LHC


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

LHC

Postby rasb » Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:33 am

to JRM & other science folks...
Do we really have to wait a decade to assess all the data from this week's Big Bang?
C'mon JRM, what is the inside word? I watched a program on this earlier this week, and it was absolutely riveting.
rasb
 
Posts: 2008
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:48 pm
Location: South of the 49th

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:36 pm

The "Big Bang" which occurred last week (collisions of lead ions, instead of protons) isn't anything more or less energetic than what's been happening since March (which, by the way, is far from 'Big Bang' energies). Just good PR on the part of that particular experiment.

Also, a note about the way colliders work: there is never just *one* collision. There are millions. And as such, there are Terabytes and Terabytes (nay, Petabytes) of data that need to be analyzed before any definitive conclusion can be reached about what happened.

The reason is that collisions can produce different results with different probabilities, and so you need an exceptionally large number to confirm the actual behavior of the particles during the process. This in turn helps you confirm or refute any of a slew of theoretical models. When you see something completely unexpected and unpredicted, that's interesting -- but you need to see it enough times to know that it's more than just a spurious data point from e.g. a faulty detector component.

So, will it take 10 years? Probably not that long. 3-5? Sure. Some inside info: strange things may have been observed at the LHC already (e.g. the universe looking like it's 2-dimensional in some collisions -- but again, not enough data to conclusively say anything).
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby kuha » Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:45 pm

JRM wrote:Some inside info: strange things may have been observed at the LHC already (e.g. the universe looking like it's 2-dimensional in some collisions -- but again, not enough data to conclusively say anything).


:!:

Fascinating...I'm just flattened by that idea...
kuha
 
Posts: 9011
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: LHC

Postby rasb » Fri Nov 12, 2010 4:22 pm

Thanks for your feedback, JRM - always appreciated.
So why is CERN making such a big deal of the use of Lead Ions instead of Protons, if they are not anticipating at least the possibility of some new data? I know they are called Heavy Ions, and I think I heard that the temperatures created when these Lead Ions collide was expected to be of a different magnitude than the Proton collisions. Is that correct, and isn't that significant? 6 syllable words or less, please ;)
rasb
 
Posts: 2008
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:48 pm
Location: South of the 49th

Re: LHC

Postby bambam » Fri Nov 12, 2010 4:41 pm

JRM - any sign of the Higgs boson yet?
bambam
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:28 pm

rasb wrote:So why is CERN making such a big deal of the use of Lead Ions instead of Protons, if they are not anticipating at least the possibility of some new data? I know they are called Heavy Ions, and I think I heard that the temperatures created when these Lead Ions collide was expected to be of a different magnitude than the Proton collisions. Is that correct, and isn't that significant?


"Yes, with a but". The lead ions contain more protons (and neutrons) than the single-particle beams, so it has more combined energy. But, the energy per proton is less than for the single collisions. The purpose of the collisions is also different. The proton-proton experiments are designed to study fundamental physics (Higgs, black holes, supersymmetry, etc...), while the lead ones create a "quark-gluon plasma" (basically they melt the lead ions). This replicates the conditions in the very early universe, hence why it's fashionable to call it a "big bang."

But the big results will come from the bare-bones proton-proton smashes.

6 syllable words or less, please ;)


Tried my best!...

bambam wrote:JRM - any sign of the Higgs boson yet?


The most compelling evidence so far has been the observation of two Z particles being created in various collisions, i.e.

<BOOM> --> ????? --> Z + Z + other particles

This is encouraging because the Z is the heaviest particle we've detected so far, and two of them have to come from the decay of something heavier. That could likely be the Higgs -- but, as I mentioned, it could be from numerous other theoretical possibilities. More data is needed.
Last edited by JRM on Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:34 pm

Some fun "pictures" of the lead-ion collisions, showing exactly what happens when they collide:

http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1305398
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:38 pm

From ABC News... Reader beware: I should stress the "proof" is "possible" only because it hasn't been seen yet. This means the size of the extra dimensions hasn't been probed by the current energies (7 TeV). When the LHC cranks it up to 14 TeV, it will potentially be able to "see" them. But, that assumes they're there in the first place.

