EPTHiggs Particle Announcement Incoming!!! - Page 28
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Astronomy74
United States31 Posts
| ||
|
Krowser
Canada788 Posts
On July 04 2012 22:42 Astronomy74 wrote: Bye Bye relgion! well soon hopefully lol Not even close. To completely cancel out religion you need to prove that God doesn't exist, and even then you'll have to deal with millions of people in denial. Discovering new particles changes nothing. Many, many physicists and other scientists are religious people, it doesn't interfere with their research. If anything, the Higgs Boson will only help to prove that God is an infinitely powerful being, seeing as how he created those particles. | ||
|
mierin
United States4943 Posts
On July 04 2012 22:42 Astronomy74 wrote: Bye Bye relgion! well soon hopefully lol LOL, that's not how that works Anyway, glad this issue was put to rest. It seemed like not much was going on in the scientific community nowadays (at least publicly anyway). | ||
|
oGoZenob
France1503 Posts
On July 04 2012 22:42 Astronomy74 wrote: Bye Bye religion! well soon hopefully lol I wish it was that easy... | ||
|
ecstatica
United States542 Posts
On July 04 2012 23:09 Krowser wrote: Not even close. To completely cancel out religion you need to prove that God doesn't exist, and even then you'll have to deal with millions of people in denial. Discovering new particles changes nothing. Many, many physicists and other scientists are religious people, it doesn't interfere with their research. If anything, the Higgs Boson will only help to prove that God is an infinitely powerful being, seeing as how he created those particles. Source? Names? Sounds like blissful ignorance on your part. Science rarely has to do with supernatural beliefs, esp in 'christian' world. | ||
|
ShadeR
Australia7535 Posts
| ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
| ||
|
Krowser
Canada788 Posts
On July 04 2012 23:28 ecstatica wrote: Source? Names? Sounds like blissful ignorance on your part. Science rarely has to do with supernatural beliefs, esp in 'christian' world. I'm not sure what you want me to explain. I was speaking from a christian point of view. Finding the Higgs Boson won't disprove religion because any religious person will easily fit it within their beliefs. I.E, God created the Higgs Boson and we are lucky to have discovered it. | ||
|
RoK Ot7Er
United States219 Posts
On July 04 2012 23:31 BluePanther wrote: So now.... what makes up a higgs boson? According to the standard model, nothing, the Higgs is a fundamental particle, much like electrons and quarks. | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On July 04 2012 23:33 RoK Ot7Er wrote: According to the standard model, nothing, the Higgs is a fundamental particle, much like electrons and quarks. That's kinda my point  I mean, we solved a certain level of physics (much like one time we solved the atom), but there's always more to learn. I'm no physicist, but I thought the standard model as we know it struggled with certain aspects of quantum physics, no? | ||
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
On July 04 2012 19:31 La1 wrote: yeah thats what i thought  Its a nice find and it will help the future but we wont see the effects of it for years because its just confirmation of a theoryso real world use = none Do you know the actual effect the Higgs boson have on all the other particles ? It could very be the first step (though i doubt it but i like to dream) to levitation, by say, manipulating the way it interact with matter so it weights significantly less. This sound futuristic and impossible, but you should remember that the photon is largely "used" today in a lot of our technologies. It's a particle just as the Higgs boson, that supports an interaction, with a null mass. You are among the people who make fundamental science difficult. Those people don't understand that 80% of our today technologies were discovered that way... (The 20% roughly coming from Company's R&D which aim to do "Today relevant science"). The percentages are probably innaccurate, but i wouldn't think it's way different from this basis. We didn't build nuclear powerplant the week after radioactivity was discovered... | ||
|
Ssin
United States88 Posts
