CERN is the European Centre for Nuclear Physics Research.
In a nutshell, the Standard Model of Particle Physics was proposed about 50 years ago which tied together many different observations observed in labs around the world. It also made verifiable predictions that experimenters could use to disprove the model, including the existence of particles that had never been seen before, or even suspected to exist.
Over the years after that, more and more results were being produced and no experiment has been able to produce a result that undermines the Standard Model.
For the past few decades, thousands of scientists from over 40 countries have collaborated on a project to verify the existence of the last missing piece to the Standard Model.
The Higgs boson was proposed almost 50 years ago to explain why matter has mass. However, we have never been able to produce proof for this particle.
It was only a matter of time before we zeroed in on it but it is still an extremely important time for the human race.
This is a really good video put together by the author of PhD comics about the Higgs boson.
If you go through the thread, I was Live Reporting the 2 presentations given prior to the public Press Conference. You'll find a lot of information there. Please feel free to post questions and I'm sure someone will be able to answer.
In summary: The CMS Collaboration reports: mass of the Higgs-like boson = 125 +/- 0.6 GeV / c^2 at the 5 sigma level.
The Atlas Collaboration reports: mass of Higgs-like boson ~ 126.5 GeV / c^2 at the 5 sigma level.
This means that independently two groups have a result that might be a statistic error once in 3.5 million times.
Personal Anecdote: Many years ago, I helped with assembling parts for the ATLAS detector when I did a coop placement at Carleton University in Ottawa so I helped in some small way!
On July 04 2012 11:52 GDbushido wrote: "hey guys, we accidentally opened a portal to another dimension. you've all played half-life right? yeah, its kinda like that. sorry."
Hey this University of Toronto guy could very be the Bobby Orr of quantum physics! Oh wai-
Jokes aside, I must that after learning about the SP hybridization with the Hund's law and how it determines the properties of each substance on a sub-molecular level, this is piquing my fascination.
At one point, the atom was considered the basic building block of life. Then further research uncovered subatomic particles such as protons, neutrons and electrons. And still more particles were discovered. But what gave those particles their mass?
In 1964, Peter Higgs suggested a particle, aptly named the Higgs boson, interacted with those particles and gave them mass as they passed through an energy field — in effect, creating mass from nothing. Proving the Higgs boson’s existence could solve the mystery of how the universe was formed.
So scientists did what any curious child might do: smash things together and analyze the mess. In the Large Hadron Collider, a 27-kilometre circular tunnel underneath Geneva, scientists launch beams of protons at each other to create trillions of particle collisions — reproductions of the Big Bang.
The Higgs boson lurks in the aftermath of these collisions, but it’s an extremely rare event.
“It’s like looking for a needle in fields and fields of haystacks,” said Richard Teuscher, another U of T physicist working on the project.
So that people know it has nothing to do with a black hole and how this discovery can affect science.
if we pretty much know it already exists, whats the big deal? you can never "see" it or interact with it, only see the traces of it (afaik).
i guess it's just "official" "proof" that the higgs field exists throughout our universe given all the data they've collected? doesn't change much except our understanding of the universe, which is pretty important i guess ^_^
On July 04 2012 12:00 xOny wrote: if we pretty much know it already exists, whats the big deal? you can never "see" it or interact with it, only see the traces of it (afaik).
i guess it's just "official" "proof" that the higgs field exists throughout our universe given all the data they've collected? doesn't change much except our understanding of the universe, which is pretty important i guess ^_^
It is insanely important. I don't think you grasp the entirety of what this can mean to future techonology/science! The discovery of the higgs boson may even develop further into actually being able to control it.
On July 04 2012 11:55 keyStorm wrote: but does it change the physics we know of?
the exact opposite, it would confirm the physics we know of. (unfortunately imo..)
On July 04 2012 12:00 xOny wrote: if we pretty much know it already exists, whats the big deal? you can never "see" it or interact with it, only see the traces of it (afaik).
i guess it's just "official" "proof" that the higgs field exists throughout our universe given all the data they've collected? doesn't change much except our understanding of the universe, which is pretty important i guess ^_^
We predicted that it exists, we don't know that it exists. If we didn't find it, then the standard model would probably have to be altered.
On July 04 2012 11:57 Xiphos wrote: Hey this University of Toronto guy could very be the Bobby Orr of quantum physics! Oh wai-
I like your canadian/hockey refrence there :p I'm sure michael jordan would've been better.
But the professor's name is truly, and genuinely 'Bob Orr'. If I've used Michael Jackson instead of the Hockey player, the jokes wouldn't be nearly as humorous.
