Download document: UN Communication LHC CERN conCERNed int v1-1.pdf (on-line version 1.1)
11/20/2009
To the
Human Rights Committee
High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations
Palais des Nations
Avenue de la Paix 8- 14
CH - 1211 Geneva 10 (Genf)
Switzerland (SCHWEIZ)
C o m m u n i c a t i o n
under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights
[Public version]
presented by
[international signatories]
[Text of UN-Communication mainly prepared and finalized by associates and
friends of “conCERNed international” ( www.concerned-international.com ) and
“LHC Kritik (Critique)” www.LHC-concern.info with direct participation,
contributions, important input and kind support by many well-known critics and
experts, risk researchers and experts in international law and by all the
international signatories and the international critics’ community.]
concerning violations of the rights assured by the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights (UN-Doc. 2200/A [XXI]) and the pertaining Optional Protocol
committed by and/or imputable to:
1.) France (République Francaise)
2.) Germany (Bundesrepublik Deutschland)
3.) Switzerland (Schweizer Eidgenossenschaft)*
Index of the present Communication.............................................................................................. 2
I.) Information on the authors (complainants):............................................................................... 4
II.) Names of the States that are party to the Optional Protocol..................................................... 5
III.)
Subject and contents of the communication (complaint).................................................... 6
Imputability Aspects................................................................................................................. 10
Introduction................................................................................................................................... 11
The LHC-experiment, its purpose and dangers ........................................................................ 12
Unprecedented conditions will be created................................................................................ 14
Results will not be clear for years............................................................................................. 15
Scientists express serious concerns........................................................................................... 15
Concrete risks and dangers of the LHC experiment as reflected in physical discourse ............... 17
Black Holes............................................................................................................................... 18
Safety concerns of scientists with a prior track record of publication authors in peer-reviewed
physics journals......................................................................................................................... 19
Erosion of black hole safety considerations.............................................................................. 20
Challenging and invalidating LHC safety arguments............................................................... 21
Disagreement between safety reviews about micro black hole decay.................................. 21
The possibility that Hawking radiation does not exist and that black holes do not decay ... 22
For the above both general and specific reasons, then, Hawking radiation is not a
satisfactory safety factor. ...................................................................................................... 23
Uncertainty about the accretion rate..................................................................................... 23
Omissions and inconsistencies within safety reviews regarding relevance of astrophysical
objects and ‘cosmic rays’...................................................................................................... 24
Dr. Rainer Plaga: Dangerous Hawking radiation from metastable black holes ................... 26
No astrophysical reassurance for dangerous Hawking radiation.......................................... 27
Black hole absorption rate surpasses decay.......................................................................... 28
Misunderstandings by CERN'sGiddings and Mangano on the basis for Plaga'scatastrophe
argument ............................................................................................................................... 28
Black holes at the LHC could only evaporate about half their mass.................................... 29
Rainer Plaga'ssuggestion for safety improvement............................................................... 30
Strangelets............................................................................................................................. 30
No satisfactory astrophysical argument for strangelet safety............................................... 33
Theories involving transitions in the energy level of space.................................................. 34
Magnetic Monopoles ............................................................................................................ 35
Dangers allowed by credible theory not excluded by safety arguments............................... 36
A summary of the physics............................................................................................................. 36
Lack of proper risk assessment practice concerning the LHC...................................................... 39
Taking account of numbers of potential casualties in risk evaluation: 'Expected value'.......... 39
The precautionary principle...................................................................................................... 40
Risk assessment and prevention practices – independent critical analysis of Dr. M. Leggett . 40
Zero risk official policy for CERN officials......................................................................... 45
Summary in timeline form of the scientific discussion of collider risk.................................... 46
Further critique and remarks from independent scientists........................................................ 49
Independent critical analysis of the Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford.... 49
Physicists supporting Independent Safety Agency concerning high energy colliders ......... 50
Recommendations from independent legal professionals......................................................... 51
US court decision.................................................................................................................. 51
Commentary of former US court of appeal Judge Richard Posner ...................................... 51
Independent juridical analyses by Prof. Eric E. Johnson...................................................... 53
Summary of the complaint............................................................................................................ 58
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 61
demanded...................................................................................................................................... 64
References..................................................................................................................................... 65
List of enclosures.......................................................................................................................... 72
Download document: UN Communication LHC CERN conCERNed int v1-1.pdf (on-line version 1.1)