Particle physicists eagerly await the first of April, 2006. On that date, the first test-run of the Large Hadron Collider at the European Center for Particle Physics in Geneva will begin. Protons will be accelerated to previously unattained energy levels and collided in a 27 km underground Tunnel. Researchers involved in the project hope thereby to observe reactions [of the type] that occurred within tiny fractions of a second after the big bang.

But that’s not all. The energy produced by these collisions might suffice to produce a tiny black holes at the rate of about one per second, according to Savas Dimopoulos, of Stanford University and Greg Landsberg of Brown University. Their calculations will be published in the upcoming issue of the professional journal "Physical Review Letters."

oops! skipped this!

Until recently, black holes were considered a phenomenon of astrophysics. It was thought the ultra-massive objects could only be produced by catastrophic events, like the collapse of a start. Newer models of a universe with [additional spacial dimensions], however, suggest that very small black holes could be produced at relatively low energies.

A black hole produced in the Large Hadron Collider would be about a million times smaller than an atomic nucleus [the article does not say of which element, my guess is hydrogen] and would exist only a moment before disappearing in a flash [burst] of energy. Stephen Hawkings predicted this [literally ‘fate’] as early as the ’70. He said that the [phenomenal horizon/barrier] of black holes could be broken and [observed] as radiation…

If the Dimopoulos/Landsberg prediction proves correct, this would be the first time black holes would be observed [their existence demonstrated] by means of so-called Hawking [radiation]. In addition, the radiation could tell the physicists even more, namely [of] the existence of the additional space dimensions predicted by [Hawkings] theory.

***

Word-related theme: concerning "scenario." The German author uses the word "scenario" in connection with the Dimopoulos/Landsberg prediction (a word he does not use). This presented me with difficulty in translation: it seems to me that a scenario involves a great deal more randomness than the prediction of an as yet unobserved playing out of natural law.