover through experimentation the answer to our theoretical questions
which are then derived from observation. Should the ongoing LHC at CERN produce the Higgs boson and field, this would then be a major victory for the Standatrard Model in Physics. Should we note the generation of a Type Ia Supernova, this will further confirm the current record of 100% successful predictions of the Generalized Theory of Relavity of Albert Einstein. These energies to be generated at CERN are those energy levels seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. Experimentally we note that these energies are deemed sufficient for the testing of these hypotheses.

Please access this webpage for a thorough update on the LHC at CERN.

http://www.lhcdefense.org/

Generation of Type Ia Supernova via a transition to de Sitter space may be added to this description as a consequence of highest energy physics experimentation.

There has been a brief hiatus introduced from now until April or thereabouts for the reactivation of the LHC at CERN. We should consider all possible alternatives before this gravely irresponsible experiment begins anew.

Please recall that the activation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is the onset of the largest highest-energy experiment so far extant on our planet.
The empirical observation of a Type Ia Supernova will serve as another confirmation of the Generalized Theory of Albert Einstein. This theory, as noted below, has had 100% verifcation in other astrophysical observations.
Let us not be so rash as to further test this theory and lose all that we hold most dear as a sacrifice to the ambitions of ruthless egoism and professional incompetence. We may discover the Higgs boson and field and yet create a perforation in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space and create a Supernova. The tentative date for the onset of the collisional actions at CERN is now around May 1, 2009.

From the LHC Machine Outreach

The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam.

The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed per example at the US accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is
288.89E30.
In scientific
notation, this 288.89 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With
a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the
energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 288.89 x 10 to the 41st
power
electron volts (288.89 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest
energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th
power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an
intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish as this undergoes a vast increment at CERN.

As one of the seven plaintiffs in the District Court in Hawaii, may I offer a formal complaint agasinst Director of CERN Robert Aymar and to John Ellis chief theoretican of CERN to appear in the International Court in the Hague to answer charges of gross negligence in the operation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As noted in this post, is the formal derivation of the generation of Type Ia Supernova from their experiment following the well-known work of Albert Einstein and his colleague Willem de Sitter in the generalized theory of relativity. The energies in nature do not approximate those found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the Big Bang at the pont origin of the Universe without forming a transition towards de Sitter space as noted per exemplar in Type II supernovae and in quasars. Their willingness to proceed with this experiment with full knowledge of this potentiallity consititutes a criminal act of public endangerment. May we request that the good people of Switzerland discontinue power service to CERN until this matter has reached full legal disposition in the International Court in the Hague.

May I add a personal note to this discussion. We should preserve the
future for all mankind. Children have the right to grow-up in a safe and
sheltered environment. We need to give our children the time to dream and
grow into all future time. We should visit other planets, other stars, other
galaxies to see and understand all things. Let us call for patience in
this research endeavor until we are certain of the potential dangers that
may lurk for the unsuspecting researcher. One Supernova will terminate all
that we hold most dear.

Update on the research progress at CERN.

End of July: First particles may be injected, and the commissioning with
beams and collisions will start.
It is expected that it will take about 2 months to have first collisions
at 10 TeV. Please note that only one area remains at below collisional
energies.

We shall now observe at CERN the onset of collisional energies at far
greater impact than those observed at Fermilab.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...der-first-beam

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm

The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers
of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message
will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from
the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the
preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation
of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his
Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis
of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now
termed. A review of the cosmological perspective is provided in the generation of Type Ia Supernova:
http://professordixon.blogspot.com/


Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in
the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly.
May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of
last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well
as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects
are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely
certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert
Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of
Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter
L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be
sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of
nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool
down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis
of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation
will commence in June/July 2008. The 7 Tev phase of the research would
then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN as noted above.

Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)


It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy
of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential
existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived
by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de
Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron
volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de
Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon
the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of
de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3
, converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation.
This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the
sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this
order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in
the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an
immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a
public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor
R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms
smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of
universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter
space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De
Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming
an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this
formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach
in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus
releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere,
the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter
space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger
for their release.

With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.

This supports of the theoretcal position that sufficient energy will penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space thus releasing the force of an exploding Universe i.e., Supernova, on our planet. The works of Albert Einstein and Willem de Sitter as shown here have never been refuted.

From the viewpoint of classical physics, the penetration towards de Sitter space is prevented by a large though not infinite potential barrier as described by Malcolm Perry. As the energies in the collliders go from 10^-9 seconds to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the big bang at the point origin of the Universe, this penetrance becomes inevitable thus releasing the force of a Type Ia Supernova on our planet, solar system and host of nearby stars.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

It's funny how he doesn't even copy and paste his own ramblings properly, urls are broken.

 

I'm amazed you looked at it closely enough to notice that

 

Yes. Me too. I learned to read Paul's post only every few months and then to skip all the text that only goes half way across the page as it is just cut and past, often from himself, or at least has appeared many times before.

 

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT CERN AND FERMILAB

It may be intuitively more comprehensible to perceive the influx of energy as an electrical discharge since it would be the penetration of a potential barrier towards de Sitter space which releases the force of a Type Ia Supernova.

As cited in the astrophysical literature, the energies resident in de Sitter space are vast enough to provide for the energies in a Type Ia Supernova.
Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)

It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy
of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential
existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived
by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de
Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron
volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de
Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon
the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of
de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3
, converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation.
This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the
sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this
order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in
the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an
immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a
public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor
R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms
smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of
universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter
space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De
Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming
an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this
formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach
in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus
releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere,
the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter
space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger
for their release.

With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.

Statistically speaking, Type Ia Supernovae are distinguished by having
much greater luminosity at point of maximum light and they are of around
1.40 solar masses or less and also show no presence of hydrogen at maximum
light as well. Should this be caused via a transition towards de Sitter
space then there should be no alteration of hydrogen towards calcium or
other elements in deflagration of Supernova Type Ia. Other types of
supernovae of I Types show presence of helium at time of maximum light.
Should there be exemplars of greater mass levels for Type Ia supernovae
this would again illustrate the artifical nature, e.g., high-energy
physics experimentation generation of a transition towards de Sitter
space. This indicates that CERN as an experimental configuration should generate a Type Ia Supernova thus supporting the work of Albert Einstein and the generalization of the Generalized Theory of Relativity
by Willem de Sitter.

http://www.google.com/search?pz=1&ne...tnmeta=searc
h%3Dsearch=Search+the+Web

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

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom..._atypical.html

Please note there is now a limited time frame to bring this supernova generation to the attention of the director of CERN
where the time of onset is now this November, 2009. May we offer our services to offer to present or debate the forthcoming destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host nearby stars via the generation of a Type Ia Supernova. Please contact at: dixon at hawaii.edu

http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

Where there is no evidence of either helium or hydrogen at maximum light for Type Ia supernova this would further support the hypothesis of a transition towards de Sitter space. This is evidence of a statistical nature.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1996PASJ...48...51S
Title: Type-Ia Supernova SN 1995D in NGC 2962: Optical V, R, and I Band
Photometry and Spectra, Sadakane, K., Yokoo, T., Arimoto, J.-I., Matsumoto, K., Honda, S., Tanabe, K., ,
Journal: Publ. of the Astronomical Society of Japan, v.48, p.51-57.
Bibliographic Code: 1996PASJ...48...51S

It may be noted in this connection that there is no trace of hydrogen at maximum light for Supernovae Type Ia, which indicates that the companion star for this model is statistically unlikely since most stars are are of an hydrogen dominant order. This observation supports the the origin of these supernovae via a transtion towards de Sitter space or other highly energetic flux. Please note:

The Golden Standard Type Ia Supernova 2005cf: Observations from the
Ultraviolet to the Near-Infrared Wavebands
Wang, X.; Li, W.; Filippenko, A. V.; Foley, R. J.; Kirshner, R. P.;
Modjaz, M.; Bloom, J.; Brown, P. J.; Carter, D.; Friedman, A. S.; Gal-Yam,
A.; Ganeshalingam, M.; Hicken, M.; Krisciunas, K.; Milne, P.; Silverman,
J. M.; Suntzeff, N. B.; Wood-Vasey, W. M.; Cenko, S. B.; Challis, P.; Fox,
D. B.; Kirkman, D.; Li, J. Z.; Li, T. P.; Malkan, M. A.; Moore, M. R.;
Reitzel, D. B.; Rich, R. M.; Serduke, F. J. D.; Shang, R. C.; Steele, T.
N.; Swift, B. J.; Tao, C.; Wong, D. S.; Zhang, S. N.

