CERN Discovery

[kanecabal]

Hey guys,

I know this has barely something to do with Star Trek Online, but more with Star Trek itself because it covers physics. We all know that there is the LHC, Large Hadron Collider, in Switzerland. As of today the scientists have discovered a new particle interpreting as the Higgs Boson, the God particle.

Might this be the beginning of a new revolutionary way of living? What I am getting is when we can create matter with energy, we all could have replicators :D.

Opinions? :)

[hortwort]

It's a good sounding find. From what I read, it sounded like they know they found *something* in the energy range they wanted. They'll have to do a lot of followup studies to figure out if it really has the expected properties. It's at the center of a lot of theories, so it'd be interesting what they find out.

And on a side note about the name, I heard it was actually called the God *bleeped* Particle, but they changed it for the press. No greater meaning was meant to be implied. :P

[captainrevo1]

I'm not a scientist by any means so in truth I have no idea but I doubt there will be much practical use in the near short term. I don't think any of our lives are going to be radically different because of it. It could have untold future applications but who knows when or what they could be.

It's not like we discovered it today out of the blue and can immediately harness it for some greater good. they have theorized about it for 40 odd years as the science suggested it was there, we just could not see it. today they have the equipment to prove it (or at the least something very similar) is there.

Again short term I'm not sure what that changes but its one more step to understanding the universe and it may lead to new devices and equipment over the next 10, 20 or 30 years etc.

[obertheromulan]

What Captain Revo said pretty much. I agree.

[mikewendell]

Cold fusion part 2 maybe? Followed by give us more money requests? :)

Interesting: When I google that to check the spelling, I get a bunch of Jan Sport back backs.

[mizarone]

Actually what CERN announced is that they have a 5-sigma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distribution) probability that they have discovered a new particle at 125 GeV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronvolt) and it is likely that its the Higgs boson. 5-sigma means that there's a 99.99955% chance that its actually something and not some random noise.

[allyoftheforce]

Waste of money.

[lilchibiclari]

A waste? Mankind's understanding of quantum effects is what allows the very microchips that power the computer that you are using right now--if we didn't understand quantum-level interactions, then computers would be stuck at the 1970 level with transistors and other wired components instead of a billion of them crammed into a space the size of a postage stamp.

Now that the Higgs boson has been confirmed to exist, we can further refine our models of physics to identify previously-unforseen effects. Who knows, we might find something that allows for warp drive, or neutron-free nuclear fusion power.

[raj011]

This is all very exciting news, I for one can't wait for the results and the possibilities this could show us. This will defiantly increase our understanding of our universe. :D The annoying thing is I'm re learn science this year, Physics, Chemistry and Biology because I want to get a job as an aerospace engineer and I am thinking it is worth doing it no or to wait. Also here in the UK they are thinking of bring back O levels, also I need to do A levels. With the cern thing happen will they need to change the text books etc?

[hortwort]

Now that the Higgs boson has been confirmed to exist, we can further refine our models of physics to identify previously-unforseen effects. Who knows, we might find something that allows for warp drive, or neutron-free nuclear fusion power.

If you want exciting stuff like that to happen, you should hope this new particle *isn't* the Higgs. All identifying it is gonna do is verify that already well-explored models are correct. If those models were wrong though, it'd be much more interesting.

[backyardserenade]

The big thing about the 'discovery' is not that there are practical implications for our every day life. None of the scientists claimed that.

What makes this discovery so important is that it proves that our entire outlook on the world and physics for the last 50 years was actually right. It's a prove that quantum physics are not just a random theory but reality.

Unless, of course, this particle turns out not to be the Higgs Boson. Than all hell might break loose. ;)

And it's true, BTW: The particle is not supposed to be called the "God Particle". One scientist wanted to publish a book with the title "The ******n Particle" because the Higgs Boson was so elusive and hard to find/verify. The publisher changed it to "The God Particle" without the scientists consent. The name stuck with the media, sadly.

[allyoftheforce]

A waste? Mankind's understanding of quantum effects is what allows the very microchips that power the computer that you are using right now--if we didn't understand quantum-level interactions, then computers would be stuck at the 1970 level with transistors and other wired components instead of a billion of them crammed into a space the size of a postage stamp.

Now that the Higgs boson has been confirmed to exist, we can further refine our models of physics to identify previously-unforseen effects. Who knows, we might find something that allows for warp drive, or neutron-free nuclear fusion power.

The problem lies in the fact it takes a machine the size of a city to find this particle and not very effectively. How long before we ever see anything practical or sustainable out of this? IMO, the way the world is now, this current generations grandchildren will be long dead before it happens. Call it the pessimist in me, but that?s not fast enough.

[hortwort]

The problem lies in the fact it takes a machine the size of a city to find this particle and not very effectively.

I think I see your point. There is plenty of knowledge to be learned yet with much smaller scale projects. These large colliders seem to be more for show than effect. But then... it's probably one of the better ways for a government to show off. They used to just build pyramids. ;)

[tharkan]

This discovery is going to result in one of four outcomes:

1. We find new energy sources and hopefully make our way to a more Trekian future, filled with all the Starships, Romulan Ale, and Orion women a Trekkie could want.
2. We find new energy sources that end up being abused and probably doing to our planet what Nero did to Vulcan.
3. Nothing will change.
4. Either outcome one or two will begin to occur, but Q or a similar being will intervene and change reality to result in outcome three.

[hrisvalar]

5. We get a new iPhone.

[sosolidshoe]

If you want exciting stuff like that to happen, you should hope this new particle *isn't* the Higgs. All identifying it is gonna do is verify that already well-explored models are correct. If those models were wrong though, it'd be much more interesting.

Rubbish. People say the same thing every time there's a breakthrough in physics, and every single time we've gone on to something even cooler and more bizarre, it's the height of arrogance to think we can decipher the totality of the mechanics of the universe in a couple of centuries, we're not that clever - and I say that as a physicist.

Understanding the Higgs field will take another century at least, but imagine what we could do if we could manipulate it; we could alter the mass of matter, we could even achieve matter-energy conversion(replicators, anyone?). In truth, we don't have a scooby what this discovery could do for us, or what new weird and wonderful domains it could open for us to explore; who saw the internet coming? The personal computer? Could Young back in 1803 have foreseen that his work, filtered through the minds of countless other scientists, would eventually lead us to graphene circuits, quantum levitation, laser-based communication systems; or that it would lead us down the path to M-Theory via special relativity and quantum electrodynamics?

No, we have a long way to go yet m'friend, and I'm glad I'm part of it.

[hortwort]

Rubbish. People say the same thing every time there's a breakthrough in physics

People always say they hope the theory is incomplete so there will be more discoveries? This is the arrogant position? I ... think I must have just chosen my words poorly. :confused:

[bladeofkahless]

The problem lies in the fact it takes a machine the size of a city to find this particle and not very effectively. How long before we ever see anything practical or sustainable out of this? IMO, the way the world is now, this current generations grandchildren will be long dead before it happens. Call it the pessimist in me, but that?s not fast enough.

lol
So, because YOU'LL never see it, it's a waste.
Even if the LHC leads to advances that change our civilization, just that you won't be around to see them...
I still call that a win.
:rolleyes:



On that note...
SCIENCE!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IlHgbOWj4o)

[lilchibiclari]

Understanding the Higgs field will take another century at least, but imagine what we could do if we could manipulate it; we could alter the mass of matter, we could even achieve matter-energy conversion(replicators, anyone?). In truth, we don't have a scooby what this discovery could do for us, or what new weird and wonderful domains it could open for us to explore; who saw the internet coming? The personal computer? Could Young back in 1803 have foreseen that his work, filtered through the minds of countless other scientists, would eventually lead us to graphene circuits, quantum levitation, laser-based communication systems; or that it would lead us down the path to M-Theory via special relativity and quantum electrodynamics?

No, we have a long way to go yet m'friend, and I'm glad I'm part of it.

210 years ago, Michael Faraday showed off his newest invention, the DC electric motor, to the Royal Society. They asked him what use it was. His reply: "What use is a newborn baby?"

[disposeableh3r0]

210 years ago, Michael Faraday showed off his newest invention, the DC electric motor, to the Royal Society. They asked him what use it was. His reply: "What use is a newborn baby?"

Door stop, foot stool, basketball, A new body to graft your conciousness in, food, source of stem cells, alarm clock, etc.....