On July 04 2012 12:00 xOny wrote: if we pretty much know it already exists, whats the big deal? you can never "see" it or interact with it, only see the traces of it (afaik).
i guess it's just "official" "proof" that the higgs field exists throughout our universe given all the data they've collected? doesn't change much except our understanding of the universe, which is pretty important i guess ^_^
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.
So from what little I know and understand, it seems we're about to confirm that there is some "essence" that exists in all atoms, the tiniest of tiniest particles, that gives the energy of the atom its appropriate mass. Or something like that. To have any sort of image or understanding of such a fundamental component to matter's existence seems like a pretty spectacular thing. Yay science!
First off, it is the product of collaboration between thousands of scientists from 40+ countries for over a generation. That in itself, is an amazing achievement for the human experience.
Next, by working out the energy at which it has been found, it puts strong limits on many different physical models. This will give researchers and theorists constraints under which to work with for 'Physics Beyond the Standard Model'.
Finally, it was the only missing particle whose existence had been predicted by the Standard Model. The Standard Model is among the most robust Theories that Physics has produced and the Higgs particle is what we use to explain why matter has mass. Not being able to find it means, that our picture of the universe was not complete.
Remember, the Standard Model is about 50 years old. The Higgs Particle was proposed about 48 years ago.
This shows to the world that although we will never know Absolute Truth, we can make reasonable guesses. These guesses are not merely just 'theories' as some people want to believe. Based upon our Theories, we are able to make verifiable predictions, even if it takes 50 years to do so.
On July 04 2012 12:11 kingjames01 wrote: It does a few things.
First off, it is the product of collaboration between thousands of scientists from 40+ countries for over a generation. That in itself, is an amazing achievement for the human experience.
Next, by working out the energy at which it has been found, it puts strong limits on many different physical models. This will give researchers and theorists constraints under which to work with for 'Physics Beyond the Standard Model'.
Finally, it was the only particle that had not been detected predicted by the Standard Model. The Standard Model is among the most robust Theories that Physics has produced and the Higgs particle is what we use to explain why matter has mass. Not being able to find it means, that our picture of the universe was not complete.
Remember, the Standard Model is about 50 years old. The Higgs Particle was proposed about 48 years ago.
This shows to the world that although we will never know Absolute Truth, we can make reasonable guesses. These guesses are not merely just 'theories' as some people want to believe. Based upon our Theories, we are able to make verifiable predictions, even if it takes 50 years to do so.
Is the standard model really complete? Don't we still have the proposed graviton to look for? (although through a different fashion)
On July 04 2012 12:08 mikell wrote: this is more important than the discovery of the electron. this is the discovery of a particle that causes particles to have MASS
Well even more important is the particle that causes the higgs particle to cause other particles to have mass!
On July 04 2012 11:55 keyStorm wrote: but does it change the physics we know of?
the exact opposite, it would confirm the physics we know of. (unfortunately imo..)
Heh, it's kind of funny that getting a negative answer to the existence of the Higgs is many more times interesting than a positive answer.
I guess it's sort of like Dark Energy in a way (at least until this announcement): we "know" it exists because something has to be doing its job. It's just a matter or being able to confirm it in some tangible way. Likewise we know something is propelling the Universe so we give it a name, Dark Energy. We've never seen it, can't say how it works or what it is, but something has to be doing the job.
It's amazing how consistently we're able to scientifically postulate things, and then decades later, find the missing piece we previously just assumed existed.
On July 04 2012 11:55 keyStorm wrote: but does it change the physics we know of?
the exact opposite, it would confirm the physics we know of. (unfortunately imo..)
Heh, it's kind of funny that getting a negative answer to the existence of the Higgs is many more times interesting than a positive answer.
It doesn't just confirm the physics we already know but also opens the door to discovering the physics we don't, such as how and why the universe started and what existed before it. If we hadn't found it then it would have caused chaos as the standard model would basically be completely wrong and we'd have wasted nearly a century on a wild goose chase.
On July 04 2012 12:11 kingjames01 wrote: It does a few things.
First off, it is the product of collaboration between thousands of scientists from 40+ countries for over a generation. That in itself, is an amazing achievement for the human experience.
Next, by working out the energy at which it has been found, it puts strong limits on many different physical models. This will give researchers and theorists constraints under which to work with for 'Physics Beyond the Standard Model'.
Finally, it was the only particle that had not been detected predicted by the Standard Model. The Standard Model is among the most robust Theories that Physics has produced and the Higgs particle is what we use to explain why matter has mass. Not being able to find it means, that our picture of the universe was not complete.
