The Daily Show on CERN, particle physics and black holes
May 1, 2009 | 10:23 am
The Daily Show visited CERN to unearth the truth behind the rumors that the world’s largest and most sophisticated science experiment will suck the Earth into a black hole.
The half-hour cable program, hosted by Jon Stewart, takes satirical aim at current news events, and has an almost fanatical American following, making it an Emmy and Peabody Award-winning series with 3.6 million total viewers at its peak.
“News” anchor John Oliver spent a day at the European particle physics laboratory this year learning about the Large Hadron Collider. In true, non-objective Daily Show form, he questioned whether the LHC is a doomsday machine or a tool to answer the most fundamental questions in the universe, including why the world has structure and isn’t an a big blob of free-floating energy.
Oliver’s video report takes you with him as he roams the laboratory’s tunnels between Switzerland and France, studies the shiny metal detectors, has a battle of wits with CERN theorist John Ellis and hunkers down for the end of the world with high school science teacher Walter Wagner, who filed a lawsuit in a Hawaii court to stop the European accelerator from turning on.
The nearly six-minute segment , aired Thursday, April 30, gives you the tools to decide for yourself who is correct: the several thousand PhD-toting scientists who have come from across the globe to work at CERN or Walter and his fellow doomsayers.
Tona Kunz
Posted in Uncategorized |
5 Comments »
May 3rd, 2009 at 4:30 am
I may have given Wagner the idea to approach The Daily Show back in February. We were discussing the appeal of the dismissal of his lawsuit.
May 9th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
I am the blue-shirted guy in the part of the segment that was filmed in the CMS cavern. I do not know where you got the idea the John Oliver spent “several days” at CERN, which has also now been repeated in “Fermilab Today”. He was at CERN for part of one day: he interviewed John Ellis for about 2 hours, then visited ATLAS and CMS. He came with the Daily Show producer, Tim Greenburg, and a locally-hired video/sound crew (I know that because I spoke to them in French).
May 11th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
@muons: Thanks for that correction. We have fixed it above. We had received erroneous information from some people at CERN who have now confirmed that was in error and that John Oliver and crew spent one full day at CERN working on the piece.
May 27th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
[...] Fermilab weighs in too [...]
August 26th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
The September 2008 dismissal of the US-based anti-LHC lawsuit, based on the District court’s decision that the US Federal court had no jurisdiction because the US Government’s funding of parts of the LHC did not amount to turning CERN construction and operation into a ‘“major Federal action” within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act. 42 U.S.C. § 4332(2)(c)’, was appealed. On August 24, 2010, the appeal was decided by a three-judge panel and unanimously affirmed on the grounds that the plaintiffs did not meet any of the three legs of standing to sue in Federal court: ‘(1) an “injury in fact,” (2) “a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of” that is not attributable to “the independent action of some third party not before the court,” and (3) a likelihood that a favorable decision will redress the injury’ and, importantly, because ‘CERN has never been properly served, and is not a party to this case’ there was no one involved in the case who had a finger on the on/off button. This echoes the early questions of the District court concerning proper channels, a statement from the Swiss mission to the US, and concerns of Wagner’s own process server.
Ultimately, the courts (like science) are evidence-based, and as the judges wrote: ‘Speculative fear of future harm does not constitute an injury in fact sufficient to confer standing.’ Which is what we have been telling Wagner (more or less) since before he filed.
The decision in text with a link to the PDF with nearby transcripts and audio of the appellate hearing and 2008 decision: http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2609237#post2609237
-rpenner