For the generation of Type Ia supernova thermonuclear explosion explanations have been proposed, none of them have withstood modern testing.
http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com...hermonuclear.h
tml
Thus the formation of a transnsition towards de Sitter space may be considereed as a viable alternative
explanatory framework. Before we take the imprudent action of testing additional energies at CERN or yet again at the Fermi Nationional Acclerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, more theoretical research should be employed to verify the safety of this research in highest-energy physics or all is lost.

An educational presentation may be provided also:
https://laulima.hawaii.edu/access/co...1010/Education
Paul W. Dixon is responsible for this presentation, Copyright 2009 Paul W. Dixon.

Consider the parameters for universe formation as being similar
to that for Type Ia Supernova generation as being very small and
vastly energetic. This may be philosophically difficult to comprehend
yet essentially vital for survival!

The parameter space of inflationary cosmology is seen in the estimate of chaotic expansion theory of the universe beginning at ~10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang, point origin of the Universe with total duration of expansion of 10^-35 seconds or thereabouts. Here the region of expansion no bigger than 10^-33 cm yielding with simultaneous inflations to reach the observable size of our Universe at l<~10^28 cm .. (Andrei Linde, Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology, La Tex Harwood, Chur, Switzerland, 1990, p39) Andrei Linde is the leading authority in this important work at the Department of Physics at Stanford University.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0503/0503203v1.pdf

Should we consider the hypothesis of the uniformity of nature as predictive of the abundance of living forms with some of them attaining the capacity to
transfer themselves to our location in the universe, what can account for their absence? We may note in this connection that there is only a short delay before a transition towards de Sitter space at CERN, Fermilab or other high-energy physics experimentation has generated a Type Ia Supernova as demonstrated in this thread. The frequency of Type Ia Supernova in the observable universe would then signal the termination of these technically advanced civilizations. A technical experimental mischance may then occur before the members of the respective civilizations are philosophically ready to accept this possibllity.

The approach of the transition towards de Sitter space at Fermilab
with the ongoing increase in luminoisty is seen:
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/now/tevlum.html
with these energies are now equivalent to those found at the point
origin of the universe. i..e. "The Big Bang."

We need to consider the increased evidence of water on Mars and the possibilty of water
on other planetary bodies as the source of life as well as intelligent life thus supporting the hypothesis
that other creatures much like ourselves can be a source of Type Ia Supernovae.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7919113.stm

It is generally agreed that the the Large Hadron Collider will provide an
empirical test for the formation of transition towards de Sitter space.
The collisional energetcis are much greater that those tested in the
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia Illinois.

"The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is being built in a circular tunnel 27 km
in circumference. The tunnel is buried around 50 to 175 m. underground. It
straddles the Swiss and French borders on the outskirts of Geneva.

The first beams were circulated successfully on 10th September 2008.
...fortunately on 19th September a serious fault developed damaging a
number of superconducting magnets. The repair will require a long
technical intervention which overlaps with the planned winter shutdown.
The LHC beam will, therefore, not see beam again before September 2009.

The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam."

The competing hypothesis which is considered even more objectionable than the transition towards de Sitter space is given in the False Vacuum solution to the Einstein de Sitter equations. Yet as can be seen in this formulation high-energy physics experimentation may serve as a trigger for this most untoward event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_vacuum

Please note in this regard that the transition towards de Sitter space is well-known in the cosmological literature. http://www.springerlink.com/content/p8377167602421t1/

An affidavit regarding the contingency of a Type Ia Supernova has been submitted as part of the legal action to bring a moratorium against such an experimental mischance.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/cou...case_id-78717/
Many thanks for the happy birthday wishes!!!

With the additional energies available at the LHC in CERN, it may also be possible to test the competing hypothesis of forming a transition to the lower condition in the Einstein de Sitter Universe. Following the formation of this transition, our Universe would drain off into the lower energy condition. This should be of a lesser probabilty of occurence yet it is still considered as a possible outcome to this research.

Please note: http://professordixon.blogspot.com

The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed at the accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is 362.37 E30.
In scientific notation, this 362.37 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 362.37 x 10 to the 41st power electron volts (362.37 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish.

Please note that the return flight of the Columbia shuttle was not halted because of the false belief that the the foam shards could not cause a life threatening defect in the aerodynamic properties of the shuttle.
http://www.reuters.com/article/lates.../idUSN30568874

As a fictional work, the novel Anathem remarks on scientists tinkering with what they do not understand. To quote from the journal Nature, "Anathem is a shrewd exploration of what might happen if the fear of scientists meddling with things they were never meant to know becomes entirely justified." with space-time itself included in the list of potential problem areas.
(Jennifer Rahn, Imprisoned by intelligence, Neal Stephenson, Anathem, Opinion Nature, 456, 7221, 27 November 2008, 447-447)

It may be noted in this connection that the term Anathem refers to an ecumenical curse of severe proportions. This may be understood to mean that we are expected to take extreme exception with predjudice to the work of those who would destroy us and our children through this meddling.

Tycho Brahe's supernova, now identified as a Type Ia Supernova, shows those characteristics as predicted by the model expected in supernova from experimentation. A large Supernova has been generated leaving behind a type G star such as is found in our solar system. (Andrea Pastorello, Astrophysics, Echo from an ancient supernova, Nature 456, 7222, 4 December 2008, 587-589) The technique of light echoes was used for this identification of an historical object.

As noted in Chang, J.,et al., An excess of cosmic ray electrons at energies of 300-800 GeV (Nature, 456, 7220, 20 November 2008, pp. 362-365) could be tapping into "muti-dimensional spaces with potenially important implications for our understanding of the Universe." Similarly, we may postulate that Type Ia supernovae are expressing the energetics of an n-dimensional space
whose properties may be understood with further study.

Please note that while the Type II Supernovae have origin in 10 or more solar mass objects Type Ia Supernovae have origin in objects of some 1 solar mass.
It may be noted in this connection that the smaller massed Supernova give rise to deflagration of some 10 billion solar luminosities whilst the larger objects give rise to some 1 billion solar luminosity deflagration objects. This difference may lend support that the energetics of Type Ia Supernovae is created via an aperture formed towards de Sitter space. As also noted in this connection, there is no trace of hydrogen at maximum light for Type Ia Supernovae thus making it statistically unlikely that they have reached the Chandrssekhar limit by accretion from a nearby solar object.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/snovcn.html

The formation of Type 1a Supernovae is dependent on them reaching the Chandrasekhar limit of greater than 1.4 solar mass to implode into a Supernova according to current theory.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/snovcn.html

Yet there is evidence that the Type !a Supernova can form at one solar mass
or less thus contradicting current theory and thus supporting the alternate theory where Type Ia Suoernovae may be formed via the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space.
Probing Dark Energy with Supernovae
by Sebastian Ihle
9.6.2006

As noted in our sciforums discussion, there are a number of competing hypotheses. An empirical investigation is under way at CERN in the LHC.
Should we generate a Type Ia Supernova, this will confirm the existence of a
highly energetic topologically cobordant continuum termed de Sitter space.
So far, the astrophysical theoretical generalizations of the generalized theory of relativity have been confirmed at the 100% level. The world's largest experiment may yet create a tragic confirmatiion of Albert Einstein's theory.