==========================================================
Proof of Extra Dimensions Possible Next Year: CERN

By Robert Evans
November 15, 2010

GENEVA (Reuters) - Scientists at the CERN research center say their "Big Bang" project is going beyond all expectations and the first proof of the existence of dimensions beyond the known four could emerge next year.

In surveys of results of nearly 8 months of experiments in their Large Hadron Collider (LHC), they also say they may be able to determine by the end of 2011 whether the mystery Higgs particle, or boson, exists.

Guido Tonelli, spokesman for one of the CERN specialist teams monitoring operations in the vast, subterranean LHC, said probing for extra dimensions -- besides length, breadth, height and time -- would become easier as the energy of the proton collisions in it is increased in 2011.

Complete story: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wirest ... 908&page=1
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby rasb » Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:48 pm

Wow ! Or maybe Wow ! This is so-o-o-o-o interesting to me. The boundaries of what we think we know could be in the process of being expanded here. I wonder what my High School Physics/Math teacher is thinking (in Heaven).
rasb
 
Posts: 2008
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:48 pm
Location: South of the 49th

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:23 am

rasb wrote:Wow ! Or maybe Wow ! This is so-o-o-o-o interesting to me. The boundaries of what we think we know could be in the process of being expanded here. I wonder what my High School Physics/Math teacher is thinking (in Heaven).


Finding proof of extra dimensions would probably be the most profound discovery ever in Physics... if not Society... It would completely revolutionize the way we think about the Universe we live it. I'm all for this possibility.

But again, the article has to be taken with a grain of salt. It's not like we've actually seen hints that extra dimensions are there, and by turning up the LHC energy they'll become complete obvious. On the contrary, we've seen nothing to suggest they exist. When the LHC is going full tilt, we may begin to see evidence, but we're just as likely not to see anything.

Nonetheless, this is an exciting time for my discipline!
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby tandfman » Tue Jul 03, 2012 11:29 am

bambam wrote:JRM - any sign of the Higgs boson yet?

There seem to be lots of signs lately.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/ ... sfeed=true


Better yet, Andy Borowitz has interviewed the particle itself!

http://www.borowitzreport.com/2012/07/0 ... -particle/
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Tue Jul 03, 2012 12:47 pm

tandfman wrote:
bambam wrote:JRM - any sign of the Higgs boson yet?

There seem to be lots of signs lately.


The LHC experiments have been cautiously teasing us for about 6 months now, but the strong speculation is that in a press conference tomorrow, they will announce observation of a "Higgs-like" particle with strong confidence (in fact, Peter Higgs and several others responsible for proposing the mechanism will be present).

Now, a little caveat and background about what it means to "observe" a particle. If the Higgs is created in these high-energy collisions, it will be unstable and live for less time than the difference between Tarmoh and Felix. It can decay into less energetic particles in a number of ways, and it's those decay particles we observe in the detector (not Higgs itself). One can calculate all the possible decay modes, and the most likely result is a Higgs becoming two photons (called a "diphoton event").

Statistically, we want to be sure that what we're seeing isn't just some fluke. Long story short: there have been an excessive number of diphoton events at 125 GeV, which falls in the theoretical Higgs mass range (125 GeV is roughly the mass of 130 protons).

To be SURE it can't be a fluke, we examine the statistical likelihood that it is the event in question by filtering out background events. This is measured in terms of standard deviations (sigmas) from the background. Usually, 3 sigmas is more than enough to make a convincing claim, which means you are 99.7% "confident" the event is a Higgs decay (or, there is less than a 0.3% chance it could be something else).

But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In this case, we wait until we have a 5-sigma confidence level -- that is, it's 99.99994% likely the event is a Higgs decay. The rumors suggest that anywhere between a 4.5- to 5-sigma announcement will be made.
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Tue Jul 03, 2012 12:53 pm

One extra caution: as mentioned, the announcement will likely confirm observation of a new "Higgs-like" particle, because of the limited number of events signaling it. To see whether or not it IS the Higgs, a longer-term analysis of many more collisions is going to be needed. If it is what we think it is, we know exactly how it should decay under certain conditions, and those will be revealed in post-analysis of the data.

