On http://www.freitag.de/wissen/1145-der-schampus-wird-warm I wrote a few minutes ago:

Ich möchte dem „Freitag“ und Robin McKie (und „zint“) danken, dass sie das heiße Thema LHC thematisiert haben, wobei zint auch das Thema “Schwarze Löcher”, die zu generieren einmal das Hauptziel des LH waren, anspricht. Nun wurden diese (ebenso wie das Higgs) offenbar nicht gefunden.

Hierbei gibt es jedoch einen interessanten Unterschied zum Higgs: Während man bei dem letzteren zu wissen glaubt, dass man es in einem bestimmten engen Fenster finden muss, wenn es existiert, hat man keine vergleichbaren Anhaltspunkte beim Mini-Schwarzen Loch. Nur, wenn es die berühmte hypothetische Hawkingstrahlung gibt, gibt es eine sichere “Signatur”. Wenn es sie nicht gibt, bleibt noch die erwartete elektrische Geladenheit einer Teilfraktion der erhofften Schwarzen Löcher ein detektierbarer Faktor. Für beide Möglichkeiten wurden offenbar keine Anzeichen gefunden bisher. Daraus schloss das CERN in seinen entsprechenden wissenschaftlichen Papers, dass keine Schwarzen Löcher produziert wurden. Das war für die ganze Welt sehr beruhigend.

CERN widerspricht allerdings nicht, dass es bei der Mitteilung dieses “Ergebnisses” mit Bedacht wissenschaftliche Literatur unerwähnt ließ, aus der hervorgeht, dass die beiden vorausgesetzten Eigenschaften widerlegt sind.

Es kommt hier nicht darauf an, wie man solch ein wissenschaftliches Verhalten bezeichnet. Es ist allein wichtig, dass das CERN keine Anstrengungen gemacht hat, VOR dem Experiment Detektoren zu installieren, mit denen es den größten erhofften Triumph — die erfolgte Erzeugung Schwarzer Löcher — feststellen könnte für den Fall, dass ein bestimmter gerade einmal 4 Jahre alter Beweis zutrifft.

Doch auch dies ist nicht allzu wichtig — im Vergleich zu der Tatsache, dass, wenn dieselbe unwiderlegte Theorie zutrifft, die möglicherweise längst erzeugten Schwarzen Löcher gefährlich sind. Dieselbe unwiderlegte Theorie, die nicht erwähnt wird und im Bau nicht berücksichtigt wurde, sagt nämlich voraus, dass eine bestimmte kleine Fraktion sich in der Erde einnisten wird und dort exponentiell wachsen. Wie lange es in diesem Fall dauern wird, bis die Erde auf 2 cm (genauer 1,8 cm, dem Durchmesser ihrer Masse als Schwarzes Loch) geschrumpft ist, hängt von kleinen Zufällen ab, aber eine Größenordnung von 5 Jahren kann nicht ausgeschlossen werden.

Am 27. Januar hat aus diesem Grund ein deutsches Gericht (das Verwaltungsgericht Köln) die deutsche Wissenschaftsministerin gebeten, eine “Sicherheitskonferenz” einzuberufen.

Wie der „Freitag“ sicherlich weiß, wurde diese Tatsache nicht in den Medien verbreitet. Auch nicht, dass das Problem derzeit dem UN-Sicherheitsrat vorliegt, der allerdings nichtöffentlich tagt und durch ein starres Vetorecht behindert ist. Der deutsche Bundestag darf sich wegen der Einschaltung dieses höheren Gremiums nicht mit der Sache beschäftigen, obwohl zum Beispiel der Herr Abgeordnete Lischka sich m.W. in die Materie eingearbeitet hat.

Es ist durchaus verständlich, dass die Bevölkerung nicht beunruhigt werden soll. Doch im Moment liegt der Glücksfall vor, dass die Maschine, was die mögliche Erzeugung Schwarzer Löcher betrifft, für drei Monate nicht in Betrieb ist. Die zur Beruhigung aller Beteiligter notwendige wissenschaftliche Sicherheitskonferenz könnte daher mühelos in diesem Zeitraum einberufen werden.