Please recall that the energies now proposed for the LHC at CERN will be some 7 times greater that those employed at FERMILAB. As is well-known, the energies in use at FERMILAB approximate those predicted for those found at the point origin of the Universe. Thus even from a Common Sense perspective we may penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space
thus releasing the force of Type Ia Supernova on our planet with the increaased energies to be employed at the LHC. Please note:

Philosophy and Common Sense (Frances)

"Not every philosophy professor takes philosophy seriously in the sense
that she thinks that some purely philosophical theories that go against
common sense have a good chance to be true. These philosophers respect
anti-commonsensical theories, in that they admit such theories are very
important in the pursuit of philosophical understanding. But they also
think that there is no real chance that they are true. If you have a valid
argument based not on scientific but purely philosophical reasoning, and
that argument concludes with something against cross-cultural and timeless
common sense, then at least one of the premises isnt true, or so they say.
It might be tremendously difficult to identify the mistaken premise, but
we can start our investigation off assuming that our assumption that the
conclusion is false is safe. These philosophers take philosophising
seriously, of course, but they dont take seriously the idea that purely
philosophical (so not empirical, not mathematical) theories have a good
chance at overthrowing parts of common sense."

A videotaped presentation of this statement is under preparation. Link to this will be provided as soon as it is made ready. This should provide a more interesting source. We welcome any suggestions you may have in this connection for illustrative material. Please let us know what Malcolm Perry would indicate regarding the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space via highest-energy physics experimentation.

Highest energy physics is an empirical science as noted below. We may then discover through experimentation the answer to our theoretical questions
which are then derived from observation. Should the ongoing LHC at CERN produce the Higgs boson and field, this would then be a major victory for the Standatrard Model in Physics. Should we note the generation of a Type Ia Supernova, this will further confirm the current record of 100% successful predictions of the Generalized Theory of Relavity of Albert Einstein. These energies to be generated at CERN are those energy levels seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. Experimentally we note that these energies are deemed sufficient for the testing of these hypotheses.

Please access this webpage for a thorough update on the LHC at CERN.

http://www.lhcdefense.org/

Generation of Type Ia Supernova via a transition to de Sitter space may be added to this description as a consequence of highest energy physics experimentation.

There has been a brief hiatus introduced from now until April or thereabouts for the reactivation of the LHC at CERN. We should consider all possible alternatives before this gravely irresponsible experiment begins anew.

Please recall that the activation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is the onset of the largest highest-energy experiment so far extant on our planet.
The empirical observation of a Type Ia Supernova will serve as another confirmation of the Generalized Theory of Albert Einstein. This theory, as noted below, has had 100% verifcation in other astrophysical observations.
Let us not be so rash as to further test this theory and lose all that we hold most dear as a sacrifice to the ambitions of ruthless egoism and professional incompetence. We may discover the Higgs boson and field and yet create a perforation in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space and create a Supernova. The tentative date for the onset of the collisional actions at CERN is now around May 1, 2009.

From the LHC Machine Outreach

The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam.

The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed per example at the US accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is
288.89E30.
In scientific
notation, this 288.89 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With
a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the
energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 288.89 x 10 to the 41st
power
electron volts (288.89 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest
energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th
power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an
intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish as this undergoes a vast increment at CERN.

As one of the seven plaintiffs in the District Court in Hawaii, may I offer a formal complaint agasinst Director of CERN Robert Aymar and to John Ellis chief theoretican of CERN to appear in the International Court in the Hague to answer charges of gross negligence in the operation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As noted in this post, is the formal derivation of the generation of Type Ia Supernova from their experiment following the well-known work of Albert Einstein and his colleague Willem de Sitter in the generalized theory of relativity. The energies in nature do not approximate those found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the Big Bang at the pont origin of the Universe without forming a transition towards de Sitter space as noted per exemplar in Type II supernovae and in quasars. Their willingness to proceed with this experiment with full knowledge of this potentiallity consititutes a criminal act of public endangerment. May we request that the good people of Switzerland discontinue power service to CERN until this matter has reached full legal disposition in the International Court in the Hague.

May I add a personal note to this discussion. We should preserve the
future for all mankind. Children have the right to grow-up in a safe and
sheltered environment. We need to give our children the time to dream and
grow into all future time. We should visit other planets, other stars, other
galaxies to see and understand all things. Let us call for patience in
this research endeavor until we are certain of the potential dangers that
may lurk for the unsuspecting researcher. One Supernova will terminate all
that we hold most dear.

Update on the research progress at CERN.

End of July: First particles may be injected, and the commissioning with
beams and collisions will start.
It is expected that it will take about 2 months to have first collisions
at 10 TeV. Please note that only one area remains at below collisional
energies.

We shall now observe at CERN the onset of collisional energies at far
greater impact than those observed at Fermilab.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...der-first-beam

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm

The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers
of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message
will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from
the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the
preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation
of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his
Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis
of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now
termed. A review of the cosmological perspective is provided in the generation of Type Ia Supernova:
http://professordixon.blogspot.com/


Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in
the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly.
May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of
last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well
as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects
are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely
certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert
Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of
Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter
L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be
sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of
nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool
down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis
of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation
will commence in June/July 2008. The 7 Tev phase of the research would
then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN as noted above.

Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)


It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy
of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential
existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived
by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de
Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron
volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de
Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon
the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of
de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3
, converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation.
This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the
sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this
order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in
the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an
immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a
public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor
R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms
smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of
universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter
space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De
Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming
an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this
formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach
in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus
releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere,
the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter
space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger
for their release.

With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.

This supports of the theoretcal position that sufficient energy will penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space thus releasing the force of an exploding Universe i.e., Supernova, on our planet. The works of Albert Einstein and Willem de Sitter as shown here have never been refuted.

From the viewpoint of classical physics, the penetration towards de Sitter space is prevented by a large though not infinite potential barrier as described by Malcolm Perry. As the energies in the collliders go from 10^-9 seconds to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the big bang at the point origin of the Universe, this penetrance becomes inevitable thus releasing the force of a Type Ia Supernova on our planet, solar system and host of nearby stars.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT CERN AND FERMILAB

A notice from the LHC administration for your interest. Please take what what action you deem
necessary in this connection. All the children will thank you for your kind actions on their behalf.

"The Latest from the LHC: Towards the big chill
With 6 sectors out of 8 at nominal cryogenic temperature (1.9 K= about
-271 C), the commissioning at the LHC is progressing well. According to
the present schedule, the whole machine will be cold in about two weeks.

Final operations to fill the nitrogen tanks for cooling the last sector to
80K.
Only Sectors 3-4 and 6-7 are still in the cooling phase (currently between
60 and 20 K). As already mentioned in the previous update, as soon as a
sector reaches the nominal cryogenic temperature, teams can start powering
the magnets. At present, the current is flowing in the magnets of three
sectors, while the remaining three will be powered in the coming two
weeks."

It may be intuitively more comprehensible to perceive the influx of energy as an electrical discharge since it would be the penetration of a potential barrier towards de Sitter space which releases the force of a Type Ia Supernova.

As cited in the astrophysical literature, the energies resident in de Sitter space are vast enough to provide for the energies in a Type Ia Supernova.
Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)

It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy
of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential
existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived
by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de
Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron
volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de
Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon
the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of
de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3
, converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation.
This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the
sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this
order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in
the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an
immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a
public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor
R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms
smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of
universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter
space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De
Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming
an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this
formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach
in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus
releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere,
the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter
space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger
for their release.

With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.