On July 04 2012 23:38 BluePanther wrote: That's kinda my point I mean, we solved a certain level of physics (much like one time we solved the atom), but there's always more to learn. I'm no physicist, but I thought the standard model as we know it struggled with certain aspects of quantum physics, no? It does, but it is a great basis to understand most of the things we know about. It is kind of like Newtonian mechanics and special relativity. Newtonian mechanics is great for anything very much below the speed of light, but as you approach greater percentages of the speed of light, Newtonian mechanics breaks down. We still use Newtonian mechanics, much like we would still use the Standard Model if we found something better. On July 04 2012 23:46 Ragnarork wrote: Do you know the actual effect the Higgs boson have on all the other particles ? It could very be the first step (though i doubt it but i like to dream) to levitation, by say, manipulating the way it interact with matter so it weights significantly less. This sound futuristic and impossible, but you should remember that the photon is largely "used" today in a lot of our technologies. It's a particle just as the Higgs boson, that supports an interaction, with a null mass. You are among the people who make fundamental science difficult. Those people don't understand that 80% of our today technologies were discovered that way... (The 20% roughly coming from Company's R&D which aim to discover "Today relevant science"). The percentages are probably innaccurate, but i wouldn't think it's way different from this basis. We didn't build nuclear powerplant the week after radioactivity was discovered... It is unfortunate that people down play science as such, but the only thing we can do is press on and ten to twenty years down the road go AHA I TOLD YOU. I live for those moments. | ||
|
Figgy
Canada1788 Posts
On July 04 2012 12:06 Nemesis wrote: We don't "pretty much know" it exist until we have physical evidence for it. Looks like CERN has finished their time machine and is now planning on making an announcement that the world is theirs to conquer. Someone has been watching just enough Stein's Gate | ||
|
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
On July 04 2012 23:58 Figgy wrote: It is unfortunate that people down play science as such, but the only thing we can do is press on and ten to twenty years down the road go AHA I TOLD YOU. I live for those moments. Exactly. *20 years later, Flying cars* AHA I TOLD YOU ! | ||
|
imallinson
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On July 04 2012 23:38 BluePanther wrote: That's kinda my point I mean, we solved a certain level of physics (much like one time we solved the atom), but there's always more to learn. I'm no physicist, but I thought the standard model as we know it struggled with certain aspects of quantum physics, no? We know the standard model isn't entirely correct because it misses out important stuff like gravity and dark matter. Finding the Higgs shows we are on the right path though and that the standard model works for the particles we have found. | ||
|
AimlessAmoeba
Canada704 Posts
| ||
|
kineSiS-
Korea (South)1068 Posts
In all likelihood, this will be exactly like when they stated they found a particle faster than the speed of light. Found out they had an error in testing. Then claimed again the previous statement and were found to be wrong AGAIN. | ||
|
RoK Ot7Er
United States219 Posts
On July 04 2012 23:38 BluePanther wrote: That's kinda my point I mean, we solved a certain level of physics (much like one time we solved the atom), but there's always more to learn. I'm no physicist, but I thought the standard model as we know it struggled with certain aspects of quantum physics, no? You could make that argument ad infinitum though. At some point there has to be something that is fundamental, otherwise nothing is. The leading alternative to the standard model is string theory which describes particles as vibrations of 11-dimensional "strings". In this model the strings are the "fundamental particles" and asking what they are made of doesn't actually make sense. I can't think of any large conflicts with quantum physics off the top of my head, however there are VERY large discrepancies between the standard model and general relativity. String theory addresses many of these concerns. EDIT: I should add that we have good reason to believe this along with the other SM fundamental particles are fundamental, as opposed to the atom/protons/neutrons being "fundamental" due to being the smallest thing we could see. | ||
|
dragonblade369
Canada464 Posts
On July 05 2012 00:34 kineSiS- wrote: This is stupid. In all likelihood, this will be exactly like when they stated they found a particle faster than the speed of light. Found out they had an error in testing. Then claimed again the previous statement and were found to be wrong AGAIN. Do u have any knowledge in physics? EDIT: Or statistics for that matter | ||
|
Ragnarork
France9034 Posts
On July 05 2012 00:34 kineSiS- wrote: This is stupid. In all likelihood, this will be exactly like when they stated they found a particle faster than the speed of light. Found out they had an error in testing. Then claimed again the previous statement and were found to be wrong AGAIN. Except they have results from two different detectors, which came up with the same observation. | ||
| ||