Remember, the Standard Model is about 50 years old. The Higgs Particle was proposed about 48 years ago.
This shows to the world that although we will never know Absolute Truth, we can make reasonable guesses. These guesses are not merely just 'theories' as some people want to believe. Based upon our Theories, we are able to make verifiable predictions, even if it takes 50 years to do so.
Is the standard model really complete? Don't we still have the proposed graviton to look for? (although through a different fashion)
This is true. Gravitons have not been detected yet but as the mediating particle for gravity it's existence is almost taken for granted. There are still many groups all around the world working on this problem.
On July 04 2012 11:52 GDbushido wrote: "hey guys, we accidentally opened a portal to another dimension. you've all played half-life right? yeah, its kinda like that. sorry."
This just made my day. Time to go find my crowbar and trusty .44 Magnum.
We are about to witness a truly momentous occasion in he history of humanity. I half confidence that it will be a very energetic announcement, and that it will come squarely, at great speed. I only wish that they might massively accelerate their official announcement, so as to force the world to acknowledge the importance of continued scientific research.
On July 04 2012 11:59 keyStorm wrote: someone care to explain to me why this is so important? -in details- please :D
It's a very big step in confirming scientific theories about how the universe works and functions. Knowing we're going in the right direction is a big deal, as it will allow physicists to continue onwards without worrying about wasting their time, as well as helping us make more accurate predictions and models. Plus, it will help to shut down a number of ideas that are floating around that are alternative ideas, which is useful because the proponents of them can stop wasting their time once we can prove they are incorrect.
In the future, it may eventually (a few hundred if not thousand years) be the underlying principle in the development of the Gravity Age.
Science fiction speculation ahead, read only if you like fun. + Show Spoiler +
Ever play Mass Effect? Knowing what precisely is the cause of mass is the first step in theoretically manipulating and controlling mass. Imagine, for example, if we were able to remove the higgs boson interaction with a set of particles: those particles might then have a mass of 0. Having a mass of 0 is the requirement for light speed travel, as it no longer requires infinite energy to reach light speed. There are all sorts of other implications that might eventually develop. This is speculation and all of this might not be possible, but it is, theoretically at least, plausible.
In the short term, this isn't a big deal, other than to those who want to know how and why matter has mass. In the long run, it will help scientists to develop their hypotheses and theories in the correct direction, and in the very long run, could be the start of all sorts of awesome technology.
I remember when they thought that the neutrino was faster than light. that was a big fuck up on their part. They must mean buissness this time given last time.
On July 04 2012 13:06 Spray wrote: I remember when they thought that the neutrino was faster than light. that was a big fuck up on their part. They must mean buissness this time given last time.
Most scientists were very skeptical of the neutrino affair in the first place. Even the scientists who conducted the experiment were pretty sure something was wrong, and that was reflected in the published paper. The whole thing just got blown out of proportion by idiot journalists.
On July 04 2012 13:06 Spray wrote: I remember when they thought that the neutrino was faster than light. that was a big fuck up on their part. They must mean buissness this time given last time.
Most scientists were very skeptical of the neutrino affair in the first place. Even the scientists who conducted the experiment were pretty sure something was wrong, and that was reflected in the published paper. The whole thing just got blown out of proportion by idiot journalists.
Exactly. The faster-than-light neutrino was not accepted at all within the scientific community. There were too many implications that made no sense with our physical world.
However, the existence of the Higgs boson has been waiting to be confirmed for decades.
On July 04 2012 13:14 chaoser wrote: Higgs Boson. God Particle. Fourth of July? Checkmate Atheists!
Damn I love that guy.
Nice reference.
On July 04 2012 13:25 Keitzer wrote: Oh man oh man.... can't WAIT to share this shit if it's 100% proven.
You don't know how science works. Nothing is ever 100% proven. If tomorrow evidence came that every theory science is currently using now is wrong it would cause everything to change. Not to reject it because it contradicts things that are already proven. In science there is only shown beyond reasonable doubt and not shown beyond reasonable doubt.
Thanks! I really like Jorge Cham's work. I'll add it to the OP.
It's disappointing that we're about to reach the conclusion of a decades long search, which is one of the most important events for the human experience and this thread keeps getting lost, while "Fit to Lick?" dominates the discussion for the night.
Thanks! I really like Jorge Cham's work. I'll add it to the OP.
It's disappointing that we're about to reach the conclusion of a decades long search, which is one of the most important events for the human experience and this thread keeps getting lost, while "Fit to Lick?" dominates the discussion for the night.