There are also several different Higgs particles, by the way. Depending on which theory you choose to accept, one Higgs will have slightly different properties than an other. So, the battle over which Higgs has been seen (if indeed it is the Higgs) will rage for some time, unless excessively obviously in the data.

That being said: this will be the first fundamental particle discovered since 1995 (top quark), and if all goes well marks the final confirmation of the Standard Model of Particle Physics.
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:36 pm

Announcement is slated for 3:00am EDT, July 4th. CERN will hold a live webcast:

http://webcast.web.cern.ch/webcast/
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby Pego » Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:15 am

Pego
 
Posts: 10196
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: LHC

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Jul 06, 2012 4:48 pm

I happen to be reading the book by Frank Close "The Infinity Puzzle" which, among other things develops a detailed history of the development of the theories of the Electro-Weak and the Strong forces. One blog I was reading was that the Nobel committee should be reading this book when deciding how to solve the problem of six main candidates [one, Brout, died last year] for a maximum of three slots (Nobel Prize constraint).

I recommend the book to those interested in this stuff, and even to JRM [vastly more informed than me].
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Fri Jul 06, 2012 8:20 pm

26mi235 wrote:One blog I was reading was that the Nobel committee should be reading this book when deciding how to solve the problem of six main candidates [one, Brout, died last year] for a maximum of three slots (Nobel Prize constraint).


There are rumors in the community that the Nobel committee is considering awarding the prize to the collaboration involved (i.e. CMS and ATLAS), instead of an individual. Also, there is discussion of having both a theory Nobel and an experimental Nobel award. The former wouldn't solve the issue of who proposed the mechanism first, however, since there are still too many.

In any event, there will no doubt be excitement as issues continue to unfold amidst news of the discovery.
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby tandfman » Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:43 am

tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LHC

Postby gh » Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:22 pm

So after the Higgs boson was discovered, the guys went out for a huge victory celebration. One of them went on a several-day bender, woke up in a gutter realized it was Sunday and he needed to go to church. So he staggered up the street, reeking to high heaven, half his clothes missing. When he got to the church the priest said "I'm afraid you'll have to leave."

"You can't do that," said the physicist.

"Why not?" responded the priest.

"Because you can't have mass with out me"


rim shot.
gh
 
Posts: 46294
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Tue Aug 14, 2012 2:38 pm

Q&A about the Higgs particle!

http://www.lmu.edu/lmunews/higgs.htm

(including an homage to gh's joke above).
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby rsb2 » Tue Aug 14, 2012 3:04 pm

A complete article without an "eh"? Is this a JRM imposter?
rsb2
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 5:21 pm

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Tue Aug 14, 2012 3:06 pm

rsb2 wrote:A complete article without an "eh"? Is this a JRM imposter?


It was edited for an American audience!

On edit: eh?
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:02 pm

So I now know what Jonas looks like. I am an amateur at this stuff, but JRM's commentary is one of the best briefs that I have read.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LHC

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Sep 27, 2012 8:53 pm

OK, the summer with its trip to the Toronto center is done. What are your insights on all of this stuff? Stuff includes: 1) Higgs-like particles,vs Higgs; 2) Nobel (too soon given ! especially because of the (quasi) limit of 3 individuals and the 'like' aspect; 3) what did you get to in your stay on the perimeter :) ?


BTW, what are YOU reading, especially on the technical end?
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: LHC

Postby mcgato » Fri Sep 28, 2012 9:01 am

My recent alumni magazine had an article on one of the spokesmen for the Higgs boson project, who got his PhD from U of Chicago, where I got my undergrad degree. It turns out my one year stint as a physics lab tech was spent helping out on his project that would make up his PhD. I haven't been following the Higgs boson project too closely though.
mcgato
 
Posts: 1605
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Hoboken

Re: LHC

Postby lonewolf » Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:47 am

This is all waaaaayyy over my head. Contemplating the dimensions of space and the smallest particles gives me a sort of heeby-jeebys but let me muster my composure and ask a couple of serious (to me) questions.

Looking way back in the thread, how can something like the universe be "2 dimensional"?