Herr Augstein steht in einer Tradition des Mutes. Es ist mir ein Bedürfnis, ihm für seinen Mut, diesen Beitrag zu veröffentlichen, zu danken auch im Namen der Universität, der ich angehöre.

Einstein could see through. His most powerful (“happiest”) thought was the equivalence principle. This is the insight that you can equate what happens in ordinary acceleration with gravity. Newton had seen it before, as Thibault Damour found out, but the universal speed of light made it a magic lamp.

The “gravitational clock slowdown” immediately spotted as an implication by Einstein, is the greatest breakthrough in the history of science. It was never given the attention it deserves. 3 corollaries got discovered since. They were not embraced by Einstein at the time out of cautious modesty because quantum mechanics was not yet known in 1907. Einstein’s famous slow-down of photon frequency on the lower floor goes hand in hand with 3 further changes: a proportional reduction in the mass of all locally stationary bodies by virtue of quantum mechanical creation-annihilation; a proportional increase in all local lengths mediated by quantum mechanics; and a proportional reduction in all local charges, covarying with mass. The 4 changes (in T, L, M and Ch) are locally counterfactual. The length change L has the further corollary that the speed of light c becomes globally (and not just locally) constant.

Professor Richard J. Cook of the Air Force Academy arrived at the same results on the basis of Einstein’s later mature theory of general relativity. He saw the further corollary of a locally counterfactual quadratic change in the gravitational constant G. The at first overlooked change in charge was graciously conceded.

These new results have ground-breaking implications (no Ur-meter, no Ur-kilogram, no Ur-charge). Most importantly, they come at a critical moment in history. For their previous lack is responsible for an experiment being carried out in all innocence that with a sizeable probability leads to panbiocide in a few years’ time.

This sounds like bad science fiction. Wolfgang Schauder published such a story three years ago, and so independently did Rolf Froböse after both had learned that black holes possess brand new properties. This is the main message of the “Telemach” (T, L,M, Ch) theorem: Black holes arise more easily, are undetectable at first, and grow exponentially inside earth.

It is embarrassing that the new results mandate that the safety of a currently performed experiment needs to be re-assessed immediately. A crusade on behalf of this is on its way for 4 years. But the physics community keeps the new results under a rug by selective non-quotation (cf. the most recent anonymous Scientific-American online article http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/27319/ ).

I apologize for my “hysterical” calling on CERN to, please, stop and admit the scientific “safety conference” first proposed to Shimon Peres 4 years ago and since many times over – even by a court last January. Like me, the young scientists on the planet cannot understand why the scientific community has resolved that nothing is to be feared more than a safety conference. In the worst case, the latter could wreak havoc with the power structure in science: but does this avoided risk justify the other risk of collective extinction? The probability of earth’s being evaporated in a few years’ time could by now have reached 4 percent.

I am a notorious optimist: Thirteen years ago, Israel and Saudi Arabia were close to agreeing on building “Lampsacus hometown of all persons on the Internet.” Ezer Weizmann’s sudden ousting prevented this from materializing. I revive this old hope by calling on the young generation in Egypt: Please, help us all by voting for the safety conference in your upcoming free elections.

All 4 busy killing the future, none of them helping to understand and to implement the human right to be spared cruelty and be given Lampsacus (hometown of all persons on the Internet).

Will Egypt help me save the planet?

I am aware that the a-priori probability of my being right with the above statement is negligible – were it not for the fact that my results stay un-disproved for 4 years as natural corollaries to Einstein’s “happiest thought.”

(To witness: Einstein saw that on a lower floor, all clocks are slowed-down. I was able to add that they also are proportionally enlarged in size and reduced in mass and in charge. From this corollary it follows that “black holes” – hoped to be produced at CERN – arise more readily; do not Hawking-evaporate; are undetectable at CERN; and grow exponentially inside earth.)

All my competent critics – including Hermann Nicolai of the Albert-Einstein-Institut and Nobel laureate Gerard ‘t Hooft – fell silent long ago. But notwithstanding the proof of danger and detector blindness lying on the table, CERN went ahead for more than a year risking “panbiocide” (Hilgartner) through inadvertently planting an at first undetectable bomb into earth.