Yeah, I'm looking forward to hearing about any deviations from predictions. From what I can tell, there doesn't seem to be anything weird, but I'd like to hear it straight from them.
Also, I might do a Live Report, if I feel like it for anyone who misses the event.
So what I'll do is post the current time. From there, people can work out the general timeline. I apologize that this initial post will use EST but that's what my clock shows. After the event is done, I'll edit the OP with the LR so the information is all in one place.
The stream is showing various views of the auditorium filling up. Nothing of interest is happening yet. From time to time, the stream stops which I assume is due to the high volume of users.
I can't actually tell if they're behind schedule. However, they don't seem ready at all. There are about 4 rows of 'Reserved' seats that have not been filled up at all. I assume that those seats are being filled by important people who are still tied up in a different room.
On July 04 2012 15:11 Al Bundy wrote: Are they behind shcedule or is the timing normal? I'm starting to fall asleep but I don't want to miss the announcement.
Stream started at 2 am ET, but the announcement isn't supposed to start until 3 am ET, from what I've read. So there's still plenty of time.
Oh wow cant wait, any announcement on their part will be good. If they have or haven't found the Higgs particle then I'll still be pleased as both answers open up possible interesting ideas and research :D
On a side note the amount of macs in that room is too damn high
Also, my sound has cut out a while back. I think they did that because sometimes the sound comes in really loud and they'll probably re-establish an audio stream when we approach the announcement.
On July 04 2012 15:41 kingjames01 wrote: Maybe this is all a sham put together by Apple to sell more Macs? =)
"We the physicists at CERN have not discovered the Higgs, but instead have discovered something much more important. That is that Macs are the greatest thing created as quantifiable by science and therefore all of you should own one..."
On July 04 2012 15:45 EatThePath wrote: Upon further inspection this is a regularly scheduled research update. OP is a little overblown. But I'll stick it out for funsies.
Well according to Wired, "Rumors have been flying for weeks already on what the LHC has found, with most pointing to a discovery of the Higgs boson with a mass of 125 gigaelectronvolts (GeV)."
Yeah, I'm really excited but I hope that I haven't over-reacted. I've found a few reputable news sites that state that there was a 'leak' which said that this would be a 'discovery' announcement.
On July 04 2012 15:45 r.Evo wrote: I wonder what everyone actually does on their laptops while waiting.
Most of them have Macs, sooo.....browse iTunes? Check their Facebook? Watch a movie trailer on Quicktime? Oh, they can play The Sims. Yes. That must be it. I pretty much covered all possibilities.
On July 04 2012 15:45 EatThePath wrote: Upon further inspection this is a regularly scheduled research update. OP is a little overblown. But I'll stick it out for funsies.
Well according to Wired, "Rumors have been flying for weeks already on what the LHC has found, with most pointing to a discovery of the Higgs boson with a mass of 125 gigaelectronvolts (GeV)."
The Boson itself has mass? That sounds incredibly weird... What give IT its mass then?
On July 04 2012 15:45 EatThePath wrote: Upon further inspection this is a regularly scheduled research update. OP is a little overblown. But I'll stick it out for funsies.
Well according to Wired, "Rumors have been flying for weeks already on what the LHC has found, with most pointing to a discovery of the Higgs boson with a mass of 125 gigaelectronvolts (GeV)."
The Boson itself has mass? That sounds incredibly weird... What give IT its mass then?
On July 04 2012 15:45 EatThePath wrote: Upon further inspection this is a regularly scheduled research update. OP is a little overblown. But I'll stick it out for funsies.
true that.. but for some reason this one pops up in newspapers. Enough to make someone make this thread lets hope there's something interesting in it ^^
On July 04 2012 15:45 EatThePath wrote: Upon further inspection this is a regularly scheduled research update. OP is a little overblown. But I'll stick it out for funsies.
Well according to Wired, "Rumors have been flying for weeks already on what the LHC has found, with most pointing to a discovery of the Higgs boson with a mass of 125 gigaelectronvolts (GeV)."
The Boson itself has mass? That sounds incredibly weird... What give IT its mass then?
Energy.
The Higgs boson acts in a way so that an object with mass 'feels' a force. Two things with mass can 'feel' each other.
On July 04 2012 15:49 kingjames01 wrote: Yeah, I'm really excited but I hope that I haven't over-reacted. I've found a few reputable news sites that state that there was a 'leak' which said that this would be a 'discovery' announcement.
On an unrelated note, watching huge well-funded organizations cobble together such poor streams makes me appreciate how much work goes into putting on a well-produced stream.