[sollvax]

Cold fusion
The transported man
Various perpetual motion machines

this "magic trick" needs investigating and those involved need investigating

Matter is MATTER
its Real and solid and not made up of tiny pieces of chewing gum

So I will not believe this until its proven by scientists paid NOT to find it

[sosolidshoe]

Cold fusion
The transported man
Various perpetual motion machines

this "magic trick" needs investigating and those involved need investigating

Matter is MATTER
its Real and solid and not made up of tiny pieces of chewing gum

So I will not believe this until its proven by scientists paid NOT to find it

This must be a troll, surely, nobody can be this thick. Do you know what all the claims to have succeeded at cold fusion or perpetual motion have in common? They weren't made by scientists, and they weren't considered credible by scientists. I mean seriously, if there's some kind of giant conspiracy among physicists, we're doing it wrong, because I'm certainly not being paid enough for my silence :rolleyes:


People always say they hope the theory is incomplete so there will be more discoveries? This is the arrogant position? I ... think I must have just chosen my words poorly. :confused:

No, I meant that it is arrogant to think that simply because we have made one discovery which confirms the standard model, the standard model is complete and all that's left is to "tidy up". We still don't even have an idea how to test a lot of the more hypothetical ideas which have arisen as a result of quantum mechanics, and it'll be a long long long time before we have the technology to build a subatomic-particle smasher powerful enough to see if we really have reached the limit of the very-small.

As to your wording, it's probable I misunderstood and used language that was a bit strong, apologies.

[sollvax]

This must be a troll, surely, nobody can be this thick.

says someone who believes in MAGIC????

in particles so tiny they are undetectable by real means??
in "mindstuff" that makes us all nul??

Do you know what all the claims to have succeeded at cold fusion or perpetual motion have in common?

yep like this they were unproven and made by Greedy men who claimed to be scientists

They weren't made by scientists, and they weren't considered credible by scientists.

you must be VERY young
not to remember the scientists falling over themselves to embrace cold fusion

I mean seriously, if there's some kind of giant conspiracy among physicists, we're doing it wrong, because I'm certainly not being paid enough for my silence

Physicists are paid to be ignorant by numbers the more ignorant the more money
and this whole experiment was stupidly expensive , stupidly dangerous and generally stupid
Never forget that "scientists" have destroyed whole cities before now.
Sometimes its not "can we" but "should we"


WHEN someone suggests weaponising this discovery maybe you will understand

however a "god particle" disproves the existance of life and matter ergo it can not be real
its impossible
if it existed none of us would be alive or human we would be transitory wave forms existing only as a mathmatical fault

this "experiment" is over
and should be closed down while its investigated by men paid NOT to find this particle
meanwhile the money wasted on this stupidity could have fed the starving , cured the sick or kept the cold warm
instead of trying to kill God and end the cosmos

I admit my own area of expertise is explosives and Engineering
But I do know that if you blow things up you get smaller bits (and those are still MATTER)
And that scientists get rich based on dumb ideas

[sosolidshoe]

-snip-

What....who....come again? I don't know how anyone could....


I admit my own area of expertise is explosives and Engineering


Wait, nevermind, all is clear now. We're done here, enjoy spouting nonsense and playing a computer game using technology which wouldn't have been possible without the things you say are impossible :D

[disposeableh3r0]

.

says someone who believes in MAGIC????

in particles so tiny they are undetectable by real means??
in "mindstuff" that makes us all nul??



yep like this they were unproven and made by Greedy men who claimed to be scientists



you must be VERY young
not to remember the scientists falling over themselves to embrace cold fusion



Physicists are paid to be ignorant by numbers the more ignorant the more money
and this whole experiment was stupidly expensive , stupidly dangerous and generally stupid
Never forget that "scientists" have destroyed whole cities before now.
Sometimes its not "can we" but "should we"


WHEN someone suggests weaponising this discovery maybe you will understand

however a "god particle" disproves the existance of life and matter ergo it can not be real
its impossible
if it existed none of us would be alive or human we would be transitory wave forms existing only as a mathmatical fault

this "experiment" is over
and should be closed down while its investigated by men paid NOT to find this particle
meanwhile the money wasted on this stupidity could have fed the starving , cured the sick or kept the cold warm
instead of trying to kill God and end the cosmos

I admit my own area of expertise is explosives and Engineering
But I do know that if you blow things up you get smaller bits (and those are still MATTER)
And that scientists get rich based on dumb ideas

wat?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf0yQbrY9Pw

[sollvax]

Nothing here requires "mindstuff" particles

the universe the REAL one and the Game both rely on things being REAL

not made up out of stuff too small to be proven and detectable only by a computer program PROGRAMMED to see it regardless of if its there or not


you claim to be a scientist
well that means you should believe NOTHING until its proven by a THIRD test in a THIRD location

as this is not even claimed by a reliable Second source its bogus and I do not trust it

Especially as you pulled out the "Troll card" (which means you are unable to argue based on proven facts like for example "matter exists" and "the Universe is real")
so yes STOP

and cern should stop too before they waste more money or blow up half of europe

[kassad2]

The problem lies in the fact it takes a machine the size of a city to find this particle and not very effectively. How long before we ever see anything practical or sustainable out of this? IMO, the way the world is now, this current generations grandchildren will be long dead before it happens. Call it the pessimist in me, but that?s not fast enough.

Do you know WHY it is that large? Do you even know WHAT it actually does? Of course you don't. Yet you critizise something you can't even begin to understand...lol.

It's the people that add to the compendium of human knowledge that make it possible for the rest of us to even have a future. With each generation they build on the knowledge of those that came before them, advancing human civilization and making it easier for those too selfish or dim-witted to otherwise survive to continue to grace our species with their presence. They in turn contribute by producing more selfish dimwits. And it is those dimwits and the prospect that they could take over that drives those with a thirst for knowledge to go to school and build city sized colliders, etc.. Thus the wheel of life is complete. :P

[aquilamontes]

I am not a scientist, but I recognize the need to learn more things about world we live in.

I am not an engineer, but I recognize the need to build, and to avoid unnecessary destruction.

I am not a priest, but I recognize the need for goodwill.

[lazarus51166]

if it existed none of us would be alive or human we would be transitory wave forms existing only as a mathmatical fault

so we ARE organians then?? :D

not made up out of stuff too small to be proven and detectable only by a computer program PROGRAMMED to see it regardless of if its there or not

thats not necessarily true. thats like going back a few hundred years and saying there is no such thing as a virus or bacteria because nobody had invented anything that could be used to see them yet

Matter is MATTER
its Real and solid and not made up of tiny pieces of chewing gum

erm..... you know that matter really isn't all that solid right?

[deadspacex64]

>sollvax< why is anyone even bothering to answer him? his statements have already made him out to be someone who doesn't have a clue.

nice discovery, cost enough (including hawking's $100 for a lost bet)>.> while all it really does is help confirm the standard model...which was getting along fine without the evidence. will it be useful? considering the cost? perhaps if there's something else discovered because of that discovery...but by itself it's useless except to those that wanted confirmation.

so, nice for the scientists, theorists, etc...but in practical terms...how does that help or apply to anyone else? mayhap i'm too logical >.> cost of discovery vs usefulness of discovery

[allyoftheforce]

Do you know WHY it is that large? Do you even know WHAT it actually does? Of course you don't. Yet you critizise something you can't even begin to understand...lol.

It's the people that add to the compendium of human knowledge that make it possible for the rest of us to even have a future. With each generation they build on the knowledge of those that came before them, advancing human civilization and making it easier for those too selfish or dim-witted to otherwise survive to continue to grace our species with their presence. They in turn contribute by producing more selfish dimwits. And it is those dimwits and the prospect that they could take over that drives those with a thirst for knowledge to go to school and build city sized colliders, etc.. Thus the wheel of life is complete. :P

Something along the lines of getting the particles they're flinging around using magnets to get it up to near the speed of light and colliding them together to see what the result causes and see what could be made out of doing this to discover the secrets of the universe? No, I don't understand it 100%, I'm sure it does more than that. But the fact still remains that it solves nothing immediate or near future and is still hypothetical if we can ever use it for anything.

BTW man, please keep this civil. Name calling to people who disagree with what's being done doesn't help your argument. I want the world to keep learning like all of you here. But I think we can do something more pracitcal with it. But that's going to lead into a discussion that I'm sure is against the TOS of the forums and I'm not going into that.

[sosolidshoe]

You guys do know that this same "what's it do for ME?!" ludditry gets trotted out every single time some major theoretical research enters the public consciousness, and you do know that each and every sodding time it's led to another huge leap forward in technology?

I mean hells bells people, we're still reaping the benefits of the last major theoretical breakthroughs in quantum electrodynamics; packed-spiral fibre optics, quantum levitation, graphene circuitry, quantum computers, nano-engineered micro-bubbles combined with ultrasound for targeted drug delivery, carbon nanotubes, etc etc etc etc. You are, right now, complaining about this new theoretical research on a machine which came about as the result of theoretical research! The same is true in any scientific field; do you think the chaps in the Netherlands working on intensive hydrofarming technologies just pulled the idea out of their backsides fully-formed? Of course not, it took decades of hypothesising and testing and expensive machinery, that's how science works, and now they've developed a method of growing plants that gives four times the yield in one third of the acreage, half the time, and with 90% less water use.

