Hasanuddin’s Dominium Model
Written by WTJ on April 26, 2008 – 10:52 am -I received this mail from Hasanuddin:
Dear Nerdy Science Guys
I enjoyed your spin on science. Perhaps you’d be interested in one of the
biggest spins on science in a long time.I am the author of new theory that has been hotly debated on my Scientific
American blog http://science-community.sciam.com/forum.jspa?forumID=300005039
To date, none of those who have commented have found a single flaw with it.
To the contrary, three of the past detractors ultimately supplied three new
lines of supporting evidence that were not used in the original book.During phase 1 of this campaign, I invitied hundreds of scientists within
the field to the blog. I wanted fault found with the new model ASAP, because
of its ominous implications. If the LHC project at CERN does “succeed”
in creating man’s first mini black-hole, then it will be stable – leading
to possible obliteration of all that we know. Because no fault has been
llocated, I then approached the media. Nothing. Not even the fact that a
separate group of concerned scientists filed a lawsuit in Hawaii to halt the
LHC project, has had any affect.This is why I’m contacting you. Your blog is read by people I have not
been able to reach. Please consider running this story as a blog topic. Any
aspect, I don’t care. Dialogue is dialogue; only through open debate can
the new model begin to affect change. If the implications of the model are
correct, there isn’t much time. LHC is scheduled to start on its maiden
run in the middle of June, this year.To view the new model for yourself you can freely download it at
http://www.sendspace.com/pro/dl/u56srb or you can purchase the book, The
Dominium, at most any online bookstore.Thank you for your help in these matters,
Hasanuddin
I am still reading the book. The aim of the book is to make people protest to the launching of Large Hadron Collider (LHC) as it might create micro black hole and suck everything on earth into it.
[pic]
Related posts:
Tags: Dominium Model, Hasanuddin, Large Hadron Collider, LHC | 1 Comment »
April 26th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
I agree with Hasanuddin about the stability of black holes, that is supportable by science, Hawking radiation is not. The odd are not …*10-9, that is pure bull. The odds of danger are greater than 50%.
CERNs web site states that we have not been destroyed by effects of cosmic rays and micro black holes will evaporate.
However, cosmic rays strike relatively stationary objects and results travel too fast to be captured by Earths gravity, while colliders smash particles head on, may focus all energy to a single point and can be captured by Earths gravity. Einsteins relativity theory predicts that micro black holes will not decay but instead only grow, and Hawking Radiation contradicts relativity, is unproven and is credibly disputed by at least 3 peer reviewed studies.
The LHC Safety Assessment Group has been trying for months to prove safety without success. However science may still be a few years away from being able to prove safety or not.
Professor Dr. Otto E. Roessler, Theorist Dr. Raj Baldev and others are warning of a very real, very possible, very present danger to the planet from the Large Hadron Collider.
If this experiment is so safe, why arent CERN scientists allowed to express any personal fears they might have about this Collider?
Alleged in the legal action: Chief Scientific Officer, Mr. Engelen passed an internal memorandum to workers at CERN, asking them, regardless of personal opinion, to affirm in all interviews that there were no risks involved in the experiments, changing the previous assertion of minimal risk. (Statisticians generally consider minimal risk as 1-10%).
Previous safety studies ruled out any possibility of creating microblackholes in a collider. But predictions have changed and CERN has estimated the possibility of creating 1 microblackhole per second in the Large Hadron Collider. No peer reviewed safety study has ever been produced that I am aware of that speaks to the safety of creating microblackholes on Earth.
If we delay for a safety study, some scientists at CERN may not be the first to discover some new science, and some Nobel prizes may be at stake.
But which would more wise, conduct a full and independent adversarial peer reviewed safety study first, or just turn it on now and discover science as quickly as humanly possible?
JTankers
LHCConcerns.com