On July 04 2012 16:00 Uncultured wrote: Why did everyone give that guy applause? This shit needs commentary. People need to learn to sell the science world better.
It might be Mr. Higgs who invented the theoratical framework for the particule he was invited to come after all. Kind of looks like his image on the wiki page no rewind... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Higgs
What he's talking about here is that there are certain ways to find the Higgs boson.
Imagine that you're looking for a golf ball. You and your friends can systematically search everywhere in the field, or if everyone splits up, they can eliminate large areas of the field.
If you have some models to back up your search, you can cut out more of the field even faster.
This is cool, but im one of the many who wish they understood more... I should have given more attention to high school physics class... but with how over my head this is, I'd guess it probably wouldn't have helped.
Can't say i can really understand this to the extent that i would like too but I find this incredibly fascinating. I can't wait to see what kind of other things this might lead too!
Press conference is scheduled for 11:00 am CEST, same time as GSL.... oh boy... Naniwa vs Higgs-Boson... i guess Naniwa wins for me (at least i understand a little bit more about sc2 than physics)
On July 04 2012 16:12 Golgotha wrote: too bad the crowd has to be silent. if not then I could base my "understanding" and "excitement" off their cheers and reactions. just like in SC
Maybe they should have a sign contest to give away a computer
On July 04 2012 16:19 buscettn wrote: A Higgs-Boson walks into a church, the priest says “We don’t allow Higgs-Bosons in here.” The Higgs-Boson says “But without me how can you have mass?"
Imagine there's a rain storm and the water is hitting your window. At one point during the storm, someone throws a drop of sea water against your window. How do you know when it hit and whether it did at all? That's what he's explaining.
On July 04 2012 16:18 DannyJ wrote: This dude doesn't sound too smart.
Neither do most GSL Code S champions when they suddenly get a microphone shoved in their face. I think he's a little bit outside of his normal element in terms of public speaking, and also aware of 1 - He's going to go over time if he doesn't pick it up and 2 - this announcement will be very, very big. As in, people that don't know about physics will be reading about it tomorrow in the news.
On July 04 2012 16:19 buscettn wrote: A Higgs-Boson walks into a church, the priest says “We don’t allow Higgs-Bosons in here.” The Higgs-Boson says “But without me how can you have mass?"
rofl that is hilarious
i think i heard him say that they can go after the higgs!
On July 04 2012 16:19 Sandtrout wrote: I think judging from the introduction (how it was held) it is rather likely they can confirm the Higgs boson. But let's see.
They have found it. The news was already announced at particle physics research institutes a few days ago.
On July 04 2012 16:19 buscettn wrote: A Higgs-Boson walks into a church, the priest says “We don’t allow Higgs-Bosons in here.” The Higgs-Boson says “But without me how can you have mass?"
On July 04 2012 16:17 kingjames01 wrote: Now, he's explaining how they know what they're looking at when they look at the data that they gather.
Basically, they compare to simulations and then they know if they're looking at electrons, or other things.
Man, you really aren't helping at all. I understand the speaker more than you, which makes me wonder if you know what you're talking about at all.
I'm trying to type while making notes as fast as I can. If you understand the talk, then don't read what I'm writing. If you disagree with what I'm writing, then you should post.
These section of his talk are going over 1 specific channel. A channel is one way that a reaction can proceed.
I think he said that they have 5 exit channels so they have to be able to identify which channel they actually see. They do that by fitting to simulation.
On July 04 2012 16:24 Al Bundy wrote: So far I can say one thing for certain, that CMS seems to perform very very well
This is basically what he's describing. How they've managed to fine tune their measurements using other variables in the standard model to a very fine degree. Then with this as a sort of barometer they are able to search for the Higgs particle with high accuracy.
hehe, yeah, Monte Carlo is the term used to describe simulations that rely on probability.
You basically tell the computer everything that can happen at each step and what the odds are for each process. Then you let the computer do its thing many, many, many times.
On July 04 2012 16:24 Al Bundy wrote: So far I can say one thing for certain, that CMS seems to perform very very well
If they did not go through every calibration then naysayers would be all over them. Due diligence is a huge part of good science since data without context is useless. After all, we remember the 'neutrinos faster than light' frenzy.
On July 04 2012 16:26 kingjames01 wrote: hehe, yeah, Monte Carlo is the term used to describe simulations that rely on probability.
You basically tell the computer everything that can happen at each step and what the odds are for each process. Then you let the computer do its thing many, many, many times.
Oh, I understand what he's talking about with regard to the Monte Carlo. But I can't stop myself from thinking about cards.
