Well before they detonated the first atomic bomb they didn't know whether it was going to do what it ended up doing or starting a chain reaction in the atmosphere and destroy the whole planet. The LHC is less dangerous then the first usage of the atomic bomb.
Sent me an email if you want me to mail you some pizza rolls.
It is somewhat amazing that people believe this about the LHC. No, it can not destroy the earth, it can not even destroy the surroundings were it is built. Yes, a lot of power is built in to the particles that collide, but not THAT much. There is a very well established law of physics called "the principle of conservation of energy". Wich essentially means you can not get energy out of nothing. This means that whatever explosion that can happen can not contain more energy then what was used to accelerate the particles. Even the unlikely "black hole" scenario, wich is indeed possible is harmless. Because the size of the so called singularity would be so small that it would evaporate within nanoseconds, this according to the Hawking law. Just to be even more clear, particles hit the earth with a LOT more energy in them then what the LHC can even dream of achieving. The so called "oh my god" particle, for wich they have built one of he largest detectors in the world in Malarque in Argentina contains about 100 MILLION times the energy that the LHC can stuff inte a particle. That energy is the equivalent of a tennis serve going 150 km/h, contained in ONE proton. Now this is a rare particle, but thousands upon thousands hit the earth each year. I have been planning to visit the LHC for the startup, and if work permits I am going to, now if they can only hold the schedule.. I am fairly well read on this stuff, I dedicate a good deal of my spare time to the subjects they are researching at the LHC. Now I am no scientist, but I am going to "risk" my life going there if I am able, the scientists working there, who are indeed scientists and well aware of what can and can not go wrong is going to be there. Hope this eased some peoples mind..
You research this well. But you dont understand too much physics
At the speed of light, a particle with non zero rest mass, will gain massive KE (Kinetic energy) and make its mass infinite.
With such mass, the gravitation is so large it could create a black hole that would wipe out the known universe.
But, the LHC doesn't accelerate particles fast enough for this to occur, it only goes 99.89% something the speed of light. Although it is still theoretically possible it could create a semi black whole that doesn't evaporate. This is if they inject atoms and not photons into the accelerator.
And yes you can get energy out of "nothing" First you have to define nothing. Empty space isnt actually empty, in a vacuum empty space is booming with vibrating quarks. And theres no such thing as a perfect vacuum. We could get massive amounts of energy even in the air we breathe. E=mc2, we can get huge amounts of energy out of small amounts of mass. But our technology isnt there yet.
Anyways, I can hope that perhaps with the LHC we will make advances toward harvesting energy from the air we breathe or from some other source derived from the experiments performed.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Best case scenario it opens an inter-dimensional rift/wormhole that fills this planet with millions of hot alien chicks that want nothing more than to experience as much sex with human men(and women) as they possibly can. Worse case scenario it opens an inter-dimensional rift/wormhole that fills this planet with millions of hot demon chicks that want nothing more than to experience as much sex with human men(and women) as they possibly can
Best case scenario it opens an inter-dimensional rift/wormhole that fills this planet with millions of hot alien chicks that want nothing more than to experience as much sex with human men(and women) as they possibly can. Worse case scenario it opens an inter-dimensional rift/wormhole that fills this planet with millions of hot demon chicks that want nothing more than to experience as much sex with human men(and women) as they possibly can Do the scenarios in-between really matter?
Or the most likely scenario is that they turn it on and it does nothing. Then they realize they spent boatloads of time and money building one big colossal failure.
Pfft, clearly they should have built this device on one of Mars' moons. It's far enough away to avoid lawsuits preventing its operation, but close enough to supply and develop in the near future with space travel technology. I'm sure some kind of aerospace corporation would jump at the chance to develop it. From there, just station the facility with plenty of scientists, and marines for security. You wouldn't even need any officers, just have some sergeant manage the security. Then all we need is to activate the thing, create a tear in space-time, and make sure to send plenty of volunteers through to see what's on the other side.