Science is not, as many people think, a series of isolated "eureka moments", it is a slog, a long, expensive, sometimes demoralising slog, but that is what's necessary if you want the shiny shiny toys at the end.

[deadspacex64]

@sosolidshoe
they already knew what it did, just didn't have any confirmation...so where exactly is the great leap forward in just confirming something? they knew the math, they had predictions, they had theories...enough to find it. the discovery just confirmed what was already known.

now, if there's something else they can glean that will be beneficial other than it just a very expensive physics experiment...great. but it's absence wasn't holding anything back. so there is a marked difference in a discovery that leads to something, and one that leads to nothing but confirmation of a theory. oh, and maybe shiny nobel prizes, fame, getting to waggle fingers in the faces of peers that disputed the theory, and bragging rights...i suppose it was worth it then.

[sollvax]

Its that big for the same reason David Copperfield makes buildings vanish

the bigger the spectacle the easier it is to decieve people

As I saw i will believe this only when someone who isn't PAID to look for it finds it

And matter is SOLID
all particles are matter
look small enough and you find smaller and smaller bits of matter (protons are MATTER too)


As to the "great advances of science"

yes remember these gems??

Weaponised virus strains
Nuclear weapons
Microwave weapons
Sonic WEAPONS


what next?
Higgs WEAPONS??

And the computer is a result of people Raging AGAINST the march of tech if scientists had been given their way the human race in general would never have been given computers

they would exist only in labs

But no matter how good the tech looking to recreate the big bang is bloody stupid
as the big bang may not actually have happened at all (one theory) or may have destroyed a previous universe (another theory)
or may not have stopped yet (a third theory)

So why does it so offend you that I do not believe the word of a bunch of people who spend MY money and Risk MY planet so they can find something that proves we don't exist??

I like being alive and having a soul and yes being made of the Elements

there are no Tiny invisible bartenders in me

[hortwort]

As I saw i will believe this only when someone who isn't PAID to look for it finds it

People used to believe in aether. Einstein came along with some theories that eventually proved it wrong. Ever heard of him?

If someone came along and disproved the Higgs, that someone would be right up there with him. Did you know he was offered the Presidency of Israel? What's the $$$ value of that, do you think?

[sosolidshoe]

@sosolidshoe
they already knew what it did, just didn't have any confirmation...so where exactly is the great leap forward in just confirming something? they knew the math, they had predictions, they had theories...enough to find it. the discovery just confirmed what was already known.

now, if there's something else they can glean that will be beneficial other than it just a very expensive physics experiment...great. but it's absence wasn't holding anything back. so there is a marked difference in a discovery that leads to something, and one that leads to nothing but confirmation of a theory. oh, and maybe shiny nobel prizes, fame, getting to waggle fingers in the faces of peers that disputed the theory, and bragging rights...i suppose it was worth it then.


But that's the point, they didn't know what it did, or what it was, it was an entirely hypothetical construct which was devised in order to solve some of the issues that arise when attempting to reconcile special relativity and quantum gravity. It was the most likely of the available hypotheses, but it was nowhere near certain until they built CERN and got this 5-sigma result. Now we can move forward, and begin to discover how it works, by which mechanisms it interacts with other subatomic particles, and how to use that knowledge for our own benefit.

And things were exactly the same in the wake of the initial confirmation of special relativity, of quantum electrodynamics, of every major discovery ever made. They've just broken ground on the foundations, but you're already deriding them because you can't ride the elevator to the top floor.

We're talking about the mechanism by which all matter in the universe derives mass; you genuinely can't see the potential of increasing our understanding of such a phenomena?



As for you solivax, pick up all your batcrap-insane lizard-illuminati nonsense and jog on mate, your ignorance and the pride you seem to take in it are killing my buzz.

[sollvax]

People used to believe in aether. Einstein came along with some theories that eventually proved it wrong. Ever heard of him?

If someone came along and disproved the Higgs, that someone would be right up there with him. Did you know he was offered the Presidency of Israel? What's the $$$ value of that, do you think?

not a lot ??

Einstein yes a patent clerk with some theories of his own to start with

also apparently a friend of norma jean

and as for your Buzz

remember e does NOT equal Mc squared except in 1 G gravity and earths atmosphere according to your wonderful smart scientists (haha)
yes just recently people every bit as well qualified as these "lizard believing " guys at cern said that the speed of light was not the universal speed limit
they might be wrong they might be right
who cares

(C is actually a variable probably)

[twg042370]

So why does it so offend you that I do not believe the word of a bunch of people who spend MY money and Risk MY planet so they can find something that proves we don't exist??

I like being alive and having a soul and yes being made of the Elements

there are no Tiny invisible bartenders in me

In a way I think it's a compliment that people like this get accused of trolling because most can't accept that someone could spout this much gibberish and be sincere, so it must be a dumb joke.

[sollvax]

Remember many people do not believe in "quantum" except as a torpedo

[twg042370]

Remember many people do not believe in "quantum" except as a torpedo

Is there a dressing to go with this word salad?

[sollvax]

if you put a quantum physics specialist into a locked box with a vial of poison gas there are two states he can be in Dead or stupid and dead

this is the thing
Quantum and quarks , bosons and bings , up down sideways and charm

its ALL a scam to get more beer money

long ago men used to dress up in long robes and chant claiming they could call the storm
they looked for truths in the entrails of geese

their replacements are "scientists"

I firmly believe If I offered these men more money they could be induced to prove that Unicorns work in tescos

[dalolorn]

Well, I will have to side with sollvax on some of his arguments here...

For one: Common sense dictates that time passes equally everywhere - it is in fact the VISIBLE passing of time that changes, unless the interactions of subatomic particles themselves are stopped/accelerated/slowed. Unless you mean to say that approaching the speed of light (most notable example of time slowing down or accelerating in modern physics) actually does slow down these interactions - which, on the other hand, is impossible as all of the particles will be moving at the same speed +/- the speed of their own movements independent of whatever means are maintaining abovementioned speed.

In other words, every particle in the human body (just an example) would be moving independently of an ALS (just made that up, At Light Speed) capable ship, whilst at the same time moving along with the ship at roughly the speed of light. You see this every day, only slower - the Earth is moving at considerable speeds as it orbits the Sun, which orbits the center of the galaxy, which is moving in relation to other galaxies and possibly even orbiting another place, yet we move around it at quite modest speeds compared to that.

However, as for the particles themselves - it is only logical that the particles are composed of something. But what is that something composed of? And what is that something the previous something is composed of, and so forth? Following that logic, every single particle in the universe is composed of several smaller particles, which are in turn composed of even smaller particles, etc. etc. etc.

Edit: Hold on a second... did he even make a comment about the second thing?

Anyway, the first one he DID talk about, and I just explained my view on it.

Oh, and I forgot to mention that based on what I said above, the light from, say, a laser pointer (relatively focused source of light, makes the calculation a lot simpler if you focus on the speed in a set direction), would travel at precisely the following sum: S1 (absolute velocity of the laser pointer) - S2 (a rather complex formula I don't quite know that calculates the relative speed of the pointer towards the light, with -C being the result if the light was travelling in precisely the same direction as the pointer, and C if it was travelling in precisely the opposite direction). So if the laser was pointing in exactly the same direction it was moving in, and if it was moving at the speed of light, the sum would be 2C, and if it were pointing in the opposite direction at the same speed, the light wouldn't be moving in relation to... Hold on, I think I just realized why it's believed that time stops/slows down... anything that is absolutely immobile or moving in the opposite direction of an object emitting light in its wake whilst moving at the speed of light would... wait, it wouldn't see the object in the first place? Bah, I know I forgot to factor in the fact that there is no true vacuum (not in space, anyway) and that the particles around the light would eventually impact the photons and... Oh what the heck, I'll let somebody with more expertise figure it out.

Re-edit: But the point is, the speed of light is not a constant at all, as it is, like all others, relative to other objects. So theoretically, light travelling in the direction of an ALS object would move at twice its speed (it evens out, though, as the object itself is approaching at the speed of light... at least I think it evens out) but light travelling in the opposite direction would not move at all without the assistance of external factors including but not limited to the particles in the so-called vacuum of space.

[nrobbiec]

Ah yes, the god damn particle because it's so god damn hard to find. So misinterpreted by the religious right.

[raj011]

once they confirm is it is the higgs boson particle what would this mean other then increasing our understanding of the universe? I mean in more of a practical sense?