On July 04 2012 16:24 Al Bundy wrote: So far I can say one thing for certain, that CMS seems to perform very very well
If they did not go through every calibration then naysayers would be all over them. Due diligence is a huge part of good science since data without context is useless. After all, we remember the 'neutrinos faster than light' frenzy.
Exactly. You have to be able to trust your detector and your data.
its scientist job to know how to present, dont act like he's not "in his element" because if they chose him to present this he definitely has presented things before. he's giving background so people don't reverse wristlock him in question period
that said this is highly boring and stream keeps dying on me, ima watch LoL and come back when he's actually announced something other than M&M
On July 04 2012 16:24 Al Bundy wrote: So far I can say one thing for certain, that CMS seems to perform very very well
If they did not go through every calibration then naysayers would be all over them. Due diligence is a huge part of good science since data without context is useless. After all, we remember the 'neutrinos faster than light' frenzy.
Which they said was insane please look at all our stuff since if not something is amiss in are understanding.
Is that the bump? Says 4.2 sigma local significance on quantum diaries. If so, biggest discovery in particle physics in at least 30 years. This is history!
i am sorry to ask a question now when you scientists are all closely listening to this announcement. I understand that they seem to have found an elusive particle and can now back it up with enormous amounts of data and tech. they prove that it exists because they can now "see" after years of research and work.
BUT, what does the higgs boson prove? will it's existence change anything? will it bring about leaps in technology? Explain the origin of the universe (big bang?)? What does this mean?
On July 04 2012 16:34 Cascade wrote: Is that the bump? Says 4.2 sigma local significance on quantum diaries. If so, biggest discovery in particle physics in at least 30 years. This is history!
That was for just one decay channel, there are a total of 5 that are discussed separately. The combined significance should go up.
On July 04 2012 16:36 Golgotha wrote: i am sorry to ask a question now when you scientists are all closely listening to this announcement. I understand that they seem to have found an elusive particle and can now back it up with enormous amounts of data and tech. they prove that it exists because they can now "see" after years of research and work.
BUT, what does the higgs boson prove? will it's existence change anything? will it bring about leaps in technology? Explain the origin of the universe (big bang?)? What does this mean?
Thank you!
It means someone gets tenure at the university of his/her choice and a crack at the Nobel prize for physics.
Beyond that? It may in fact lead to greater understanding of the universe.
OOO Standard Model Higgs it may be then eh. Too bad in a way, I kind of wish the Higgs is never found because it's always more interesting when shit doesn't happen as expected and breaks shit. Kind of like blackbody radiation back in the day, although that was quite apparent without the need for experimentation. Hi, I'm Mr. Higgs. I can be somewhat hard to find. I'm a rarely seen little bugger at probably ~126 GeV. It was probably pretty easy for you to find me here. Can you imagine the pain in the ass collecting enough data to discover me at the LHC?
On July 04 2012 16:36 Golgotha wrote: i am sorry to ask a question now when you scientists are all closely listening to this announcement. I understand that they seem to have found an elusive particle and can now back it up with enormous amounts of data and tech. they prove that it exists because they can now "see" after years of research and work.
BUT, what does the higgs boson prove? will it's existence change anything? will it bring about leaps in technology? Explain the origin of the universe (big bang?)? What does this mean?
Thank you!
It means someone gets tenure at the university of his/her choice and a crack at the Nobel prize for physics.
Beyond that? It may in fact lead to greater understanding of the universe.
On July 04 2012 16:36 Golgotha wrote: i am sorry to ask a question now when you scientists are all closely listening to this announcement. I understand that they seem to have found an elusive particle and can now back it up with enormous amounts of data and tech. they prove that it exists because they can now "see" after years of research and work.
BUT, what does the higgs boson prove? [that the current model of particle physics (the standard model) is on track.] will it's existence change anything? [not much. was expected by many, if not most.] will it bring about leaps in technology? [Nope.] Explain the origin of the universe (big bang?)? [A small step closer maybe, but not really groundbreaking I'd say.] What does this mean? [PARTY AT CERN EVERYONE INVITED!!! :D]
On July 04 2012 16:36 Golgotha wrote: i am sorry to ask a question now when you scientists are all closely listening to this announcement. I understand that they seem to have found an elusive particle and can now back it up with enormous amounts of data and tech. they prove that it exists because they can now "see" after years of research and work.
BUT, what does the higgs boson prove? will it's existence change anything? will it bring about leaps in technology? Explain the origin of the universe (big bang?)? What does this mean?
Thank you!
It means someone gets tenure at the university of his/her choice and a crack at the Nobel prize for physics.