You research this well. But you dont understand too much physics At the speed of light, a particle with non zero rest mass, will gain massive KE (Kinetic energy) and make its mass infinite. With such mass, the gravitation is so large it could create a black hole that would wipe out the known universe. But, the LHC doesn't accelerate particles fast enough for this to occur, it only goes 99.89% something the speed of light. Although it is still theoretically possible it could create a semi black whole that doesn't evaporate. This is if they inject atoms and not photons into the accelerator. And yes you can get energy out of "nothing" First you have to define nothing. Empty space isnt actually empty, in a vacuum empty space is booming with vibrating quarks. And theres no such thing as a perfect vacuum. We could get massive amounts of energy even in the air we breathe. E=mc2, we can get huge amounts of energy out of small amounts of mass. But our technology isnt there yet.
Trust me, I know my physics.
First of all, there are black holes, massive ones at that at the center of nearly every galaxy, containing upwards to 4 BILLION solar masses.
Ours has around 3-4million solar masses, the milky way that is.
There are no such thing as a semi black hole, it either traps light or it does not, thats a black and white answer as it where.
They do not inject photons in any way, photons is a mass less particle that can ONLY travel at the speed of light you do not need a particle accelerator for that, you need a light bulb.
At the speed of ligth a zero mass particle still has zero mass, the equation is exponential you see, starting from zero it can not go above zero.
They inject protons, wich they accelerate as much as they can and the energy they put in as it sppeds up increases it mass but the mass can not increase more then the energy the put in, ever.
And yes our technology is there, E=mc^2 has been done to much really, it is an atom bomb, a nuclear reactor ( fission ), or late experimental fusion reactors.
Fusion is hydrogen conversion into helium, hydrogen is in our air so yes, the technology is there, it is just not profitable at this point.
And no, you can not get energy out of nothing.
Perhaps you meant vibrating strings?
Strings is what they are trying to find with with LHC, or rather traces of them as the LHC does not have enough energy to cut that deep.
Their main objective is the Biggs particle, wich they think account for gravity.
Quarks can not exist alone for more then an fraction of a second as they are partly charged point particles.
In essense they need to be combined until they make a "full" charge.
Not be rude mate but I find it ironic you start this post with questioning my knowledge and go on with a haphazard, and erronous combination of facts that none of them makes sense.
I do suggest you go read up a bit on the subject, you seem to at least have an interest in it wich is good and I do suspect you will look back on this post with a smile on your face.
Oh, you had one thing rigth, at the speed of light any particle with mass will indeed gain infite mass.
This is why we can never achieve that speed.
The LHC certainly can not, nor can anything else as again physics kicks in and due to the preservation of energy law infinite mass requires infinite energy.
Of wich there is a limited amount.
The amount of combined energy in the universe that is, and even using that we could not accelerate anything with mass to the speed of light.
I appreciate the effort though, do not hesitate to ask away.
/edit
I said fusion is the "fusing" of hudrogen into helium, wich is true but it is not the only way of fusion, you can fuse all they way up to iron, just wanted to make that clear.
Why only up to iron?
No time to explain that now, but I will if anyone want the answer, later.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it was impossible for a mass of any size to go as fast or faster than the speed of light becasue the mass would require infinite power to move it since the mass would be infinite in mass. OK my brain is now oozing out of my left ear....it is all so confusing.
Best case scenario it opens an inter-dimensional rift/wormhole that fills this planet with millions of hot alien chicks that want nothing more than to experience as much sex with human men(and women) as they possibly can. Worse case scenario it opens an inter-dimensional rift/wormhole that fills this planet with millions of hot demon chicks that want nothing more than to experience as much sex with human men(and women) as they possibly can Do the scenarios in-between really matter?
I Support the LHC!!
Playing: EVE Online Favorite MMOs: WoW, SWG Pre-cu, Lineage 2, UO, EQ, EVE online Looking forward to: Archeage, Kingdom Under Fire 2 KUF2's Official Website - http://www.kufii.com/ENG/ -
Umbrood, I'm actually quite curious, but why can you only fuse up to iron?
As for the LHC, if it destroys everything, I don't think anyone would really mind afterwards.
Actually, I was a bit missleading, you CAN fuse past iron obviously as there are heavier elements in the universe.
Its just that fusing iron takes more energy to be put in then you get out ( preservation law again, hehe ), so it is not a sustainable process.
Our sun for example fuses hydrogen into helium, but for a star the size of the sun it stops there, at least for now.
Bigger stars can fuse helium into carbon and so and so forth, up to iron but that is the end of the line as far a star made matter is concerned.