[hortwort]

once they confirm is it is the higgs boson particle what would this mean other then increasing our understanding of the universe? I mean in more of a practical sense?

A lot of the people involved consider that the *only* thing that's practical.

[januhull]

Waste of money.

This from a **** posting on an online game forum. So much irony, it's generating a sarcastic field...

[januhull]

Its that big for the same reason David Copperfield makes buildings vanish

the bigger the spectacle the easier it is to decieve people

As I saw i will believe this only when someone who isn't PAID to look for it finds it

And matter is SOLID
all particles are matter
look small enough and you find smaller and smaller bits of matter (protons are MATTER too)


As to the "great advances of science"

yes remember these gems??

Weaponised virus strains
Nuclear weapons
Microwave weapons
Sonic WEAPONS


what next?
Higgs WEAPONS??

And the computer is a result of people Raging AGAINST the march of tech if scientists had been given their way the human race in general would never have been given computers

they would exist only in labs

But no matter how good the tech looking to recreate the big bang is bloody stupid
as the big bang may not actually have happened at all (one theory) or may have destroyed a previous universe (another theory)
or may not have stopped yet (a third theory)

So why does it so offend you that I do not believe the word of a bunch of people who spend MY money and Risk MY planet so they can find something that proves we don't exist??

I like being alive and having a soul and yes being made of the Elements

there are no Tiny invisible bartenders in me

Higgs weapons? Interesting, the first thing that came to mind for me, when considering the possibility of affecting mass in the form of a manipulable energy field was "alcubierre warp drive!"

[januhull]

For one: Common sense dictates that time passes equally everywhere.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!


Gravity affects time flow, even at the smallest scales. GPS satellites have to take into account the variation of flow of time between the ground and their orbits, or they'd be inaccurate as heck. This is not some pie in the sky theory, it is practical and proven knowledge....

[dalolorn]

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!


Gravity affects time flow, even at the smallest scales. GPS satellites have to take into account the variation of flow of time between the ground and their orbits, or they'd be inaccurate as heck. This is not some pie in the sky theory, it is practical and proven knowledge....

Can you elaborate, please?

*wonders if there is something like a chroniton to be affected by gravity :rolleyes:*

Edit: Also, I do believe I focused more on the theory that approaching the speed of light slows time down during my wall of text.

[sollvax]

Time is a constant
Light and various forms of waves are slowed down by gravity (proving they are made of matter)
but time
not "human measurement of time" or "perception of time" is and remains a constant
there have always been 1000 pulses to a kilopulse and there always will be

Meanwhile back in the bat cave
The scientists who claimed only this year to have made something move faster than light now agree they didn't
And the scientists behind the "higgs whatsit" (A much better name) freely admit that they have only "some evidence" and "a possible sighting"
Given a year they will likely admit that they are wrong.
in much the same way that previous scientists have admitted they were wrong about

Cold fusion . matter transmission , "Dark matter" and other similar garbage.

[raj011]

A lot of the people involved consider that the *only* thing that's practical.

okay, that does not answer my question exactly but u have hinted there are practical implications :D, if that was what your meant to say. All I can say is about time, warp drive or hyperspace travel and starships here we come :D

[sollvax]

No this would not allow starfall
It could be used (if it existed ) to destroy on a massive scale (cause the particulates to disipate or concentrate) but it would likely make starfall impossible

"och captain if we exceed warp one the higgs whatsits will implode and we will all wind up speaking in Korean Sir"

[mustrumridcully0]

Can you elaborate, please?

*wonders if there is something like a chroniton to be affected by gravity :rolleyes:*

Edit: Also, I do believe I focused more on the theory that approaching the speed of light slows time down during my wall of text.
If you've ever used a GPS device, then you have seen a practical application of special and general relativity:
http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

(if you don't like reading, this video may also help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQdIjwoi-u4)

[sollvax]

GPS works on response times of sats

think of it as echo location on a big scale

(and sometimes it doesn't work)

[hevach]

Can you elaborate, please?

*wonders if there is something like a chroniton to be affected by gravity :rolleyes:*

Edit: Also, I do believe I focused more on the theory that approaching the speed of light slows time down during my wall of text.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation

Time dilation per special relativity isn't just a product of velocity. Gravitational potential also produces an accelerated frame of reference.

It's quite well tested, as well. The Pound-Rebka experiment proved the effect with gravitational redshifts in 1959. The redshift of the objects tested was off the expected by the exact same factor expected by Einstein's equations, and no branch of physics has ever come up with an accurate model to postdict the results of that experiment.

The effect can be detected in communications from interplanetary probes (first measured with Viking 1, it's been tested in many other probes but was never a subject of interest after Viking), and as somebody else pointed out the GPS system will drift out of alignment if it's not periodically corrected for the effect. Its even been tested in single buildings, and a few years ago Wolfson managed to confirm it in a single room with two atomic clocks less than a meter of vertical separation, at which point the gravitation slowing of the lower clock is greater than the velocity slowing of the upper clock - that is, the lower clock drifts behind, but when looking only at velocity you'd expect the upper clock to drift behind.


It's not like gravity effecting a chroniton because... well, chronitons aren't a thing. They're not consistent with any experimentally supported theory, or even any of the exotic hypothetical physics branches. It's a fictional extension of the hypothesis that all forces are carried by massless particles the way electromagnetism is carried by a spin 1 photon. Gravitons are part of that - unconfirmed but consistent - but time isn't, because it's not a force.

[sollvax]

if the "higgs whatsit" exists then why should not "tetryons ", "Gravitons" , "chronotons" and "starbuckatons"

because they are all equally valid scientifically (they are claimed / believed to exist by a small self interested group)

infact we should call the whatsit the "Kirk particle" because apparently it over acts

[iconians]

The mathematics of wonton burrito meals, got it.

[dalolorn]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation

Time dilation per special relativity isn't just a product of velocity. Gravitational potential also produces an accelerated frame of reference.

It's quite well tested, as well. The Pound-Rebka experiment proved the effect with gravitational redshifts in 1959. The redshift of the objects tested was off the expected by the exact same factor expected by Einstein's equations, and no branch of physics has ever come up with an accurate model to postdict the results of that experiment.

The effect can be detected in communications from interplanetary probes (first measured with Viking 1, it's been tested in many other probes but was never a subject of interest after Viking), and as somebody else pointed out the GPS system will drift out of alignment if it's not periodically corrected for the effect. Its even been tested in single buildings, and a few years ago Wolfson managed to confirm it in a single room with two atomic clocks less than a meter of vertical separation, at which point the gravitation slowing of the lower clock is greater than the velocity slowing of the upper clock - that is, the lower clock drifts behind, but when looking only at velocity you'd expect the upper clock to drift behind.


It's not like gravity effecting a chroniton because... well, chronitons aren't a thing. They're not consistent with any experimentally supported theory, or even any of the exotic hypothetical physics branches. It's a fictional extension of the hypothesis that all forces are carried by massless particles the way electromagnetism is carried by a spin 1 photon. Gravitons are part of that - unconfirmed but consistent - but time isn't, because it's not a force.

Interesting. And the chroniton thing was just sarcasm :P

As for Viking, that could easily be due to my previous arguments, but I have absolutely no idea how to counter your other arguments, so I guess I'm either stupid or you're right.

if the "higgs whatsit" exists then why should not "tetryons ", "Gravitons" , "chronotons" and "starbuckatons"

because they are all equally valid scientifically (they are claimed / believed to exist by a small self interested group)

infact we should call the whatsit the "Kirk particle" because apparently it over acts

... First of all, I've only ever heard of tetryons, gravitons, and chronitons, two of which I only know from ST.

Second, I've never heard of a starbuckaton or a chronoton.

Third, it's the Higgs boson, which, as said by an above poster, is rather dumbly called a 'God particle'.

[sollvax]

its the Higgs whatsit

you only get to name it when you can produce a lb of them in a glass jar

and Kirk beat god right?

so its the kirk particle

[darkstarkirian]

found this floating around Facebookland, thought i would share:

Higgs Boson Existence (http://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=327385617349148&set=a.157796790974699.40772.157750900979288&type=1&theater)

[mustrumridcully0]

Well, according to what I read recently - a scientist wanted to write a book or journal article about the Higgs Boson, and wanted to title it "The ******n Particle", because it was so difficult to find. The editor or publisher or what not apparantly didn't like swear words and changed it to "god particle", without asking for consent of the author. Now it has that silly name.

It doesn't have anything to do with god or mystical stuff or anything like that. It's only meaning is that a theory that tried to explain why some elemental particles have mass and some don't has made an accurate prediction and is thus more likely to be true - and overall pretty much is another important confirmation of our theory on elemental particles and elemental forces.

