QuoteOriginally posted by: Traden4AlphaQuoteOriginally posted by: AlanMore related to TJ's post:The Safety of the LHC So, is this what the argument boils down to: (0) we can stop worrying about charged microscopic holes because the earth is still here after millions of 14 TEV+ cosmic rays (I do buy this one). (i) this leaves only uncharged microscopic holes to even worry about (ok)(ii) but, we can dismiss those because we have never seen a neutron star eaten by such a hole, (are we sure?)(iii) yet, we would have seen that, (given their cosmic ray cross-section?). (well ...)ok, who is completely reassured by this???The part that bothers me is the velocity differences between cosmic ray events versus LHC events -- that is, asymmetric collisions versus symmetric collisions. Are we so sure that microscopic blackholes evaporate as quickly as expected? Are we so sure that we understand how other interactions (quintessence, dark matter, dark energy, etc.) might interact with an in-Earth, slow-moving microscopic blackhole?The core of the safety statement is that LHC events == cosmic ray events, but they don't seem as equivalent as one might like.Have you ever studied physics?