Statistically speaking, Type Ia Supernovae are distinguished by having
much greater luminosity at point of maximum light and they are of around
1.40 solar masses or less and also show no presence of hydrogen at maximum
light as well. Should this be caused via a transition towards de Sitter
space then there should be no alteration of hydrogen towards calcium or
other elements in deflagration of Supernova Type Ia. Other types of
supernovae of I Types show presence of helium at time of maximum light.
Should there be exemplars of greater mass levels for Type Ia supernovae
this would again illustrate the artifical nature, e.g., high-energy
physics experimentation generation of a transition towards de Sitter
space. This indicates that CERN as an experimental configuration should generate a Type Ia Supernova thus supporting the work of Albert Einstein and the generalization of the Generalized Theory of Relativity
by Willem de Sitter.

http://www.google.com/search?pz=1&ne...tnmeta=searc
h%3Dsearch=Search+the+Web

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

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom..._atypical.html

Please note there is now a limited time frame to bring this supernova generation to the attention of the director of CERN
where the time of onset is now this November, 2009. May we offer our services to offer to present or debate the forthcoming destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host nearby stars via the generation of a Type Ia Supernova. Please contact at: dixon at hawaii.edu

http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

Where there is no evidence of either helium or hydrogen at maximum light for Type Ia supernova this would further support the hypothesis of a transition towards de Sitter space. This is evidence of a statistical nature.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1996PASJ...48...51S
Title: Type-Ia Supernova SN 1995D in NGC 2962: Optical V, R, and I Band
Photometry and Spectra, Sadakane, K., Yokoo, T., Arimoto, J.-I., Matsumoto, K., Honda, S., Tanabe, K., ,
Journal: Publ. of the Astronomical Society of Japan, v.48, p.51-57.
Bibliographic Code: 1996PASJ...48...51S

It may be noted in this connection that there is no trace of hydrogen at maximum light for Supernovae Type Ia, which indicates that the companion star for this model is statistically unlikely since most stars are are of an hydrogen dominant order. This observation supports the the origin of these supernovae via a transtion towards de Sitter space or other highly energetic flux. Please note:

The Golden Standard Type Ia Supernova 2005cf: Observations from the
Ultraviolet to the Near-Infrared Wavebands
Wang, X.; Li, W.; Filippenko, A. V.; Foley, R. J.; Kirshner, R. P.;
Modjaz, M.; Bloom, J.; Brown, P. J.; Carter, D.; Friedman, A. S.; Gal-Yam,
A.; Ganeshalingam, M.; Hicken, M.; Krisciunas, K.; Milne, P.; Silverman,
J. M.; Suntzeff, N. B.; Wood-Vasey, W. M.; Cenko, S. B.; Challis, P.; Fox,
D. B.; Kirkman, D.; Li, J. Z.; Li, T. P.; Malkan, M. A.; Moore, M. R.;
Reitzel, D. B.; Rich, R. M.; Serduke, F. J. D.; Shang, R. C.; Steele, T.
N.; Swift, B. J.; Tao, C.; Wong, D. S.; Zhang, S. N.

For the generation of Type Ia supernova thermonuclear explosion explanations have been proposed, none of them have withstood modern testing.
http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com...hermonuclear.h
tml
Thus the formation of a transnsition towards de Sitter space may be considereed as a viable alternative
explanatory framework. Before we take the imprudent action of testing additional energies at CERN or yet again at the Fermi Nationional Acclerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, more theoretical research should be employed to verify the safety of this research in highest-energy physics or all is lost.

An educational presentation may be provided also:
https://laulima.hawaii.edu/access/co...1010/Education
Paul W. Dixon is responsible for this presentation, Copyright 2009 Paul W. Dixon.

Consider the parameters for universe formation as being similar
to that for Type Ia Supernova generation as being very small and
vastly energetic. This may be philosophically difficult to comprehend
yet essentially vital for survival!

The parameter space of inflationary cosmology is seen in the estimate of chaotic expansion theory of the universe beginning at ~10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang, point origin of the Universe with total duration of expansion of 10^-35 seconds or thereabouts. Here the region of expansion no bigger than 10^-33 cm yielding with simultaneous inflations to reach the observable size of our Universe at l<~10^28 cm .. (Andrei Linde, Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology, La Tex Harwood, Chur, Switzerland, 1990, p39) Andrei Linde is the leading authority in this important work at the Department of Physics at Stanford University.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0503/0503203v1.pdf

Should we consider the hypothesis of the uniformity of nature as predictive of the abundance of living forms with some of them attaining the capacity to
transfer themselves to our location in the universe, what can account for their absence? We may note in this connection that there is only a short delay before a transition towards de Sitter space at CERN, Fermilab or other high-energy physics experimentation has generated a Type Ia Supernova as demonstrated in this thread. The frequency of Type Ia Supernova in the observable universe would then signal the termination of these technically advanced civilizations. A technical experimental mischance may then occur before the members of the respective civilizations are philosophically ready to accept this possibllity.

The approach of the transition towards de Sitter space at Fermilab
with the ongoing increase in luminoisty is seen:
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/now/tevlum.html
with these energies are now equivalent to those found at the point
origin of the universe. i..e. "The Big Bang."

We need to consider the increased evidence of water on Mars and the possibilty of water
on other planetary bodies as the source of life as well as intelligent life thus supporting the hypothesis
that other creatures much like ourselves can be a source of Type Ia Supernovae.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7919113.stm

It is generally agreed that the the Large Hadron Collider will provide an
empirical test for the formation of transition towards de Sitter space.
The collisional energetcis are much greater that those tested in the
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia Illinois.

"The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is being built in a circular tunnel 27 km
in circumference. The tunnel is buried around 50 to 175 m. underground. It
straddles the Swiss and French borders on the outskirts of Geneva.

The first beams were circulated successfully on 10th September 2008.
...fortunately on 19th September a serious fault developed damaging a
number of superconducting magnets. The repair will require a long
technical intervention which overlaps with the planned winter shutdown.
The LHC beam will, therefore, not see beam again before September 2009.

The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam."

The competing hypothesis which is considered even more objectionable than the transition towards de Sitter space is given in the False Vacuum solution to the Einstein de Sitter equations. Yet as can be seen in this formulation high-energy physics experimentation may serve as a trigger for this most untoward event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_vacuum

Please note in this regard that the transition towards de Sitter space is well-known in the cosmological literature. http://www.springerlink.com/content/p8377167602421t1/

An affidavit regarding the contingency of a Type Ia Supernova has been submitted as part of the legal action to bring a moratorium against such an experimental mischance.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/cou...case_id-78717/
Many thanks for the happy birthday wishes!!!

With the additional energies available at the LHC in CERN, it may also be possible to test the competing hypothesis of forming a transition to the lower condition in the Einstein de Sitter Universe. Following the formation of this transition, our Universe would drain off into the lower energy condition. This should be of a lesser probabilty of occurence yet it is still considered as a possible outcome to this research.

Please note: http://professordixon.blogspot.com

The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed at the accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is 362.37 E30.
In scientific notation, this 362.37 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 362.37 x 10 to the 41st power electron volts (362.37 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish.

Please note that the return flight of the Columbia shuttle was not halted because of the false belief that the the foam shards could not cause a life threatening defect in the aerodynamic properties of the shuttle.
http://www.reuters.com/article/lates.../idUSN30568874

As a fictional work, the novel Anathem remarks on scientists tinkering with what they do not understand. To quote from the journal Nature, "Anathem is a shrewd exploration of what might happen if the fear of scientists meddling with things they were never meant to know becomes entirely justified." with space-time itself included in the list of potential problem areas.
(Jennifer Rahn, Imprisoned by intelligence, Neal Stephenson, Anathem, Opinion Nature, 456, 7221, 27 November 2008, 447-447)

It may be noted in this connection that the term Anathem refers to an ecumenical curse of severe proportions. This may be understood to mean that we are expected to take extreme exception with predjudice to the work of those who would destroy us and our children through this meddling.