[sollvax]

Any particle that exists has mass (it may be too small to measure but its there)
as without mass its not actually made of anything

anything made of nothing is a nul

Nuls can not be real objects

[mustrumridcully0]

Any particle that exists has mass (it may be too small to measure but its there)
as without mass its not actually made of anything

anything made of nothing is a nul

Nuls can not be real objects
That is wrong. Unless you don't count photons and gluons, which wouldn't surprise me, as you dont't actually seem to know anything about the subject and I keep wishing an old forum function back. *sigh*

[sollvax]

Photons have MASS its just tiny

this is why it is effected by GRAVITY

I can see why you chose your name
you have a powerful mind but it runs on rails

ALL objects must have mass to exist

[deadspacex64]

But that's the point, they didn't know what it did, or what it was, it was an entirely hypothetical construct which was devised in order to solve some of the issues that arise when attempting to reconcile special relativity and quantum gravity. It was the most likely of the available hypotheses, but it was nowhere near certain until they built CERN and got this 5-sigma result. Now we can move forward, and begin to discover how it works, by which mechanisms it interacts with other subatomic particles, and how to use that knowledge for our own benefit.

And things were exactly the same in the wake of the initial confirmation of special relativity, of quantum electrodynamics, of every major discovery ever made. They've just broken ground on the foundations, but you're already deriding them because you can't ride the elevator to the top floor.

We're talking about the mechanism by which all matter in the universe derives mass; you genuinely can't see the potential of increasing our understanding of such a phenomena?



in order:
they have been using it as a black box addition to equations.
SR has equal footing with LR both have been confirmed to function and apply. the difference is speed limits that LR doesn't have (among other things).

as devils advocate here, as i have been (it can be fun) increasing knowledge, is something to be respected, at the cost however...that's what i have an issue with. it wasn't something that required immediate attention, life threatening, or would doom the entire planet if it wasn't discovered. get the angle i'm coming from? that's not to say there aren't other budgeted forms of stupidity in various forms throughout the world labeled 'research'.

CERN is just one of the biggest. it all sounds great...'discover the building blocks of the universe'. if they hadn't already known >.>
there's a certain point if everything fits, even if one of those factors is unconfirmed, as long as it functions as intended or required go with it. it's when things don't add up you need to search.

what could have been truly discovered if that money had been pumped into euro's space program? into fusion R&D? alternative viable energy sources?

instead they have confirmation of a particle...no more black box because we know it's there now...

Photons have MASS its just tiny

this is why it is effected by GRAVITY

I can see why you chose your name
you have a powerful mind but it runs on rails

ALL objects must have mass to exist

photon, gauge boson, and gluon. massless. before you insult others you should make sure you have a secure footing.

[dalolorn]

Well, according to what I read recently - a scientist wanted to write a book or journal article about the Higgs Boson, and wanted to title it "The ******n Particle", because it was so difficult to find. The editor or publisher or what not apparantly didn't like swear words and changed it to "god particle", without asking for consent of the author. Now it has that silly name.

It doesn't have anything to do with god or mystical stuff or anything like that. It's only meaning is that a theory that tried to explain why some elemental particles have mass and some don't has made an accurate prediction and is thus more likely to be true - and overall pretty much is another important confirmation of our theory on elemental particles and elemental forces.

Yes, that's what I was talking about when I replied to sollvax last time. Thank you.

in order:
they have been using it as a black box addition to equations.
SR has equal footing with LR both have been confirmed to function and apply. the difference is speed limits that LR doesn't have (among other things).

as devils advocate here, as i have been (it can be fun) increasing knowledge, is something to be respected, at the cost however...that's what i have an issue with. it wasn't something that required immediate attention, life threatening, or would doom the entire planet if it wasn't discovered. get the angle i'm coming from? that's not to say there aren't other budgeted forms of stupidity in various forms throughout the world labeled 'research'.

CERN is just one of the biggest. it all sounds great...'discover the building blocks of the universe'. if they hadn't already known >.>
there's a certain point if everything fits, even if one of those factors is unconfirmed, as long as it functions as intended or required go with it. it's when things don't add up you need to search.

what could have been truly discovered if that money had been pumped into euro's space program? into fusion R&D? alternative viable energy sources?

instead they have confirmation of a particle...no more black box because we know it's there now...

I don't know... we never will know now, will we? :P

photon, gauge boson, and gluon. massless. before you insult others you should make sure you have a secure footing.

Actually, I think my science encyclopedia (may have spelled that wrong, sorry) gives them a mass of Something E-Something (I don't remember the exact numbers, and I trust you know what E stands for... right?).

Should I go fetch it and give the precise numbers?

Edit: Oops, forgot to wrap the second part of your sentence in [QUOTE] tags.

[beezle23]

Photons have MASS its just tiny

this is why it is effected by GRAVITY

Photons are not affected by gravity.

Space-time is affected by gravity, which is what causes the apparent "bending" of light.

[deadspacex64]

Yes, that's what I was talking about when I replied to sollvax last time. Thank you.

Actually, I think my science encyclopedia (may have spelled that wrong, sorry) gives them a mass of Something E-Something (I don't remember the exact numbers, and I trust you know what E stands for... right?).

Should I go fetch it and give the precise numbers?

Edit: Oops, forgot to wrap the second part of your sentence in tags

here's a logic conundrum for you, if a particle has mass, then it's affected by SR as it approaches the speed of light, mass continues to increase...now, how much energy would be required for a photon to match the speed of light and what then would be it's resulting mass at that point? reminder, mass/energy is considered to infinitely increase as the object approaches c.

now there could be a flaw with SR where photons are exempt from the rule, so even if they have negligible mass it's doesn't matter. but i haven't noticed any reports that photons are exhibiting the mass/energy they should be expected to have traveling at light speed. a case if you start with something you can increase that (mass) if you start with nothing you cannot increase that.

SR requires an object to have mass to be affected by it's mass/energy increase as light speed is approached. if the object has no mass, there is no increase.

[dalolorn]

here's a logic conundrum for you, if a particle has mass, then it's affected by SR as it approaches the speed of light, mass continues to increase...now, how much energy would be required for a photon to match the speed of light and what then would be it's resulting mass at that point? reminder, mass/energy is considered to infinitely increase as the object approaches c.

now there could be a flaw with SR where photons are exempt from the rule, so even if they have negligible mass it's doesn't matter. but i haven't noticed any reports that photons are exhibiting the mass/energy they should be expected to have traveling at light speed. a case if you start with something you can increase that (mass) if you start with nothing you cannot increase that.

SR requires an object to have mass to be affected by it's mass/energy increase as light speed is approached. if the object has no mass, there is no increase.

I don't have a clue as to what SR is supposed to mean anyway. But I'm going to get that book after all.

*several minutes later* Funny, it wasn't there. I could have sworn it also displayed the mass of quarks, protons, and stuff, but it doesn't even display that.

Edit: Hold on, I just realized... SR = Special Relativity, am I right?

[deadspacex64]

I don't have a clue as to what SR is supposed to mean anyway. But I'm going to get that book after all.

*several minutes later* Funny, it wasn't there. I could have sworn it also displayed the mass of quarks, protons, and stuff, but it doesn't even display that.

Edit: Hold on, I just realized... SR = Special Relativity, am I right?

yep

+10 chars

[mustrumridcully0]

Photons are not affected by gravity.

Space-time is affected by gravity, which is what causes the apparent "bending" of light.
I believe this is still one area where we have no definitive model - quantum mechanics has gravitons, while relativity theory has it as curving space time. Models that attempt to unify both actually go so far an describe all forces (electro-weak, electro-strong, gravity and electro-magnetic force) as curving of space time, but it requires a 10-dimensional spacetime instead of a 4-dimensional - and so far these theories haven't really predicted anything we could test. (IIRC, even the Higgs Boson is insufficient here, it is just another confirmation of our models for elemental particles).

Anyway - you don't need mass to be affected by gravity. You just need mass to cause your own gravity field.

[hortwort]

it requires a 10-dimensional spacetime instead of a 4-dimensional - and so far these theories haven't really predicted anything we could test.

String Theory took quite a blow last year. Someone finally thought of a way to test one of the more popular variants of it, and the test came back negative. I haven't heard too much about it since then.

Sliders will never be the same now.

[sollvax]

Photons exert pressure
HAVE mass and are particles

you can stream photons
you can also measure them

Ergo they are physical objects

[beezle23]

Actually, I think my science encyclopedia (may have spelled that wrong, sorry) gives them a mass of Something E-Something (I don't remember the exact numbers, and I trust you know what E stands for... right?).

From what I recall, it's not true mass, but "relativistic mass" (aka effective momentum) based on the effect light has on semiconductors (how many electrons it moves).