Beyond that? It may in fact lead to greater understanding of the universe.
this seems nobel peace prize worthy!
Because it solidifies the current physics model. If the Higgs boson wasn't found, then the standard model would collapse (of course it's not as simple and absolute as "collapse" but you get the point). In modern physics, there are math to find stuff then many years later experiments are made to prove the math were right. So it's research on paper --> research on colliders --> proof --> more research on paper
Imagine the research of everyone in the world, which was based on the standard model being suddently irrelevant!! That's why it's so bloody important
On July 04 2012 16:36 Golgotha wrote: i am sorry to ask a question now when you scientists are all closely listening to this announcement. I understand that they seem to have found an elusive particle and can now back it up with enormous amounts of data and tech. they prove that it exists because they can now "see" after years of research and work.
BUT, what does the higgs boson prove? [that the current model of particle physics (the standard model) is on track.] will it's existence change anything? [not much. was expected by many, if not most.] will it bring about leaps in technology? [Nope.] Explain the origin of the universe (big bang?)? [A small step closer maybe, but not really groundbreaking I'd say.] What does this mean? [PARTY AT CERN EVERYONE INVITED!!! :D]
Thank you!
lmao thanks man. i would love to party with scientists!
On July 04 2012 16:43 alderamin wrote: So which person are they going to give the Nobel prize? 5000 people?
My guess is, it will depend a great deal on whose names are on the final monograph published in the appropriate journals. Then, too, they could just give it to CERN. (The Physics prize. I don't see this as Peace prize material - it doesn't really fall into the realm of the Peace prize.)
On a random tangent, imagine how funny it would be if one day there were a super important thing verified to 5-6+ sigma, and then later it turned out the very slight nonzero chance of error actually occurred. After all, the chances are much lower of me winning the jackpot... but hey it happens o.o
On July 04 2012 16:46 EtherealDeath wrote: On a random tangent, imagine how funny it would be if one day there were a super important thing verified to 5-6+ sigma, and then later it turned out the very slight nonzero chance of error actually occurred.
You would have to have some pretty damn super proof of that - not that it couldn't happen, just that everyone you're proving wrong and most other people with less of a stake but an understanding of the statistical probabilities will take a lot of convincing. If they can be convinced. Some breakthroughs take the death or retirement of the "old guard" to come to light.
On July 04 2012 16:49 Starburst wrote: Can someone please explain all this lol. I really want to understand, but lack the physics knowledge to decipher this code...
Check the twitter link which just got posted, best explainations so far imo.
On July 04 2012 16:46 EtherealDeath wrote: On a random tangent, imagine how funny it would be if one day there were a super important thing verified to 5-6+ sigma, and then later it turned out the very slight nonzero chance of error actually occurred. After all, the chances are much lower of me winning the jackpot... but hey it happens o.o
In practice, the probability of error is much larger than implied from the 5 sigma. This is due to many error sources not being gaussian, and human factors. (see neutrino 6 sigma signal which turned out to be a loose cable.) With some luck, they will build a linear colldier to study the higgs further, and then they will notice if it's not there.
The last wikipedia entry on the timeline of the Higgs boson research:
4 July 2012 - the Higgs Boson has been discovered.
That's so touching... Just think about the amount of work and money and people's lives spent on our efforts of solving the mysteries of the universe. Just a great moment for mankind.
I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
so I guess I can use Comic Sans in all my papers/presentations now and refer to a billion dollar funded project using it for their discoveries. Hard to refute it's viability as academic viable font now.
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
...and when you bang e.g. two photons against each other often enough you are able to read where 'mass' is written down on their charactersheet?
(I'm being serious here, this shit is hard for non-physics. =P)
Edit: Or rather, the entire book which is written down on them is smacked against the wall and you try to decypher what you know from what you don't know and the only part you didn't know is called 'mass' and that's how you find out what it is?
On July 04 2012 17:03 TBO wrote: so I guess I can use Comic Sans in all my papers/presentations now and refer to a billion dollar funded project using it for their discoveries. Hard to refute it's viability as academic viable font now.
Brian Cox @ProfBrianCox
It's entirely appropriate to present in Comic Sans @VincentConnare !
On July 04 2012 17:03 TBO wrote: so I guess I can use Comic Sans in all my papers/presentations now and refer to a billion dollar funded project using it for their discoveries. Hard to refute it's viability as academic viable font now.
Maybe she's meta-trolling the scientific community.
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
The whole thing only has meaning mathematically. You can't put it in words like this. You can put it in words that sound similar and that make sense, but the end it's just math.