Tycho Brahe's supernova, now identified as a Type Ia Supernova, shows those characteristics as predicted by the model expected in supernova from experimentation. A large Supernova has been generated leaving behind a type G star such as is found in our solar system. (Andrea Pastorello, Astrophysics, Echo from an ancient supernova, Nature 456, 7222, 4 December 2008, 587-589) The technique of light echoes was used for this identification of an historical object.

As noted in Chang, J.,et al., An excess of cosmic ray electrons at energies of 300-800 GeV (Nature, 456, 7220, 20 November 2008, pp. 362-365) could be tapping into "muti-dimensional spaces with potenially important implications for our understanding of the Universe." Similarly, we may postulate that Type Ia supernovae are expressing the energetics of an n-dimensional space
whose properties may be understood with further study.

Please note that while the Type II Supernovae have origin in 10 or more solar mass objects Type Ia Supernovae have origin in objects of some 1 solar mass.
It may be noted in this connection that the smaller massed Supernova give rise to deflagration of some 10 billion solar luminosities whilst the larger objects give rise to some 1 billion solar luminosity deflagration objects. This difference may lend support that the energetics of Type Ia Supernovae is created via an aperture formed towards de Sitter space. As also noted in this connection, there is no trace of hydrogen at maximum light for Type Ia Supernovae thus making it statistically unlikely that they have reached the Chandrssekhar limit by accretion from a nearby solar object.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/snovcn.html

The formation of Type 1a Supernovae is dependent on them reaching the Chandrasekhar limit of greater than 1.4 solar mass to implode into a Supernova according to current theory.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/snovcn.html

Yet there is evidence that the Type !a Supernova can form at one solar mass
or less thus contradicting current theory and thus supporting the alternate theory where Type Ia Suoernovae may be formed via the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space.
Probing Dark Energy with Supernovae
by Sebastian Ihle
9.6.2006

As noted in our sciforums discussion, there are a number of competing hypotheses. An empirical investigation is under way at CERN in the LHC.
Should we generate a Type Ia Supernova, this will confirm the existence of a
highly energetic topologically cobordant continuum termed de Sitter space.
So far, the astrophysical theoretical generalizations of the generalized theory of relativity have been confirmed at the 100% level. The world's largest experiment may yet create a tragic confirmatiion of Albert Einstein's theory.

Please recall that the energies now proposed for the LHC at CERN will be some 7 times greater that those employed at FERMILAB. As is well-known, the energies in use at FERMILAB approximate those predicted for those found at the point origin of the Universe. Thus even from a Common Sense perspective we may penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space
thus releasing the force of Type Ia Supernova on our planet with the increaased energies to be employed at the LHC. Please note:

Philosophy and Common Sense (Frances)

"Not every philosophy professor takes philosophy seriously in the sense
that she thinks that some purely philosophical theories that go against
common sense have a good chance to be true. These philosophers respect
anti-commonsensical theories, in that they admit such theories are very
important in the pursuit of philosophical understanding. But they also
think that there is no real chance that they are true. If you have a valid
argument based not on scientific but purely philosophical reasoning, and
that argument concludes with something against cross-cultural and timeless
common sense, then at least one of the premises isnt true, or so they say.
It might be tremendously difficult to identify the mistaken premise, but
we can start our investigation off assuming that our assumption that the
conclusion is false is safe. These philosophers take philosophising
seriously, of course, but they dont take seriously the idea that purely
philosophical (so not empirical, not mathematical) theories have a good
chance at overthrowing parts of common sense."

A videotaped presentation of this statement is under preparation. Link to this will be provided as soon as it is made ready. This should provide a more interesting source. We welcome any suggestions you may have in this connection for illustrative material. Please let us know what Malcolm Perry would indicate regarding the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space via highest-energy physics experimentation.

Highest energy physics is an empirical science as noted below. We may then discover through experimentation the answer to our theoretical questions
which are then derived from observation. Should the ongoing LHC at CERN produce the Higgs boson and field, this would then be a major victory for the Standatrard Model in Physics. Should we note the generation of a Type Ia Supernova, this will further confirm the current record of 100% successful predictions of the Generalized Theory of Relavity of Albert Einstein. These energies to be generated at CERN are those energy levels seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. Experimentally we note that these energies are deemed sufficient for the testing of these hypotheses.

Please access this webpage for a thorough update on the LHC at CERN.

http://www.lhcdefense.org/

Generation of Type Ia Supernova via a transition to de Sitter space may be added to this description as a consequence of highest energy physics experimentation.

There has been a brief hiatus introduced from now until April or thereabouts for the reactivation of the LHC at CERN. We should consider all possible alternatives before this gravely irresponsible experiment begins anew.

Please recall that the activation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is the onset of the largest highest-energy experiment so far extant on our planet.
The empirical observation of a Type Ia Supernova will serve as another confirmation of the Generalized Theory of Albert Einstein. This theory, as noted below, has had 100% verifcation in other astrophysical observations.
Let us not be so rash as to further test this theory and lose all that we hold most dear as a sacrifice to the ambitions of ruthless egoism and professional incompetence. We may discover the Higgs boson and field and yet create a perforation in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space and create a Supernova. The tentative date for the onset of the collisional actions at CERN is now around May 1, 2009.

From the LHC Machine Outreach

The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam.

The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed per example at the US accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is
288.89E30.
In scientific
notation, this 288.89 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With
a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the
energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 288.89 x 10 to the 41st
power
electron volts (288.89 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest
energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th
power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an
intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish as this undergoes a vast increment at CERN.

As one of the seven plaintiffs in the District Court in Hawaii, may I offer a formal complaint agasinst Director of CERN Robert Aymar and to John Ellis chief theoretican of CERN to appear in the International Court in the Hague to answer charges of gross negligence in the operation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As noted in this post, is the formal derivation of the generation of Type Ia Supernova from their experiment following the well-known work of Albert Einstein and his colleague Willem de Sitter in the generalized theory of relativity. The energies in nature do not approximate those found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the Big Bang at the pont origin of the Universe without forming a transition towards de Sitter space as noted per exemplar in Type II supernovae and in quasars. Their willingness to proceed with this experiment with full knowledge of this potentiallity consititutes a criminal act of public endangerment. May we request that the good people of Switzerland discontinue power service to CERN until this matter has reached full legal disposition in the International Court in the Hague.

May I add a personal note to this discussion. We should preserve the
future for all mankind. Children have the right to grow-up in a safe and
sheltered environment. We need to give our children the time to dream and
grow into all future time. We should visit other planets, other stars, other
galaxies to see and understand all things. Let us call for patience in
this research endeavor until we are certain of the potential dangers that
may lurk for the unsuspecting researcher. One Supernova will terminate all
that we hold most dear.

Update on the research progress at CERN.

End of July: First particles may be injected, and the commissioning with
beams and collisions will start.
It is expected that it will take about 2 months to have first collisions
at 10 TeV. Please note that only one area remains at below collisional
energies.

We shall now observe at CERN the onset of collisional energies at far
greater impact than those observed at Fermilab.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...der-first-beam

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm

The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers
of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message
will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from
the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the
preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation
of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his
Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis
of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now
termed. A review of the cosmological perspective is provided in the generation of Type Ia Supernova:
http://professordixon.blogspot.com/


Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in
the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly.
May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of
last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well
as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects
are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely
certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert
Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of
Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter
L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be
sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of
nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool
down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis
of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation
will commence in June/July 2008. The 7 Tev phase of the research would
then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN as noted above.

Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)


It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy
of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential
existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived
by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de
Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron
volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de
Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon
the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of
de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3
, converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation.
This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the
sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this
order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in
the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an
immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a
public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor
R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms
smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of
universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter
space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De
Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming
an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this
formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach
in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus
releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere,
the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter
space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger
for their release.