- - - -

Some "light" reading:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.html

[sollvax]

problem is its all Theory

And the theorys are all equally valid (and if you listen to some of the REALLY drunk Quantum boys may all be right depending on who is looking at the particle)

But the fact is that gravity is shown to effect photons
as is air , water , glass
they can be bent , slowed down and even stopped

in someways the standing wave theory of light holds more water than the particulate theory


but the thing is they are probably BOTH wrong

Some of the worlds finest nutcases (sorry scientists) debate this constantly and can't agree

We who are after all slightly more sober simply can't grasp the concepts as loosely

I have often suspected it would all make a lot more sense If I were REALLY REALLY DRUNK

[mustrumridcully0]

problem is its all Theory

And the theorys are all equally valid (and if you listen to some of the REALLY drunk Quantum boys may all be right depending on who is looking at the particle)

In science, not all theories are equally valid. In fact, some are outright invalid, because they make predictions that are false, e.g. you test the prediction and the predicted event/measurement does not occur.

Any scientific theory that "holds water" needs to make predictions that we can check via experiments and measurements. And for it to be interesting to be adopted, it also requires it to make new predictions - if it just does what another theory does, it's only equivalent.

That's for an example a problem for the string theory - so far, it doesn't make any new predictions that we could check.

But Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity have made many predictions, and so far all that were tested were found correct. Which is why physicist have a high confidence that QM and GR are solid and useful theories.
Still, there are areas where QM and GR are in conflict - which means they are probably not the complete picture yet, and scientists are looking for a unifying theory of both - which has the requirement that the predictions it makes still fit all the predictions QM and GR made correctly.

[sollvax]

Einstein himself said "My Theory will probably be disproven eventually , I look forward to reading the equation that disproves it"
Refering to the General theory

sadly he died before it happened and as an athiest did not believe in anything beyond
(some people claim he was a believer but thats unproven )

[hevach]

Ok, now you're hitting one of my pet peeves. "Just theory"? You've said that several times, and it's time to lay down the theory.

I say lay down the theory, because theory is a higher level than law. Theory does not become law upon confirmation, theory requires law to already be confirmed. The laws of gravity predates the theory of gravity by centuries, Newton revolutionized laws that had been largely taken for granted since Galileo, but was unable to establish a theoretical framework for why the laws were consistent. Likewise Darwin's theory never became law because the laws behind his theory were established years earlier, most notably by Lamarck, who's theoretical framework for it was hilariously wrong but still established the law of modification by descent quite soundly.

While we're at it, photons do not require mass to be a thing. Nothing does. A thing requires energy to be a thing. If photons have a mass, even if that mass is energy equivalent to less than one quanta (and therefore zero), due to relativistic correction their inertial mass must be infinite.

All particles - massive and massless - obey relativity, a single set of equations. But if we assume massless have mass, we must establish two sets of equations governing different two classes of particles. And since they all have mass, the distinction between those two classes is completely arbitrary, there is no observable trait to separate them, and no theoretical framework for why they do not obey a single set of rules.

They do not need mass to exert pressure - pressure is the transfer of energy on contact. Pressure only requires energy, not mass, and photons are mass.

[sollvax]

Energy is a PROPERTY of matter

it does not exist without matter

Chemical energy , potential energy etc are all produced by the action or interaction or destruction or transformation of matter

Gravity is a property of matter as well


And the "guidelines of Gravity" are not a law they are more a rule of thumb

There are a very few "laws" in the cosmos that are set in stone (another form of MATTER)

and these include

1 Any object with existance has mass
2 Any object with mass can effect any other object with mass even if not measurably so
3 any object without mass is nul or a projection of a real object
4 the cosmos can not be of infinate size as this is mathmatically impossible
5 there is exactly 1 universe

you can dispute any of these
but you will be wrong


Scientists look for questions to fit the answers and answers to fit the questions
A good scientist accepts he knows less than his grandfather and more than his grandsons because there is an endless supply of questions and a limited supply of answers

[hevach]

Einstein himself said "My Theory will probably be disproven eventually , I look forward to reading the equation that disproves it"
Refering to the General theory

He was referring to a unified theory that would model both quantum and classical systems. He was not referring to his theory being proven wrong, but being surplanted by a more complete model.

sadly he died before it happened and as an athiest did not believe in anything beyond
(some people claim he was a believer but thats unproven )

He did not believe in anything after because he was an Orthodox Jew, and Jewish belief in an afterlife is limited, and didn't come around until Einstein was an adult.

He wrote extensively about himself as a Jew, as well. "I consider this the greatest day of my life. Before, I have always found something to regret in the Jewish soul, and that is the forgetfulness of its own people. Today, I have been made happy by the sight of the Jewish people learning to recognize themselves and to make themselves recognized as a force in the world." (after returning from his trip to Palestine), "For me the most beautiful thing is to be in contact with a few fine Jews?a few millennia of a civilized past do mean something after all. In my whole life I have never felt so Jewish as now." (referring to the many brilliant Jews fleeting Germany that he met), "All my life I have dealt with objective matters, hence I lack both the natural aptitude and the experience to deal properly with people and to exercise official function. I am the more distressed over these circumstances because my relationship with the Jewish people became my strongest human tie once I achieved complete clarity about our precarious position among the nations of the world." (upon turning down the presidency of Israel for feeling he had not done enough to help other Jews).

[hortwort]

It's so unfortunate when bad things happen to good threads. :(

[hevach]

1 Any object with existance has mass
2 Any object with mass can effect any other object with mass even if not measurably so
3 any object without mass is nul or a projection of a real object
4 the cosmos can not be of infinate size as this is mathmatically impossible
5 there is exactly 1 universe


I know that list. You shortened number 4 and left out 6 and 7, but this is Henry Morris's work. A hydraulic engineer who's not even good at what he is educated in who writes extensively about biology, geology, chemistry, astronomy, and physics as part of an organization that intentionally deludes people for financial and political reasons.

I thought I was dealing with somebody who had a grade school understanding of classical mechanics and was trying to talk real physics with educated people. But now that I know you're working out of the YEC cookbook, I can see that you never entered this thread intending to discuss from an intellectually honest position.

[sollvax]

I confess my knowledge of the Abrahamistic faiths is limited
(Islam , Judaism , Christianity)
So im not entirely sure what the Jewish afterlife belief currently is.

I would like to meet Einstein in the life to come as I am quite interested in hearing his views on the intercosmic universe (a theory that appeared after his death) and the recursive universe (a theory that I have never fully understood)

As a mind he ranks up there with Xeno and Apellion so he would be interesting to talk with..


of course if the higgs particle exists there is no life to come for any of us which would be disappointing

[sollvax]

I know that list. You shortened number 4 and left out 6 and 7, but this is Henry Morris's work. A hydraulic engineer who's not even good at what he is educated in who writes extensively about biology, geology, chemistry, astronomy, and physics as part of an organization that intentionally deludes people for financial and political reasons.

never heard of him
the list as given is based on Sir Henry Jordans work (early 20th century)
His work was based on that of older thinkers (mostly roman)
if henry morris is claiming it as his own then he is a total fraud

organisations which do this (scientologists , cern , greenworld trust) should not be trusted
only people who are decently DEAD can be relied upon not to have an angle


I thought I was dealing with somebody who had a grade school understanding of classical mechanics and was trying to talk real physics with educated people

where as you are talking to someone with more than one degree and who is at least as educated as you are (just from a different angle)

. But now that I know you're working out of the YEC cookbook, I can see that you never entered this thread intending to discuss from an intellectually honest position.

if you were intellectually honest you would not be claiming to be intellectual at all

Science is about ignorance and questions
a GOOD scientist knows he knows little or nothing and strives to learn

a poor one thinks he knows everything and tries to teach

im not a scientist
My area of expertise is actually Engineering (the blowing stuff up sort mostly)
my secondary area is classical history and mythology

My cosmic view is older than yours but equally valid

[suricatta]

But that's

-- snip --



100% aggree with everything you've stated, this is not a discovery with immedite use (as is the way with most discoveries), but it is indeed a huge breakthough in our understanding of the very fabric of the universe. I'm really looked forward to the theories that come from this discovery and possable applications.



-- snip --



100% disaggree with everything you've stated, I can only think that you've gone so far off track in this topic because the media have called it 'The God particle' and because of that you've linked it to religion. Eitherway, I'm completely perplexed by your view of the world.