All elements heavier then iron is created in a somewhat special manner, supernovas.
Wich occur when the star has converted a specific amount of matter into iron, the fusion process dies of the pressure within the star can not hold up its outher layers and it all come crashing in and boom.
For type 1 supernovas this occurs when the core mass is 1.4 sun masses, fairly exactly.
Wich is why these are the types used to measure distances with great accuracy as you have a known variable.
Type 2 supernovas are the really big ones, wich are a bit more erratic but usually go boom when the core reaches 2.5+ sun masses.
In essence, and here is the kicker, all but the hydrogen and some of the helium atoms in your body is either created within the bowels of stars, or created when the really massive stars go boom.
All hydrogen atoms in your body, or anywere really was created in the big bang.
We are all partly stardust, literally.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sounds like the Y2K thing from 8 or 9 years ago. A whole lot of worry over nothing. As I recall the end of the world was suppose to happen then as well. :::::Checking around:::::: Nope. Still here.
Originally posted by sanicek They should have said it will bring free internet and holographic porn to everyone, I bet the population would be teeming with expectance.
it is going to bring high volume internet (porn) to everyone
We're letting the LHC run the same reason we let Fermilab run. Creating a black hole that would swallow the planet seems a bit too far fetched don't you?
THE LHC would allow us to see Higgs Boson, which from my understanding would prove the theory of the Boson field, and would help us to make advances in Quantum Physics should we be able to prove its existance.
Im no expert on the idea, I just have a few friends who were talking about it a while ago.
On a side note, current physics says nothing dangerous will happend. If we are wrong about certain theories, the other likely result (but phyisics right now says it shouldnt be able to generate enough energy (or some similar unit) to for this to happen) is a tiny black hole.
Should this happen, we could A, be sucked in. Or B, its a tiny black hole, so the theoretical idea of Hawkings radiation would "fill in" the black hole almost instantly, because it would be so small.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
You research this well. But you dont understand too much physics At the speed of light, a particle with non zero rest mass, will gain massive KE (Kinetic energy) and make its mass infinite. With such mass, the gravitation is so large it could create a black hole that would wipe out the known universe. But, the LHC doesn't accelerate particles fast enough for this to occur, it only goes 99.89% something the speed of light. Although it is still theoretically possible it could create a semi black whole that doesn't evaporate. This is if they inject atoms and not photons into the accelerator. And yes you can get energy out of "nothing" First you have to define nothing. Empty space isnt actually empty, in a vacuum empty space is booming with vibrating quarks. And theres no such thing as a perfect vacuum. We could get massive amounts of energy even in the air we breathe. E=mc2, we can get huge amounts of energy out of small amounts of mass. But our technology isnt there yet.
Trust me, I know my physics.
First of all, there are black holes, massive ones at that at the center of nearly every galaxy, containing upwards to 4 BILLION solar masses.
Ours has around 3-4million solar masses, the milky way that is.
There are no such thing as a semi black hole, it either traps light or it does not, thats a black and white answer as it where.
They do not inject photons in any way, photons is a mass less particle that can ONLY travel at the speed of light you do not need a particle accelerator for that, you need a light bulb.
At the speed of ligth a zero mass particle still has zero mass, the equation is exponential you see, starting from zero it can not go above zero.
They inject protons, wich they accelerate as much as they can and the energy they put in as it sppeds up increases it mass but the mass can not increase more then the energy the put in, ever.
And yes our technology is there, E=mc^2 has been done to much really, it is an atom bomb, a nuclear reactor ( fission ), or late experimental fusion reactors.
Fusion is hydrogen conversion into helium, hydrogen is in our air so yes, the technology is there, it is just not profitable at this point.
And no, you can not get energy out of nothing.
Perhaps you meant vibrating strings?
Strings is what they are trying to find with with LHC, or rather traces of them as the LHC does not have enough energy to cut that deep.
Their main objective is the Biggs particle, wich they think account for gravity.
Quarks can not exist alone for more then an fraction of a second as they are partly charged point particles.
In essense they need to be combined until they make a "full" charge.
Not be rude mate but I find it ironic you start this post with questioning my knowledge and go on with a haphazard, and erronous combination of facts that none of them makes sense.
