Many of us have created science-fiction titles that have remained for posterity and that, although in that small corner of incombustible imagination of our being, we have thought that if part of that could not be reality. Some time ago we saw if it was physically possible to build the backpack of the Ghostbusters (that works), but today it is the science that collapses the dream that there are ectoplasms , or that "translated" Neil deGrasse Tyson from a scientist who Works at the LHC ( Large Hadron Collider ).
Have you really been trying to prove the existence of ghosts in the giant collider? No, not much less. But statements by particle physicist Brian Cox (who is currently working on the LHC's ATLAS) on a BBC radio show on "Making the Invisible Visible" led to CERN's assertion that ghosts do not exist.
No phantom protons
Speaking of the "ivisible" in this context refers to experiments with sub-atomic particles such as the Higgs boson or what the great telescopes and more powerful microscopes have been letting us see and discover. And right here is where it has been missing to see Slimer, Casper or any evidence of what is also defined as ectoplasm.
Where does the curious conclusion that the LHC rules out the existence of ghosts? In the program we said, episode 06 of The Infinite Monkey Cage, one of Cox's explanations enunciated something apparently generic to rule out the existence of phenomena that had not been demonstrated after the activity of the LHC. The fragment in question is as follows (via The Independent ).
If we want some kind of pattern that contains information about living cells that persist then we must specifically specify what medium contains this pattern and how it interacts with the particles of matter outside of what makes up our bodies. We must, in other words, invent an extension of the Standard Model of particles that has escaped the detection of the LHC. That is virtually inconceivable in the energy scales typical of the interactions of particles of our body.
The discourse can be somewhat complex especially if we are not familiar with physics and its lexicon. But, as on other occasions, Neil deGrasse Tyson comes to our rescue and reformulates it as a question alluding to ghosts:
If I have understood what you have just stated, you have just stated that CERN, the European Center for Nuclear Research, denies the existence of ghosts, right?
To which Cox responds with a resounding "Yes".
The deduction (or rather, the discard) is because "in theory" the ghosts should be energies (since they are not composed of matter by definition), and not dissipate in heat (by the second principle of Thermodynamics) would require an energy input that is not supported by either the Standard Model or any of the findings in the LHC.
It would have been fun to know that between bosons and dark matter at CERN they are engaged in the search for ectoplasms, but this time the conclusion is due to the absence of evidence. At least Cox states with certainty that there is nothing under the bed or inside the closet for what to fear, according to the laws of physics.