With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.

This supports of the theoretcal position that sufficient energy will penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space thus releasing the force of an exploding Universe i.e., Supernova, on our planet. The works of Albert Einstein and Willem de Sitter as shown here have never been refuted.

From the viewpoint of classical physics, the penetration towards de Sitter space is prevented by a large though not infinite potential barrier as described by Malcolm Perry. As the energies in the collliders go from 10^-9 seconds to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the big bang at the point origin of the Universe, this penetrance becomes inevitable thus releasing the force of a Type Ia Supernova on our planet, solar system and host of nearby stars.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

SUPERNOVA FROM EXPERIMENTATION AT CERN AND FERMILAB

We note also: in the CERN news bulletin
"For the first time also, lead ions have arrived at the doorstep of the
LHC." ESSAY , The Collider, The Particle and a Theory about Fate
(The New York Times, Dennis Overbye) It may be anticipated that we can
reset the cosmic timetable for our planet and a host of nearby stars back to the
interstellar medium. High velocity lead ions should suffice to penetrate the
potential barrier towards de Sitter space. The great Swiss people may
find this an instructive lesson.

A notice from the LHC administration for your interest. Please take what what action you deem
necessary in this connection. All the children will thank you for your kind actions on their behalf.

"The Latest from the LHC: Towards the big chill
With 6 sectors out of 8 at nominal cryogenic temperature (1.9 K= about
-271 C), the commissioning at the LHC is progressing well. According to
the present schedule, the whole machine will be cold in about two weeks.

Final operations to fill the nitrogen tanks for cooling the last sector to
80K.
Only Sectors 3-4 and 6-7 are still in the cooling phase (currently between
60 and 20 K). As already mentioned in the previous update, as soon as a
sector reaches the nominal cryogenic temperature, teams can start powering
the magnets. At present, the current is flowing in the magnets of three
sectors, while the remaining three will be powered in the coming two
weeks."

It may be intuitively more comprehensible to perceive the influx of energy as an electrical discharge since it would be the penetration of a potential barrier towards de Sitter space which releases the force of a Type Ia Supernova.

As cited in the astrophysical literature, the energies resident in de Sitter space are vast enough to provide for the energies in a Type Ia Supernova.
Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)

It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy
of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential
existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived
by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de
Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron
volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de
Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon
the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of
de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3
, converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation.
This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the
sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this
order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in
the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an
immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a
public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor
R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms
smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of
universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter
space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De
Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming
an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this
formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach
in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus
releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere,
the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter
space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger
for their release.

With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.

Statistically speaking, Type Ia Supernovae are distinguished by having
much greater luminosity at point of maximum light and they are of around
1.40 solar masses or less and also show no presence of hydrogen at maximum
light as well. Should this be caused via a transition towards de Sitter
space then there should be no alteration of hydrogen towards calcium or
other elements in deflagration of Supernova Type Ia. Other types of
supernovae of I Types show presence of helium at time of maximum light.
Should there be exemplars of greater mass levels for Type Ia supernovae
this would again illustrate the artifical nature, e.g., high-energy
physics experimentation generation of a transition towards de Sitter
space. This indicates that CERN as an experimental configuration should generate a Type Ia Supernova thus supporting the work of Albert Einstein and the generalization of the Generalized Theory of Relativity
by Willem de Sitter.

http://www.google.com/search?pz=1&ne...tnmeta=searc
h%3Dsearch=Search+the+Web

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

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom..._atypical.html

Please note there is now a limited time frame to bring this supernova generation to the attention of the director of CERN
where the time of onset is now this November, 2009. May we offer our services to offer to present or debate the forthcoming destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host nearby stars via the generation of a Type Ia Supernova. Please contact at: dixon at hawaii.edu

http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

Where there is no evidence of either helium or hydrogen at maximum light for Type Ia supernova this would further support the hypothesis of a transition towards de Sitter space. This is evidence of a statistical nature.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1996PASJ...48...51S
Title: Type-Ia Supernova SN 1995D in NGC 2962: Optical V, R, and I Band
Photometry and Spectra, Sadakane, K., Yokoo, T., Arimoto, J.-I., Matsumoto, K., Honda, S., Tanabe, K., ,
Journal: Publ. of the Astronomical Society of Japan, v.48, p.51-57.
Bibliographic Code: 1996PASJ...48...51S

It may be noted in this connection that there is no trace of hydrogen at maximum light for Supernovae Type Ia, which indicates that the companion star for this model is statistically unlikely since most stars are are of an hydrogen dominant order. This observation supports the the origin of these supernovae via a transtion towards de Sitter space or other highly energetic flux. Please note:

The Golden Standard Type Ia Supernova 2005cf: Observations from the
Ultraviolet to the Near-Infrared Wavebands
Wang, X.; Li, W.; Filippenko, A. V.; Foley, R. J.; Kirshner, R. P.;
Modjaz, M.; Bloom, J.; Brown, P. J.; Carter, D.; Friedman, A. S.; Gal-Yam,
A.; Ganeshalingam, M.; Hicken, M.; Krisciunas, K.; Milne, P.; Silverman,
J. M.; Suntzeff, N. B.; Wood-Vasey, W. M.; Cenko, S. B.; Challis, P.; Fox,
D. B.; Kirkman, D.; Li, J. Z.; Li, T. P.; Malkan, M. A.; Moore, M. R.;
Reitzel, D. B.; Rich, R. M.; Serduke, F. J. D.; Shang, R. C.; Steele, T.
N.; Swift, B. J.; Tao, C.; Wong, D. S.; Zhang, S. N.

For the generation of Type Ia supernova thermonuclear explosion explanations have been proposed, none of them have withstood modern testing.
http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com...hermonuclear.h
tml
Thus the formation of a transnsition towards de Sitter space may be considereed as a viable alternative
explanatory framework. Before we take the imprudent action of testing additional energies at CERN or yet again at the Fermi Nationional Acclerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, more theoretical research should be employed to verify the safety of this research in highest-energy physics or all is lost.

An educational presentation may be provided also:
https://laulima.hawaii.edu/access/co...1010/Education
Paul W. Dixon is responsible for this presentation, Copyright 2009 Paul W. Dixon.

Consider the parameters for universe formation as being similar
to that for Type Ia Supernova generation as being very small and
vastly energetic. This may be philosophically difficult to comprehend
yet essentially vital for survival!

The parameter space of inflationary cosmology is seen in the estimate of chaotic expansion theory of the universe beginning at ~10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang, point origin of the Universe with total duration of expansion of 10^-35 seconds or thereabouts. Here the region of expansion no bigger than 10^-33 cm yielding with simultaneous inflations to reach the observable size of our Universe at l<~10^28 cm .. (Andrei Linde, Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology, La Tex Harwood, Chur, Switzerland, 1990, p39) Andrei Linde is the leading authority in this important work at the Department of Physics at Stanford University.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0503/0503203v1.pdf

Should we consider the hypothesis of the uniformity of nature as predictive of the abundance of living forms with some of them attaining the capacity to
transfer themselves to our location in the universe, what can account for their absence? We may note in this connection that there is only a short delay before a transition towards de Sitter space at CERN, Fermilab or other high-energy physics experimentation has generated a Type Ia Supernova as demonstrated in this thread. The frequency of Type Ia Supernova in the observable universe would then signal the termination of these technically advanced civilizations. A technical experimental mischance may then occur before the members of the respective civilizations are philosophically ready to accept this possibllity.

The approach of the transition towards de Sitter space at Fermilab
with the ongoing increase in luminoisty is seen:
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/now/tevlum.html
with these energies are now equivalent to those found at the point
origin of the universe. i..e. "The Big Bang."