I do suggest you go read up a bit on the subject, you seem to at least have an interest in it wich is good and I do suspect you will look back on this post with a smile on your face.
Oh, you had one thing rigth, at the speed of light any particle with mass will indeed gain infite mass.
This is why we can never achieve that speed.
The LHC certainly can not, nor can anything else as again physics kicks in and due to the preservation of energy law infinite mass requires infinite energy.
Of wich there is a limited amount.
The amount of combined energy in the universe that is, and even using that we could not accelerate anything with mass to the speed of light.
I appreciate the effort though, do not hesitate to ask away.
/edit
I said fusion is the "fusing" of hudrogen into helium, wich is true but it is not the only way of fusion, you can fuse all they way up to iron, just wanted to make that clear.
Why only up to iron?
No time to explain that now, but I will if anyone want the answer, later.
They dont put energy into the LHC. The LHC uses superconducting magnets to accelerate particles. The faster the speed, the more energetic and massive.
Im really not sure what you mean by "we cant get energy out of nothing" The term nothing hints on a perfect vacuum, (no pressure, all particles sucked out) which is impossible.
LIke i said, e=mc2 the mass lost by a atom during fusion, or fission, is transformed into the massive amounts kinetic energy. So it is theoretically possible to gain energy out of what most people call "nothing"
If we had the technology to convert mass fully into energy, you could drive your car until for all its useful life with one drop of gasoline. No our technology isnt there yet.
And you can only fuse up to a certain point because the energy required to fuse larger nucleus would require the energy from a dying star or black hole.
i dont disagree with you on any point. But you never know when it comes to "theoretical" physics
Comments
well Im just going to have to create a conspiracy group against the LHC now wont I?
(being sarcastic in case someone thinks im serious
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
Well before they detonated the first atomic bomb they didn't know whether it was going to do what it ended up doing or starting a chain reaction in the atmosphere and destroy the whole planet. The LHC is less dangerous then the first usage of the atomic bomb.
Sent me an email if you want me to mail you some pizza rolls.
You research this well. But you dont understand too much physics
At the speed of light, a particle with non zero rest mass, will gain massive KE (Kinetic energy) and make its mass infinite.
With such mass, the gravitation is so large it could create a black hole that would wipe out the known universe.
But, the LHC doesn't accelerate particles fast enough for this to occur, it only goes 99.89% something the speed of light. Although it is still theoretically possible it could create a semi black whole that doesn't evaporate. This is if they inject atoms and not photons into the accelerator.
And yes you can get energy out of "nothing" First you have to define nothing. Empty space isnt actually empty, in a vacuum empty space is booming with vibrating quarks. And theres no such thing as a perfect vacuum. We could get massive amounts of energy even in the air we breathe. E=mc2, we can get huge amounts of energy out of small amounts of mass. But our technology isnt there yet.
"so I says Supercollider? I don't even know her!"
Anyways, I can hope that perhaps with the LHC we will make advances toward harvesting energy from the air we breathe or from some other source derived from the experiments performed.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
Best case scenario it opens an inter-dimensional rift/wormhole that fills this planet with millions of hot alien chicks that want nothing more than to experience as much sex with human men(and women) as they possibly can. Worse case scenario it opens an inter-dimensional rift/wormhole that fills this planet with millions of hot demon chicks that want nothing more than to experience as much sex with human men(and women) as they possibly can
Do the scenarios in-between really matter?
Or the most likely scenario is that they turn it on and it does nothing. Then they realize they spent boatloads of time and money building one big colossal failure.
So then they start over again......
Pfft, clearly they should have built this device on one of Mars' moons. It's far enough away to avoid lawsuits preventing its operation, but close enough to supply and develop in the near future with space travel technology. I'm sure some kind of aerospace corporation would jump at the chance to develop it. From there, just station the facility with plenty of scientists, and marines for security. You wouldn't even need any officers, just have some sergeant manage the security. Then all we need is to activate the thing, create a tear in space-time, and make sure to send plenty of volunteers through to see what's on the other side.
Trust me, I know my physics.
First of all, there are black holes, massive ones at that at the center of nearly every galaxy, containing upwards to 4 BILLION solar masses.
Ours has around 3-4million solar masses, the milky way that is.
