argumentA line of reasoning from premises to a conclusion. Like a claim, it belongs to no one who makes it.constitution →
Rebuttal of the metastable scenario
againstThis argument, if it holds, weighs against the claim.constitution →Published LHC black hole risk analyses do not establish that catastrophic risk is negligible.
The argument
Because linked claim and linked claim, the one concrete scenario alleged to escape the published risk analyses is neither physically consistent nor catastrophic, so it does not show that those analyses fail to establish negligible risk.
Does it work?
Not yet evaluated.
Premises
- SupportedThe evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →Plaga's metastable black-hole risk scenario applies Hawking-radiation and accretion formulas inconsistently.
- SupportedThe evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →Catastrophic growth does not occur in Plaga's metastable micro black hole scenario.
Where it is made
Passages where sources make, criticize or mention this argument. They record where it appears, not how strong it is, and none has precedence over another.
No source is recorded as making it.