[sollvax]

a particle that makes illusionary objects seem solid disproves the universe

so to me it means NOTHING would be real
Ergo there is no possibility it can be real

this has led to one person mistaking me for a (I just looked him up) Young earth american creationist

which is DEEPLY funny

the cosmos is VERY old (older than the 6000 years this guy believes in for a start)

older than the so called "big bang"
and older than the concept of time itself

because it must have always existed or there was no "here" for a big bang to occur in

Now maybe I merely misunderstand the insanity put forward by the people at cern
but if thats the case then they need to make it clear that this "particle" is matter , has mass and is part of the physical cosmos

in which case they need to stop poking it

[hevach]

this has led to one person mistaking me for a (I just looked him up) Young earth american creationist

You quoted his arguments against quantum mechanics and uncertainty, in the order he numbers them, minus the two nonsequiters that tie it to biological evolution. And in fact, in your last post, you start right off with his argument against particle duality in your ridiculous string of logic.


the cosmos is VERY old (older than the 6000 years this guy believes in for a start)

older than the so called "big bang"
and older than the concept of time itself

because it must have always existed or there was no "here" for a big bang to occur in


This is a fundamental misunderstanding. It's common. It's one of Henry Morris's arguments against deep time, in fact - that the universe must be infinite in age for there to be a place for it to begin. Your previous claim that the universe cannot be infinitely large also sounds like his - there is, in fact, no mathematical reason that the universe could not be infinite, but Morris has contrived one. I bring it up, though, because you've already pointed out that there can be nothing outside the universe. That's not completely true, but close enough that the distinction isn't worth making. But now, you're ignoring that fact and requiring there to be someplace outside the universe to provide the "here" where it formed. Both cannot be true.

Before I explain why both cannot be true, you have actually made so many of Morris's mistakes - every one of your gradeschool misconceptions of science is something he's pushed as the truth - that if the man wasn't dead I'd think he finally learned to use the internet.

The big bang was not an explosion into emptiness. It was not an explosion at all. It was not a center out of which the universe expanded into emptiness, it was a singularity. Time does not exist in the singularity, space does not exist in the singularity, no mass, no light, none of the four fundamental forces can exist in a singularity, only energy in its most elementary form. Even heat requires a space of nonzero size before it can exist.

There was only the singularity, no empty space around it. The universe had (and still has) no edge, there is nothing around it, less than nothing because there is nowhere around it for nothing to be. The singularity did not require a "here" to expand into, because it was the only here - emtiness expanding into itself, not something expanding into emptiness. It is finite, but like the surface of a sphere has no boundary - a straight path ignoring all forces or obstacles will eventually return to its origin. There may be something other than the universe, but a multiverse would be something truly other, outside the closed system and casually separate from it, irrelevant to any discussion of this one's origin or demise.

[captainrevo1]

It's so unfortunate when bad things happen to good threads. :(

that god damn particle ;)

[sollvax]

You quoted his arguments against quantum mechanics and uncertainty, in the order he numbers them, minus the two nonsequiters that tie it to biological evolution. And in fact, in your last post, you start right off with his argument against particle duality in your ridiculous string of logic.

no HE Quoted MY argument (which is older than him by a LONG way)

Quote:
the cosmos is VERY old (older than the 6000 years this guy believes in for a start)

older than the so called "big bang"
and older than the concept of time itself

because it must have always existed or there was no "here" for a big bang to occur in

This is a fundamental misunderstanding. It's common. It's one of Henry Morris's arguments against deep time, in fact - that the universe must be infinite in age for there to be a place for it to begin. Your previous claim that the universe cannot be infinitely large also sounds like his - there is, in fact, no mathematical reason that the universe could not be infinite, but Morris has contrived one.

infinite universe and Finite matter = vac and nul (basic maths) any mass divided by infinite space = nul

infinite matter = solid object (again basic maths)
both impossible

this morris guy is what we call a "FRAUD"
he is misusing older information to make money


You have actually made so many of his mistakes - every one of your gradeschool misconceptions of science is something he's pushed as the truth - that if the man wasn't dead I'd think he finally learned to use the internet.

Grades school = you are an american unused to dealing with an Alpha mind (someone whi does not kiss the backside of the latest trend)
The Alpha mind is hard to change and hard to break


The big bang was not an explosion into emptiness.

some say it was

It was not an explosion at all. It was not a center out of which the universe expanded into emptiness, it was a singularity.

A "mass point "
which would exist in a location

Time does not exist in the singularity, space does not exist in the singularity, no mass, no light, none of the four fundamental forces can exist in a singularity, only energy in its most elementary form. Even heat requires a space of nonzero size before it can exist.

so there is no such thing
a nul can not become a positive or a negative its a nul

Time is NOT a force it is a concept

There was only the singularity, no empty space around it.

there would have to be

it would be a point mass (smaller than the current solar system) ERGO its in a space


The universe had (and still has) no edge, there is nothing around it, less than nothing because there is nowhere around it for nothing to be.

i bet you also believe in the easter bunny and true love?

Of course it has an edge its just a long way out

The singularity did not require a "here" to expand into, because it was the only here - emtiness expanding into itself, not something expanding into emptiness.

religion ??

In the begining was the word and the word was god etc

It is finite, but like the surface of a sphere has no boundary -

it does you know
a Sphere has a surface and an inside
you can not see the outside from the inside perhaps but its there (also a sphere is an unlikely choice a ovate is more likely)

a straight path ignoring all forces or obstacles will eventually return to its origin.

fire a bullet inside a balloon it hits the outside and leaves


There may be something other than the universe, but a multiverse would be something truly other, outside the closed system and casually separate from it, irrelevant to any discussion of this one's origin or demise.

you can by definition only have ONE universe
it may have "subverse" or "interverse" spaces but they are all inside the ONE universe
(more than one universe is like owning TWO unique items which are identical )


now please do not compare me with some sad Dead religious flimflam man who wanted "donations"

Because GODS do not need a space ship
or a credit card number

[hortwort]

So anyway, back to the original topic... I was linked to a video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Uh5mTxRQcg) that explains the Higgs pretty well.

[hevach]

no HE Quoted MY argument (which is older than him by a LONG way)

infinite universe and Finite matter = vac and nul (basic maths) any mass divided by infinite space = nul

infinite matter = solid object (again basic maths)
both impossible

now please do not compare me with some sad Dead religious flimflam man who wanted "donations"

Quote from The Creation Flood, published decades before you made your argument:

An infinite universe with finite matter is a vacuum with null density. Any mass divided by infinite space yields zero density. Indeed, infinite mass divided by infinite space also gives zero density, yet infinite matter necessitates a solid object encompassing the entire infinite universe. Both of these possibilities fly in the face of the most basic observation.

Word for word, at least until he goes off the deep end right after and says, "The mathematics are complex, but any radius much exceeding seven thousand light years will always yield either impossibly high or impossibly low densities."

Only, of course, if you ignore something called cardinality. One infinity is not always equal to another infinity.

A universe of infinite size with finite mass localized in a finite space is consistent with deep-sky observation and only breaks down at the background radiation - this model would predict no background. This universe would have an average density of zero, but a localized finite nonzero density.

A universe of infinite size evenly populated with matter throughout is actually more consistent, as it actually predicts a background radiation, just not in the form we detect, it predicts a background through the entire spectrum. This universe would have infinite size, infinite mass, but finite nonzero density, because countably infinite/uncountably infinite can yield an answer in the form of a real number.

[sollvax]

Quote from The Creation Flood, published decades before you made your argument:


Quote:
An infinite universe with finite matter is a vacuum with null density. Any mass divided by infinite space yields zero density. Indeed, infinite mass divided by infinite space also gives zero density, yet infinite matter necessitates a solid object encompassing the entire infinite universe. Both of these possibilities fly in the face of the most basic observation.

then they owe royalties to Henry Jordan (who said it slightly earlier) and various people dating back to the reformation



Word for word, at least until he goes off the deep end right after and says, "The mathematics are complex, but any radius much exceeding seven thousand light years will always yield either impossibly high or impossibly low densities."

well thats Balls
the size before nul (a much older term than Vacuum) is not calculable unless you know the actual mass of the universe and we don't

But as the observable universe is at least 12 times larger than that (even allowing for fraud on the part of nasa) he needs to speak to his maths teacher



Only, of course, if you ignore something called cardinality. One infinity is not always equal to another infinity.