There are no such thing as a semi black hole, it either traps light or it does not, thats a black and white answer as it where.
They do not inject photons in any way, photons is a mass less particle that can ONLY travel at the speed of light you do not need a particle accelerator for that, you need a light bulb.
At the speed of ligth a zero mass particle still has zero mass, the equation is exponential you see, starting from zero it can not go above zero.
They inject protons, wich they accelerate as much as they can and the energy they put in as it sppeds up increases it mass but the mass can not increase more then the energy the put in, ever.
And yes our technology is there, E=mc^2 has been done to much really, it is an atom bomb, a nuclear reactor ( fission ), or late experimental fusion reactors.
Fusion is hydrogen conversion into helium, hydrogen is in our air so yes, the technology is there, it is just not profitable at this point.
And no, you can not get energy out of nothing.
Perhaps you meant vibrating strings?
Strings is what they are trying to find with with LHC, or rather traces of them as the LHC does not have enough energy to cut that deep.
Their main objective is the Biggs particle, wich they think account for gravity.
Quarks can not exist alone for more then an fraction of a second as they are partly charged point particles.
In essense they need to be combined until they make a "full" charge.
Not be rude mate but I find it ironic you start this post with questioning my knowledge and go on with a haphazard, and erronous combination of facts that none of them makes sense.
I do suggest you go read up a bit on the subject, you seem to at least have an interest in it wich is good and I do suspect you will look back on this post with a smile on your face.
Oh, you had one thing rigth, at the speed of light any particle with mass will indeed gain infite mass.
This is why we can never achieve that speed.
The LHC certainly can not, nor can anything else as again physics kicks in and due to the preservation of energy law infinite mass requires infinite energy.
Of wich there is a limited amount.
The amount of combined energy in the universe that is, and even using that we could not accelerate anything with mass to the speed of light.
I appreciate the effort though, do not hesitate to ask away.
/edit
I said fusion is the "fusing" of hudrogen into helium, wich is true but it is not the only way of fusion, you can fuse all they way up to iron, just wanted to make that clear.
Why only up to iron?
No time to explain that now, but I will if anyone want the answer, later.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it was impossible for a mass of any size to go as fast or faster than the speed of light becasue the mass would require infinite power to move it since the mass would be infinite in mass. OK my brain is now oozing out of my left ear....it is all so confusing.
Umbrood, I'm actually quite curious, but why can you only fuse up to iron?
As for the LHC, if it destroys everything, I don't think anyone would really mind afterwards.
I Support the LHC!!
Playing: EVE Online
Favorite MMOs: WoW, SWG Pre-cu, Lineage 2, UO, EQ, EVE online
Looking forward to: Archeage, Kingdom Under Fire 2
KUF2's Official Website - http://www.kufii.com/ENG/ -
Actually, I was a bit missleading, you CAN fuse past iron obviously as there are heavier elements in the universe.
Its just that fusing iron takes more energy to be put in then you get out ( preservation law again, hehe ), so it is not a sustainable process.
Our sun for example fuses hydrogen into helium, but for a star the size of the sun it stops there, at least for now.
Bigger stars can fuse helium into carbon and so and so forth, up to iron but that is the end of the line as far a star made matter is concerned.
All elements heavier then iron is created in a somewhat special manner, supernovas.
Wich occur when the star has converted a specific amount of matter into iron, the fusion process dies of the pressure within the star can not hold up its outher layers and it all come crashing in and boom.
For type 1 supernovas this occurs when the core mass is 1.4 sun masses, fairly exactly.
Wich is why these are the types used to measure distances with great accuracy as you have a known variable.
Type 2 supernovas are the really big ones, wich are a bit more erratic but usually go boom when the core reaches 2.5+ sun masses.
In essence, and here is the kicker, all but the hydrogen and some of the helium atoms in your body is either created within the bowels of stars, or created when the really massive stars go boom.
All hydrogen atoms in your body, or anywere really was created in the big bang.
We are all partly stardust, literally.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sounds like the Y2K thing from 8 or 9 years ago. A whole lot of worry over nothing. As I recall the end of the world was suppose to happen then as well. :::::Checking around:::::: Nope. Still here.
it is going to bring high volume internet (porn) to everyone
The Grid
the tech needed to direct all the information from the detectors is some of the highest information bandwidth possible with current technology.
this stuff is brilliant.