If the universe consists of gazillions of three dimensional objects scattered zillions of miles/light years apart to, so far, infinity, how can it be said to have any "dimension"?

If the Higgs-boson thing has never been identified/discovered, how can something be Higgs-like if you do not have the real thing to compare it to?

I am not trolling or mocking. These are just nagging questions that popped into my head.
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8811
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:10 pm

lonewolf wrote:Looking way back in the thread, how can something like the universe be "2 dimensional"?


On large distance scales (large with respect to an atom, say), the universe is 3D -- out to the farthest our telescopes can see. But you go to scales smaller than an atom, smaller than an electron, or smaller than the smallest particle we know of, it might not be 3D.

Imagine space as a kind of "scaffolding". A good analogy would be wool. To us, wool is 3D: it's fluffy and obviously has length, height, and depth. But in reality, it's made up of woven "sheets" of fabric. To small bugs that walk on those sheets, wool seems to be "2D". And moreover, those woven sheets are made up of tiny strands of wool. Tiny mites that walk on the strands see wool as a 1D string.

If the universe consists of gazillions of three dimensional objects scattered zillions of miles/light years apart to, so far, infinity, how can it be said to have any "dimension"?


'Dimension' refers to directions that are perpendicular to each other (x, y, and z). Since the universe obviously has a volume, it must be 3D.

One of the quirkiest ideas is that, at the scale size of the universe itself (called the Hubble length), there are theories that suggest a *new* spatial dimension could be appearing. Hence, the universe is actually 4D at the biggest scales!

If the Higgs-boson thing has never been identified/discovered, how can something be Higgs-like if you do not have the real thing to compare it to?


The Higgs has been theorized to exist for almost 50 years now, so we have detailed descriptions of the Higgs would look like if it was discovered. The problem is that we have TOO MANY Higgs bosons to pick from. Depending on the input parameters to the model, the particle will behave differently and have slightly different characteristics. The task now is to figure out exactly which Higgs was discovered.
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby Daisy » Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:20 pm

Genetics seems so simple in comparison to that. :shock:
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: LHC

Postby lonewolf » Fri Sep 28, 2012 8:24 pm

Thank you, JRM, good try.

I visualize dimensions, as you say, in as set of perpendicular distances of x, y and z. I can see that a surface is two dimensional in that it has only breadth and length.

On reflection, it would seem that this xyz definition would only apply to a cube, or a rectangular structure or pyramid with uniform opposing sides, whereas a sphere would only have one dimension (the diameter) and a dodecahedron would have twelve (?) dimensions.
Or, would it be 12 x 12= 144 dimensions?

On the scale of the universe scaffold, where I don't think there are neatly arranged perpendicular distances, it would seem there are not four but an infinite number of dimensions. Or, if the limits of the universe deliniate a sphere, only one dimension. Or, if the universe is an oblate collection of whirling stuff, two dimensions.

I will now go and cogitate your answers for another 80 years. :?

I hope it doesn't intrude on my thoughts when I am sitting at the take off board. :)
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8811
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Fri Sep 28, 2012 9:15 pm

lonewolf wrote:On reflection, it would seem that this xyz definition would only apply to a cube, or a rectangular structure or pyramid with uniform opposing sides, whereas a sphere would only have one dimension (the diameter) and a dodecahedron would have twelve (?) dimensions.
Or, would it be 12 x 12= 144 dimensions?


These are all still 3-D objects, in the sense that they exist in a 3D world. You're confusing 'dimension' with 'parameter'. Yes, a sphere is *defined* by only one number, namely its diameter. But this doesn't mean it exists in only one dimension. In fact, using the 'perpendicular direction' definition, a sphere meets the criteria. The Earth is a good example. It has three distinct directions: East/West, North/South, and Up/Down (into/out of the ground). A basic line, on the other hand, *is* one dimensional, because it only has length (and nothing else).