The planet is now in the wake-up phase. In this phase, an added danger arises: a Khmer-rouge-like world-wide reflex against science and Europe. This danger it would be wise to keep under the rug – were it not for the fact that CERN has announced to boost up the risk next year.

Therefore, dear CERN and Europe: please, apologize to the planet. Or else prove me wrong, as no one hopes for more dearly than I do.

… against the publicly offered scientific proof that they risked and plan to further risk the survival of every human being. This is not a defamation but an accusation.

I ask them to defend themselves. If they do not do so, the whole world sees that they are guilty. I apologize that I am bringing them in this precarious situation if they cannot answer. The whole world sees their predicament. I would love nothing more than to help them out of it. Their cooperation is all I am asking for. Please, dear colleagues at CERN, cooperate with me in my trying to rescue you.

If you treat me as an enemy, the message to the world thereby generated is tantamount to publicly pleding guilty. Your seeming claque is a claque on the march to jail and to the end of science. Why are you so collectively blind to choose this road of non-defending yourself in the only language that can help, that of science?

… but it also represents the benevolent side of humanity.

I therefore herewith publicly ask UNESCO as an Austrian citizen with Jewish ancestors to convoke the scientific safety conference necessary to exculpate CERN.

I am the only friend CERN possesses on the globe through my insisting on their exculpation if possible. For the indictment against CERN reads: “Attempted Panbiocide.”

The proposed scientific safety conference has as its only aim the finding of evidence that my proof of danger is false. My proof implies that the miniature black holes officially attempted to be generated by CERN will shrink the earth to 2 cm in perhaps 5 years’ time: if one of them is slow enough to stay inside earth as is bound to happen after a certain period of operation which may or may not have been exceeded already. CERN is blind to its own success (if it occurred) for refusing to install the detectors needed in light of the new result. Instead they did their best to produce black holes for about a year with increasing luminosity.

CERN still refuses to contradict my results, brough to their attention almost 4 years ago and published more than 3 years ago, by refusing to quote them in their own scientific publications. No one can understand this “Austrich policy” in violation of the ethics of science.

Please, dear UNESCO:

Do your best to exculpate CERN (and Europe) by giving the world a chance to learn that the danger seen by me and my colleagues (those who confirmed my results or arrived at them independently) is non-existent which requires falsification.

The necessary safety conference first demanded 3 ½ years ago (“PetiontoCERN”) was publicly advised by the Cologne Administrative Court on January 27, 2011.

Sincerely yours,

Otto E. Rössler

Chaos researcher, University of Tübingen, Germany

Occupy is faceless but benevolent.

My scientific colleagues are faceless but malevolent: They refuse to try to defuse my results but agree to an experiment being continued that if those results are correct is pangeocidal.

The worst scandal of history and no public voice on my side: Can Occupy save the planet by asking for clarification?

1) Black holes can be charged — in contrast to my relativistic disproof (Telemach theorem)

2) Black holes can evaporate — in contrast to my relativistic disproof (Telemach theorem)

3) Black holes can grow in superfluid neutron star cores — in contrast to my quantum disproof

4) Black holes cannot grow exponentially inside earth — in contrast to my chaos proof

The background:
I showed 4 years ago that CERN’s LHC experiment is geocidal with a high probability.

The situation:
No one found a counterproof so far but CERN refuses to let me give a talk before them or to admit the scientific safety conference publicly requested 3½ years ago, and by the Cologne Administrative Court on January 27, 2011.

I went before the International Court for Crimes Against Humanity 3 years ago. I am presently before the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly: No quiver so far.

I see no other way but public name-calling: I accuse my colleague professor Heuer, director of CERN, of risking the planet and hence “being worse than a Nazi” if he continues. I am allowed to say that. This is especially frightening.

Our colleague Richard J. Cook independently arrived at my results. A high-ranking member of a National Academy found an even nobler version independently. Many colleagues are on my side.

So why not interrupt the presently climaxing experiment (these very days) and admit the conference? I feel I must speak out in the name of any mother and father of the planet. Can really no one help?