We need to consider the increased evidence of water on Mars and the possibilty of water
on other planetary bodies as the source of life as well as intelligent life thus supporting the hypothesis
that other creatures much like ourselves can be a source of Type Ia Supernovae.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7919113.stm

It is generally agreed that the the Large Hadron Collider will provide an
empirical test for the formation of transition towards de Sitter space.
The collisional energetcis are much greater that those tested in the
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia Illinois.

"The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is being built in a circular tunnel 27 km
in circumference. The tunnel is buried around 50 to 175 m. underground. It
straddles the Swiss and French borders on the outskirts of Geneva.

The first beams were circulated successfully on 10th September 2008.
...fortunately on 19th September a serious fault developed damaging a
number of superconducting magnets. The repair will require a long
technical intervention which overlaps with the planned winter shutdown.
The LHC beam will, therefore, not see beam again before September 2009.

The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam."

The competing hypothesis which is considered even more objectionable than the transition towards de Sitter space is given in the False Vacuum solution to the Einstein de Sitter equations. Yet as can be seen in this formulation high-energy physics experimentation may serve as a trigger for this most untoward event.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_vacuum

Please note in this regard that the transition towards de Sitter space is well-known in the cosmological literature. http://www.springerlink.com/content/p8377167602421t1/

An affidavit regarding the contingency of a Type Ia Supernova has been submitted as part of the legal action to bring a moratorium against such an experimental mischance.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/cou...case_id-78717/
Many thanks for the happy birthday wishes!!!

With the additional energies available at the LHC in CERN, it may also be possible to test the competing hypothesis of forming a transition to the lower condition in the Einstein de Sitter Universe. Following the formation of this transition, our Universe would drain off into the lower energy condition. This should be of a lesser probabilty of occurence yet it is still considered as a possible outcome to this research.

Please note: http://professordixon.blogspot.com

The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed at the accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is 362.37 E30.
In scientific notation, this 362.37 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 362.37 x 10 to the 41st power electron volts (362.37 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish.

Please note that the return flight of the Columbia shuttle was not halted because of the false belief that the the foam shards could not cause a life threatening defect in the aerodynamic properties of the shuttle.
http://www.reuters.com/article/lates.../idUSN30568874

As a fictional work, the novel Anathem remarks on scientists tinkering with what they do not understand. To quote from the journal Nature, "Anathem is a shrewd exploration of what might happen if the fear of scientists meddling with things they were never meant to know becomes entirely justified." with space-time itself included in the list of potential problem areas.
(Jennifer Rahn, Imprisoned by intelligence, Neal Stephenson, Anathem, Opinion Nature, 456, 7221, 27 November 2008, 447-447)

It may be noted in this connection that the term Anathem refers to an ecumenical curse of severe proportions. This may be understood to mean that we are expected to take extreme exception with predjudice to the work of those who would destroy us and our children through this meddling.

Tycho Brahe's supernova, now identified as a Type Ia Supernova, shows those characteristics as predicted by the model expected in supernova from experimentation. A large Supernova has been generated leaving behind a type G star such as is found in our solar system. (Andrea Pastorello, Astrophysics, Echo from an ancient supernova, Nature 456, 7222, 4 December 2008, 587-589) The technique of light echoes was used for this identification of an historical object.

As noted in Chang, J.,et al., An excess of cosmic ray electrons at energies of 300-800 GeV (Nature, 456, 7220, 20 November 2008, pp. 362-365) could be tapping into "muti-dimensional spaces with potenially important implications for our understanding of the Universe." Similarly, we may postulate that Type Ia supernovae are expressing the energetics of an n-dimensional space
whose properties may be understood with further study.

Please note that while the Type II Supernovae have origin in 10 or more solar mass objects Type Ia Supernovae have origin in objects of some 1 solar mass.
It may be noted in this connection that the smaller massed Supernova give rise to deflagration of some 10 billion solar luminosities whilst the larger objects give rise to some 1 billion solar luminosity deflagration objects. This difference may lend support that the energetics of Type Ia Supernovae is created via an aperture formed towards de Sitter space. As also noted in this connection, there is no trace of hydrogen at maximum light for Type Ia Supernovae thus making it statistically unlikely that they have reached the Chandrssekhar limit by accretion from a nearby solar object.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/snovcn.html

The formation of Type 1a Supernovae is dependent on them reaching the Chandrasekhar limit of greater than 1.4 solar mass to implode into a Supernova according to current theory.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/snovcn.html

Yet there is evidence that the Type !a Supernova can form at one solar mass
or less thus contradicting current theory and thus supporting the alternate theory where Type Ia Suoernovae may be formed via the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space.
Probing Dark Energy with Supernovae
by Sebastian Ihle
9.6.2006

As noted in our sciforums discussion, there are a number of competing hypotheses. An empirical investigation is under way at CERN in the LHC.
Should we generate a Type Ia Supernova, this will confirm the existence of a
highly energetic topologically cobordant continuum termed de Sitter space.
So far, the astrophysical theoretical generalizations of the generalized theory of relativity have been confirmed at the 100% level. The world's largest experiment may yet create a tragic confirmatiion of Albert Einstein's theory.

Please recall that the energies now proposed for the LHC at CERN will be some 7 times greater that those employed at FERMILAB. As is well-known, the energies in use at FERMILAB approximate those predicted for those found at the point origin of the Universe. Thus even from a Common Sense perspective we may penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space
thus releasing the force of Type Ia Supernova on our planet with the increaased energies to be employed at the LHC. Please note:

Philosophy and Common Sense (Frances)

"Not every philosophy professor takes philosophy seriously in the sense
that she thinks that some purely philosophical theories that go against
common sense have a good chance to be true. These philosophers respect
anti-commonsensical theories, in that they admit such theories are very
important in the pursuit of philosophical understanding. But they also
think that there is no real chance that they are true. If you have a valid
argument based not on scientific but purely philosophical reasoning, and
that argument concludes with something against cross-cultural and timeless
common sense, then at least one of the premises isnt true, or so they say.
It might be tremendously difficult to identify the mistaken premise, but
we can start our investigation off assuming that our assumption that the
conclusion is false is safe. These philosophers take philosophising
seriously, of course, but they dont take seriously the idea that purely
philosophical (so not empirical, not mathematical) theories have a good
chance at overthrowing parts of common sense."

A videotaped presentation of this statement is under preparation. Link to this will be provided as soon as it is made ready. This should provide a more interesting source. We welcome any suggestions you may have in this connection for illustrative material. Please let us know what Malcolm Perry would indicate regarding the formation of a transition towards de Sitter space via highest-energy physics experimentation.

Highest energy physics is an empirical science as noted below. We may then discover through experimentation the answer to our theoretical questions
which are then derived from observation. Should the ongoing LHC at CERN produce the Higgs boson and field, this would then be a major victory for the Standatrard Model in Physics. Should we note the generation of a Type Ia Supernova, this will further confirm the current record of 100% successful predictions of the Generalized Theory of Relavity of Albert Einstein. These energies to be generated at CERN are those energy levels seen some 10^-9 - 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the point origin of the Universe. Experimentally we note that these energies are deemed sufficient for the testing of these hypotheses.

Please access this webpage for a thorough update on the LHC at CERN.

http://www.lhcdefense.org/

Generation of Type Ia Supernova via a transition to de Sitter space may be added to this description as a consequence of highest energy physics experimentation.

There has been a brief hiatus introduced from now until April or thereabouts for the reactivation of the LHC at CERN. We should consider all possible alternatives before this gravely irresponsible experiment begins anew.

Please recall that the activation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN is the onset of the largest highest-energy experiment so far extant on our planet.
The empirical observation of a Type Ia Supernova will serve as another confirmation of the Generalized Theory of Albert Einstein. This theory, as noted below, has had 100% verifcation in other astrophysical observations.
Let us not be so rash as to further test this theory and lose all that we hold most dear as a sacrifice to the ambitions of ruthless egoism and professional incompetence. We may discover the Higgs boson and field and yet create a perforation in the potential barrier towards de Sitter space and create a Supernova. The tentative date for the onset of the collisional actions at CERN is now around May 1, 2009.