I hope you're not too distracted at the long jump pit -- which, by the way, is a two-dimensional event (height and length!). ;-)
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby tandfman » Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:39 am

JRM wrote:I hope you're not too distracted at the long jump pit -- which, by the way, is a two-dimensional event (height and length!). ;-)

The pit is two-dimensional, but the judge at the landing area must ascertain where the jumper has broken into the third dimension--the depth. :D
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: LHC

Postby lonewolf » Sat Sep 29, 2012 8:49 pm

I think I will go back to pondering something simple..like the Mars photos. :)
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8811
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: LHC

Postby dukehjsteve » Sun Sep 30, 2012 3:01 am

3 "big picture ??'s from me:

1. We say the universe began with a "big bang". How do we know there have not been an infinite # of big bangs previously, with another infinity of them to come in the future, before and after the birth and demise of our current deal ?

2. What is currently the farthest object ( star/galaxy ) that we have seen telescopically ?

3. We speak of the "expanding" universe." If this is so, and the other sides, how do we know there are not an infinite # of additional universes ?

My head is spinning now, I'll stop.
dukehjsteve
 
Posts: 6054
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Fishers, IN

Re: LHC

Postby lonewolf » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:40 am

dukehjsteve, that is exactly the sort of calvacade of "what ifs" that roil my brain when I get to thinking about this universe stuff..

Going small, I similarly do not understand the objective of smashing atoms or molecules into smaller pieces but obviously there are those who do and I say, "power to 'em."
Let me know what you find out :)

I am content to know we do not know the answers, will never know the answers, it would not change the course of eternal events if we did and there is nothing we can do about it anyway.
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8811
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: LHC

Postby Marlow » Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:16 am

dukehjsteve wrote:1. We say the universe began with a "big bang". How do we know there have not been an infinite # of big bangs previously, with another infinity of them to come in the future, before and after the birth and demise of our current deal ?

Coincidently, I just gave my classes my "Annual Multiverse Lecture". to wit:

There are am infinity of universes in the multiverse, and they are all in some stage of their infinitely repeating expansion or contraction. Each time they blink out of existence, they take their space-time with them, so nothing remains, not even space or time. That's why there can be no 'travel' between universes, there is no time or space 'between' them. These cycles also therefore don't even occur in time or space, since that's a construct of each individual universe. The origin of each big bang is a flaw in the nothingness, because, after all, nothing (as opposed to Nothing) is perfect. The flaw is the singularity that holds all matter, time and space of the nascent universe. The singularity is, of course, unstable, because it's an imperfection in the nothingness, so it must explode, creating that universe. Eventually, all energy of the explosion dissipates and it implodes back into itself, taking its time and space and matter with it. Being timeless and infinite in its 'structure', the multiverse is beyond all science and reason, which is why it hurts our brains to try and think about it. We can't - any more than an amoeba can 'think' about us or its own existence.

The purpose of the lecture (which I give with a deadpan expression of 'fact', as if I were explaining a grammar rule) is, of course, to blow their minds and any preconceived notions that they might have had about 'understanding' anything at all. :wink:
Marlow
 
Posts: 21076
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: LHC

Postby lonewolf » Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:46 pm

And you get away with that?? :)
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8811
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: LHC

Postby Daisy » Sun Sep 30, 2012 4:25 pm

lonewolf wrote:And you get away with that?? :)

Wouldn't you like to hear the kids in the halls after his class? :)
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: LHC

Postby Marlow » Sun Sep 30, 2012 4:46 pm

Daisy wrote:
lonewolf wrote:And you get away with that?? :)

Wouldn't you like to hear the kids in the halls after his class? :)

a. is it not intuitively obvious that I can't possibly KNOW any of that?
b. when I see their parents after that, they inevitably say it was the dinner conversation for several days and they (the parents) think it's wonderful that someone is finally challenging them in that sort of way.
c. no student ends up believing me, lock-stock-and-barrel, but the inevitable outcome is that that start thinking about these sorts of things, instead of just locksteppingly accepting everything they had been taught heretofore.
d. we finally come to the conclusion that my story is as feasible as any other. :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21076
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: LHC

Postby JRM » Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:13 pm

Marlow wrote:d. we finally come to the conclusion that my story is as feasible as any other. :D


Well, some may believe that... ;)
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: LHC

Postby lonewolf » Sun Sep 30, 2012 8:47 pm

I suppose anything someone doesn't understand is feasible. :)
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8811
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests