In addition to what the other reply points out (that the LHC and such are not sufficient to produce a black hole), another calculation I've seen shows that, eve

In addition to what the other reply points out (that the LHC and such are not sufficient to produce a black hole), another calculation I've seen shows that, even if it had produced a black hole with mass given by the energy of these collisions, and even if these black holes had started at rest with respect to the earth, and like, fallen into the earth (and started oscillating around the center), and if they did not evaporate (say, if Hawking radiation wasn't actually a thing), then the amount of time needed for them to swallow any appreciable amount of matter at all, would be very very long, and so would not actually cause any problem for the forseeable future. (not that any were created. The detectors would have noticed. But even if they had been created, it wouldn't have been a problem, even if we are wrong in thinking that they would immediately evaporate.) The thing is, if the black hole is made from something of a given mass, then, well, it only has the amount of gravitational attraction associated with that quantity of mass. And, that is a very small amount unless the-thing-to-be-attracted is very very very very close to it, and, a point particle falling through the earth wouldn't be likely to get that close to many atoms. Ok, found the link I read this on : https://4gravitons.com/2023/01/27/lhc-black-holes-for-the-terminally-un-reassured/ https://4gravitons.com/2023/01/27/lhc-black-holes-for-the-te... He says that it would take 10^67 years for the black hole to double in mass. So.... Not really a problem.