I am only a couple of hundred Kms from it, and have asked my boss if he knows anyone who could give us a tour.
But then, maybe I am not the person you want to hear from as I am work designing self-replicating molecules.
We're letting the LHC run the same reason we let Fermilab run. Creating a black hole that would swallow the planet seems a bit too far fetched don't you?
THE LHC would allow us to see Higgs Boson, which from my understanding would prove the theory of the Boson field, and would help us to make advances in Quantum Physics should we be able to prove its existance.
Im no expert on the idea, I just have a few friends who were talking about it a while ago.
On a side note, current physics says nothing dangerous will happend. If we are wrong about certain theories, the other likely result (but phyisics right now says it shouldnt be able to generate enough energy (or some similar unit) to for this to happen) is a tiny black hole.
Should this happen, we could A, be sucked in. Or B, its a tiny black hole, so the theoretical idea of Hawkings radiation would "fill in" the black hole almost instantly, because it would be so small.
after 6 or so years, I had to change it a little...
Trust me, I know my physics.
First of all, there are black holes, massive ones at that at the center of nearly every galaxy, containing upwards to 4 BILLION solar masses.
Ours has around 3-4million solar masses, the milky way that is.
There are no such thing as a semi black hole, it either traps light or it does not, thats a black and white answer as it where.
They do not inject photons in any way, photons is a mass less particle that can ONLY travel at the speed of light you do not need a particle accelerator for that, you need a light bulb.
At the speed of ligth a zero mass particle still has zero mass, the equation is exponential you see, starting from zero it can not go above zero.
They inject protons, wich they accelerate as much as they can and the energy they put in as it sppeds up increases it mass but the mass can not increase more then the energy the put in, ever.
And yes our technology is there, E=mc^2 has been done to much really, it is an atom bomb, a nuclear reactor ( fission ), or late experimental fusion reactors.
Fusion is hydrogen conversion into helium, hydrogen is in our air so yes, the technology is there, it is just not profitable at this point.
And no, you can not get energy out of nothing.
Perhaps you meant vibrating strings?
Strings is what they are trying to find with with LHC, or rather traces of them as the LHC does not have enough energy to cut that deep.
Their main objective is the Biggs particle, wich they think account for gravity.
Quarks can not exist alone for more then an fraction of a second as they are partly charged point particles.
In essense they need to be combined until they make a "full" charge.
Not be rude mate but I find it ironic you start this post with questioning my knowledge and go on with a haphazard, and erronous combination of facts that none of them makes sense.
I do suggest you go read up a bit on the subject, you seem to at least have an interest in it wich is good and I do suspect you will look back on this post with a smile on your face.
Oh, you had one thing rigth, at the speed of light any particle with mass will indeed gain infite mass.
This is why we can never achieve that speed.
The LHC certainly can not, nor can anything else as again physics kicks in and due to the preservation of energy law infinite mass requires infinite energy.
Of wich there is a limited amount.
The amount of combined energy in the universe that is, and even using that we could not accelerate anything with mass to the speed of light.
I appreciate the effort though, do not hesitate to ask away.
/edit
I said fusion is the "fusing" of hudrogen into helium, wich is true but it is not the only way of fusion, you can fuse all they way up to iron, just wanted to make that clear.
Why only up to iron?
No time to explain that now, but I will if anyone want the answer, later.
They dont put energy into the LHC. The LHC uses superconducting magnets to accelerate particles. The faster the speed, the more energetic and massive.
Im really not sure what you mean by "we cant get energy out of nothing" The term nothing hints on a perfect vacuum, (no pressure, all particles sucked out) which is impossible.
LIke i said, e=mc2 the mass lost by a atom during fusion, or fission, is transformed into the massive amounts kinetic energy. So it is theoretically possible to gain energy out of what most people call "nothing"
If we had the technology to convert mass fully into energy, you could drive your car until for all its useful life with one drop of gasoline. No our technology isnt there yet.
And you can only fuse up to a certain point because the energy required to fuse larger nucleus would require the energy from a dying star or black hole.
i dont disagree with you on any point. But you never know when it comes to "theoretical" physics