Maths says it does (GREEK maths actually)

A universe of infinite size with finite mass localized in a finite space is consistent with deep-sky observation and only breaks down at the background radiation - this model would predict no background. This universe would have an average density of zero, but a localized finite nonzero density.

it could not localise it would disperse at infinite speed

A universe of infinite size evenly populated with matter throughout is actually more consistent, as it actually predicts a background radiation, just not in the form we detect, it predicts a background through the entire spectrum. This universe would have infinite size, infinite mass, but finite nonzero density, because the infinite mass is cardinally lower than the infinite size.

it would be SOLID
and full of an infinite number of religious and scientific frauds

you see its possible to understand that the universe can't be endless without believing in Abraham
or Unicorns (Unicorns having been observed / reported more often than higgs particles)
and by more credible men (including several Knights )

[dalolorn]

then they owe royalties to Henry Jordan (who said it slightly earlier) and various people dating back to the reformation




well thats Balls
the size before nul (a much older term than Vacuum) is not calculable unless you know the actual mass of the universe and we don't

But as the observable universe is at least 12 times larger than that (even allowing for fraud on the part of nasa) he needs to speak to his maths teacher




Maths says it does (GREEK maths actually)



it could not localise it would disperse at infinite speed



it would be SOLID
and full of an infinite number of religious and scientific frauds

you see its possible to understand that the universe can't be endless without believing in Abraham
or Unicorns (Unicorns having been observed / reported more often than higgs particles)
and by more credible men (including several Knights )

Sollvax, having what you called an "Alpha mind" is one thing. Having the mind of an idiot is another. They both share what you said - they are hard to change and hard to break.

[sollvax]

Definitions

Alpha mind
Intractable , Strong willed , obsessive , prepared to die for a cause or ideal , prone to considering only one point of view often a trait of military officers , religious vocations and Scientists

Beta mind
Seeks to adapt to the Group view , concilatory , agreeable , follower type

Delta mind
Evaluates the flow and seeks a level ground , indecisive , often a trait in social workers , teachers and care professions

Epsilon mind
Hates order and reason , will argue ANY point to attack or destroy anothers view

Theres also the "multiple" mind
who does not fit these

when Alpha personalities clash neither will give ground
because BOTH are right
in the view of the one being in existance either of them will listen to (themself)

and yes i am an Alpha mind
I do not bow to group will

And i don't like to be threatened or told to self terminate either

[carmenara]

Yet another USELESS debate.

Can we just wrap this up and create a Higgs Particle Trace item (and doff missions) for STO? Or at least post ideas for the Devs to consider as a homage to science.

Excuse me for interjecting but Sollvax has been known to have many alternative views from the rest of us. However, this is no justification to continually target him on the forums.

I've met him before in game. I quite regularly see him on ESD Zone chat every 'morning' US time. There is nothing inherently wrong with his viewpoints. Infact, his commentary can be a refreshing change of pace and point out various new discussion points none of us had seen before.

There is no gain calling him out. There is no gain calling him names. Accept that he is from a different culture from the rest of us STO community members (if you talked to sollvax you'll realize that). Sollvax is, I repeat, one of US THE COMMUNITY and it is up to us to try and find some way of reaching a consensus on this forums without butting heads for months on end creating forum drama for no logical purpose.

Because you know, I actually sat in on a few ESD debates which seemed to run against sollvax (he jokingly talks about Hirogen-like people hunting him down and was afraid to voice his opinion), Nevertheless, as much as I was irritated by SOME of his words and conversation paths, I also realized he made very good points in often indirect ways.

This dynamicism of human culture has the potential to highlight discussion areas that the rest of us miss out. Even if you disagree, there is an option to avoid him, pursue other paths of discussion, or take any other option you deem feasible.

Anything that doesn't involve personal attacks and/or ridicule, because you know, he's been subject to that for at least 3 months now, and like it or not, he's here to stay.

If no one can make sense of sollvax's posts, then fine. I will take it upon myself to communicate with this individual whom you all despise. I will chart down a list of his ideas on a regularly updated blog. I will write analyses and how they related to STO's current affairs.

I will give him a place in the community, and his own niche to fill, just as we all have found in our weeks, months and indeed, years here.

You cannot change how a person reacts to social stimuli. But you can use his base reasoning and posts in good faith to find common ground and develop them. This is what Star Trek is about - creating progress out of seemingly impossible situations through advancement and enlightenment.

And if no one is going to take up that challenge, that is where I will boldly go. Because you know, those ESD debates were transformed into constructive analyses in a mere 5 minutes of casual ESD zone chat participation and debate.

[sollvax]

Thanks

actually there is a suggestion for a particle already

[hortwort]

Anything that doesn't involve personal attacks and/or ridicule, because you know, he's been subject to that for at least 3 months now, and like it or not, he's here to stay.


The problem is he started off by insulting the scientific profession, suggesting they fabricated results for personal gain. This is *highly* insulting to every scientist, like calling all women prostitutes. A lot of people were offended, but he just kept going anyway. Everyone who tried to get the thread back on topic just got drowned out as he trolled more and more.

If you think that's all fine, then how much? It's okay, I'm from a different culture.

[sollvax]

I said that the results were not to be trusted until confirmed by someone paid NOT to find it

Scientists like anyone else can be corrupt

and I see this research as dangerous , expensive and clearly a risk to mankind

because true or false its going to make people doubt the world
and people who lose faith tend to kill

[dalolorn]

Yet another USELESS debate.

Can we just wrap this up and create a Higgs Particle Trace item (and doff missions) for STO? Or at least post ideas for the Devs to consider as a homage to science.

Excuse me for interjecting but Sollvax has been known to have many alternative views from the rest of us. However, this is no justification to continually target him on the forums.

I've met him before in game. I quite regularly see him on ESD Zone chat every 'morning' US time. There is nothing inherently wrong with his viewpoints. Infact, his commentary can be a refreshing change of pace and point out various new discussion points none of us had seen before.

There is no gain calling him out. There is no gain calling him names. Accept that he is from a different culture from the rest of us STO community members (if you talked to sollvax you'll realize that). Sollvax is, I repeat, one of US THE COMMUNITY and it is up to us to try and find some way of reaching a consensus on this forums without butting heads for months on end creating forum drama for no logical purpose.

Because you know, I actually sat in on a few ESD debates which seemed to run against sollvax (he jokingly talks about Hirogen-like people hunting him down and was afraid to voice his opinion), Nevertheless, as much as I was irritated by SOME of his words and conversation paths, I also realized he made very good points in often indirect ways.

This dynamicism of human culture has the potential to highlight discussion areas that the rest of us miss out. Even if you disagree, there is an option to avoid him, pursue other paths of discussion, or take any other option you deem feasible.

Anything that doesn't involve personal attacks and/or ridicule, because you know, he's been subject to that for at least 3 months now, and like it or not, he's here to stay.

If no one can make sense of sollvax's posts, then fine. I will take it upon myself to communicate with this individual whom you all despise. I will chart down a list of his ideas on a regularly updated blog. I will write analyses and how they related to STO's current affairs.
I will give him a place in the community, and his own niche to fill, just as we all have found in our weeks, months and indeed, years here.

You cannot change how a person reacts to social stimuli. But you can use his base reasoning and posts in good faith to find common ground and develop them. This is what Star Trek is about - creating progress out of seemingly impossible situations through advancement and enlightenment.

And if no one is going to take up that challenge, that is where I will boldly go. Because you know, those ESD debates were transformed into constructive analyses in a mere 5 minutes of casual ESD zone chat participation and debate.

Where is it? :)

And for the record, I do sometimes agree with his posts. For example, the "Are small fleets doomed?" thread, where his answers were often comprehensible (as much as they can be with his kind of spelling, anyway :D), and in fact, I even sided with him when some guy wanted to remove 90% of all existing fleets, and likely shrink the remaining 10%.

[sollvax]

Some of us are working in a second or third language (with the wrong Alphabet as well) We try

[dalolorn]

Some of us are working in a second or third language (with the wrong Alphabet as well) We try

You were referring to my comment on your spelling/grammar/etc., I presume?

And come to think of it, "spelling" was a very poor choice of words, as you do it quite well - however your posts are somewhat chaotic and break some of the more basic rules of grammar (upper and lower-case usage, commas, semicolons, periods... that sort of stuff, makes your posts a bit hard to read in my opinion)

[sollvax]

Think of me as not so much wrong as a few centuries out of date .

I learned English as a requirement of my Military training more than anything else.

So I would imagine I come across as filling in a requistion form .

Probably for Tires (ever tried to get tires from a military stores NCO?)

STFS do not come close

[dalolorn]

I wouldn't know, I'm going to hit 15 later this year :D

[mustrumridcully0]

So anyway, back to the original topic... I was linked to a video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Uh5mTxRQcg) that explains the Higgs pretty well.

I can offer this in return: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qzqIHj4uGI

[hortwort]

I can offer this in return: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qzqIHj4uGI

Nice! It sounds sort of silly to think that thing could give other particles mass since its rest mass is so much more than the proton though. I hadn't really thought about it until she said something. Argh.

(Also, sorry if my last post offended anyone. I was in a grumpy mood when I typed it because I was worried about a friend of mine.)

[notapwefan]

(Also, sorry if my last post offended anyone. I was in a grumpy mood when I typed it because I was worried about a friend of mine.)

Not a good idea to post online when you are in dispersal mode grumpy.