From the LHC Machine Outreach

The LHC is designed to collide two counter rotating beams of protons or
heavy ions. Proton-proton collisions are foreseen at an energy of 7 TeV
per beam.

The WORLD RECORD luminosity now employed per example at the US accelerator (Please note:
Accelerator Division Notification on the Fermilab Home Page) is
288.89E30.
In scientific
notation, this 288.89 x 10 to the 30th power particle interactions. With
a beam energy of 10 to the 11th power electron volts, we have then the
energy of the current work at Fermilab set a 288.89 x 10 to the 41st
power
electron volts (288.89 E 41 eV). This is much greater than the largest
energies seen on earth via cosmic ray interactions at 10 to the 19th
power eV (E 19 eV). Without publicity regarding this most critical danger,
a breach in the potential barrier may occur at any moment thus releasing
the force of a supernova on our planet and solar system. We will thus have an
intrusional event from de Sitter space in the Einstein de Sitter Universe
as it is now termed. Your kind and generous action on behalf of all
mankind is greatly needed at this critical juncture or all is lost and we
shall all perish as this undergoes a vast increment at CERN.

As one of the seven plaintiffs in the District Court in Hawaii, may I offer a formal complaint agasinst Director of CERN Robert Aymar and to John Ellis chief theoretican of CERN to appear in the International Court in the Hague to answer charges of gross negligence in the operation of the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. As noted in this post, is the formal derivation of the generation of Type Ia Supernova from their experiment following the well-known work of Albert Einstein and his colleague Willem de Sitter in the generalized theory of relativity. The energies in nature do not approximate those found some 10^-9 to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the Big Bang at the pont origin of the Universe without forming a transition towards de Sitter space as noted per exemplar in Type II supernovae and in quasars. Their willingness to proceed with this experiment with full knowledge of this potentiallity consititutes a criminal act of public endangerment. May we request that the good people of Switzerland discontinue power service to CERN until this matter has reached full legal disposition in the International Court in the Hague.

May I add a personal note to this discussion. We should preserve the
future for all mankind. Children have the right to grow-up in a safe and
sheltered environment. We need to give our children the time to dream and
grow into all future time. We should visit other planets, other stars, other
galaxies to see and understand all things. Let us call for patience in
this research endeavor until we are certain of the potential dangers that
may lurk for the unsuspecting researcher. One Supernova will terminate all
that we hold most dear.

Update on the research progress at CERN.

End of July: First particles may be injected, and the commissioning with
beams and collisions will start.
It is expected that it will take about 2 months to have first collisions
at 10 TeV. Please note that only one area remains at below collisional
energies.

We shall now observe at CERN the onset of collisional energies at far
greater impact than those observed at Fermilab.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...der-first-beam

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7512586.stm

The Director General of CERN Robert Aymar as well as the safety officers
of CERN have received the appended posting. We may hope that this message
will alert them to the forthcoming generation of a Type Ia Supernova from
the experimental highest-energy physics at CERN. So far, as the
preparation for the LHC experiment continues, there has been no refutation
of the theoretical work of Albert Einstein and the extension of his
Generalized Theory of Relativity by Willem de Sitter. This forms the basis
of our understanding of the Einstein de Sitter Universe as it is now
termed. A review of the cosmological perspective is provided in the generation of Type Ia Supernova:
http://professordixon.blogspot.com/


Please note: Cool down at CERN is near completion as all segments are in
the blue condition. Collisional energetics should now be observed shortly.
May God have mercy on the souls of all our children.
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/

As we are in engaged in an eschatological discourse, the "philosophy of
last things," we need to distinguish between black hole generation as well
as strangelets and Type Ia Supernova. Their generation and their effects
are uncertain whilst Type Ia Supernova Generation is almost completely
certain as are as any of the effects under the auspices of Albert
Einstein's generalized theory of relativity. Please note: Dragging of
Inertial Frames (Ignazio Ciufloni (2007) Nature 7158, 449, 41-53) Walter
L. Wagner and I have discusssed this. Type Ia Supernova generation will be
sudden and the destruction of our planet, our solar system and a host of
nearby stars will follow. Should the CERN LHC (Large Hadron Collider) cool
down schedule proceed as now planned, an empirical test of the hypothesis
of Type Ia Supernova generation via highest energy physics experimentation
will commence in June/July 2008. The 7 Tev phase of the research would
then begin at this time. Please note: http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/
cooldown progress in preparation of the empirical test of this hypotheisis
at the LHC in CERN as noted above.

Please review, "Quantum tunnelling towards an exploding Universe?"
by Malcolm J. Perry (1986) (Nature Vol. 320, 24 April, p. 679)


It may be helpful to clarify the philosophical position and astrophysical
energetics instrinsic to de Sitter space in the standard cosmological
model in this postulation of transition from de Sitter space as generative
of supernova in high-energy physics experimentation.

A philosophical position may be cited from, G. W. F. Hegel (The philosophy
of history, New York: Dover, 249, 1956) ..." there is no essential
existence which does not manifest itself." The very large energies derived
by Willem de Sitter for the equations describing the false vacuum of de
Sitter space yield an energy density of 1.69 x 10^126 for eV (electron
volts) per cm^3. (Gott, R. (1982) Creation of open universes from de
Sitter space, Nature, 295, 304-307. In Waldrop. M.M., (1982) Bubbles upon
the river of time, Science, 215, 4536, 1082-1083), the energy density of
de Sitter space is given as: 5 x 10^31 kelvin and 3 x 10^93 grams per cm^3
, converted to eV via e=mc^2 which is Albert Einstein's famous equation.
This energy would then find expression in the observable universe. In the
sense of this analysis, it would be quite unlikely that energies of this
order of magnitude would remain hidden should a transition be formed in
the potential barrier towards de Sitter space. This would serve as an
immediate and ever present danger for the investigator and constitutes a
public endangerment as well.

This is based on the mainstream theory of universe formation by Professor
R. Gott of Princeton University in which each bubble universe forms
smoothly out of de Sitter space. A potentially infinite number of
universes may form in de Sitter space. In a topological sense, de Sitter
space is cobordant at each point with the continuum (our universe). De
Sitter space is then prevented by a large potential barrier from forming
an intrusional event into the continuum. The essential hypothesis of this
formulation is that with sufficiently great energetics, a classical breach
in the potential barrier towards de Siitter space will be formed thus
releasing the force of Type Ia supernova upon the terrestrial ecosphere,
the solar system and those nearby stars. These energies are from de Sitter
space, therefore; the energies of the accelerator only serve as a trigger
for their release.

With sufficient energies, under this postulation, we discover that the
accelerator is in the Einstein de Sitter universe, as it is now termed,
and we have gone from particle physics as our governing theory to
relativistic cosmology.

This supports of the theoretcal position that sufficient energy will penetrate the potential barrier towards de Sitter space thus releasing the force of an exploding Universe i.e., Supernova, on our planet. The works of Albert Einstein and Willem de Sitter as shown here have never been refuted.

From the viewpoint of classical physics, the penetration towards de Sitter space is prevented by a large though not infinite potential barrier as described by Malcolm Perry. As the energies in the collliders go from 10^-9 seconds to 10^-14 seconds subsequent to the big bang at the point origin of the Universe, this penetrance becomes inevitable thus releasing the force of a Type Ia Supernova on our planet, solar system and host of nearby stars.

All the children will thank you for your kind efforts on their behalf.

Yours sincerely,

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation

 

Paul W. Dixon, Ph.D.
Supernova from Experimentation
Has anyone noticed that his post has the same feel as a Nigerian Scam letter, has he ask anyone for money?