On July 04 2012 17:03 TBO wrote: so I guess I can use Comic Sans in all my papers/presentations now and refer to a billion dollar funded project using it for their discoveries. Hard to refute it's viability as academic viable font now.
Still more respectable than Science requiring Word format.
On July 04 2012 17:03 TBO wrote: so I guess I can use Comic Sans in all my papers/presentations now and refer to a billion dollar funded project using it for their discoveries. Hard to refute it's viability as academic viable font now.
Maybe she's meta-trolling the scientific community.
No, she's actually just incredibly stubborn. People in the collaboration have tried to get her to make her presentations look more presentable, but she just ignores that
On July 04 2012 17:05 Bahamuth wrote: Does anyone know what is meant by 'channels'? Is it just different processes/Feynman diagrams?
A channel is a process in which a Higgs boson decays. Since the detector picks up the decay products rather than the actual particle, it's important to look at all possible decay channels.
Whoa, nice job on the 5 sigma. I''m going to jump on this physics-bandwagon and claim Higgs-boson confirmed
So now we have confirmed the model, I have 2 questions: 1) Anyone have an idea what's next? A collider the size of the planet to confirm even more elimentary particles? 2) When can I expect my gravity gun?
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
...and when you bang e.g. two photons against each other often enough you are able to read where 'mass' is written down on their charactersheet?
(I'm being serious here, this shit is hard for non-physics. =P)
Edit: Or rather, the entire book which is written down on them is smacked against the wall and you try to decypher what you know from what you don't know and the only part you didn't know is called 'mass' and that's how you find out what it is?
Well, imagine that there was a box that you can throw money into. If you throw in $10 dollars, then when you look inside, you'll find items that can only total $10.
The Higgs particle costs $12.5 +/- 0.6 billion dollars. So in order to find it you had to throw in at least $12.5 +/- 0.6 billion dollars. The problem is that you can't actually see the Higgs particle. After it's been made, it falls apart. However, you can see what's left over and add up what you find. The CMS was sensitive to 5 channels. If the Higgs boson wasn't there, they'd see one thing. If it was, they'd see something else.
On July 04 2012 17:03 TBO wrote: so I guess I can use Comic Sans in all my papers/presentations now and refer to a billion dollar funded project using it for their discoveries. Hard to refute it's viability as academic viable font now.
Maybe she's meta-trolling the scientific community.
No, she's actually just incredibly stubborn. People in the collaboration have tried to get her to make her presentations look more presentable, but she just ignores that
I think its more that she went through school before powerpoint presentations, and younger collegues are unlikely to criticize it too much.
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
...and when you bang e.g. two photons against each other often enough you are able to read where 'mass' is written down on their charactersheet?
(I'm being serious here, this shit is hard for non-physics. =P)
Edit: Or rather, the entire book which is written down on them is smacked against the wall and you try to decypher what you know from what you don't know and the only part you didn't know is called 'mass' and that's how you find out what it is?
Well, imagine that there was a box that you can throw money into. If you throw in $10 dollars, then when you look inside, you'll find items that can only total $10.
The Higgs particle costs $12.5 +/- 0.6 billion dollars. So in order to find it you had to throw in at least $12.5 +/- 0.6 billion dollars. The problem is that you can't actually see the Higgs particle. After it's been made, it falls apart. However, you can see what's left over and add up what you find. The CMS was sensitive to 5 channels. If the Higgs boson wasn't there, they'd see one thing. If it was, they'd see something else.
On July 04 2012 17:10 RodrigoX wrote: I'm sorry, but I mean I took physics in highschool, but I don't understand a thing theyre saying. Did they discover it or not lol?
Not quite... but they highly suspect its there... they have found the equivalent of a Higgs Boson silhouette... just needs a bit more data until they confirm its the real thing
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
...and when you bang e.g. two photons against each other often enough you are able to read where 'mass' is written down on their charactersheet?
(I'm being serious here, this shit is hard for non-physics. =P)
Edit: Or rather, the entire book which is written down on them is smacked against the wall and you try to decypher what you know from what you don't know and the only part you didn't know is called 'mass' and that's how you find out what it is?
Well, imagine that there was a box that you can throw money into. If you throw in $10 dollars, then when you look inside, you'll find items that can only total $10.
The Higgs particle costs $12.5 +/- 0.6 billion dollars. So in order to find it you had to throw in at least $12.5 +/- 0.6 billion dollars. The problem is that you can't actually see the Higgs particle. After it's been made, it falls apart. However, you can see what's left over and add up what you find. The CMS was sensitive to 5 channels. If the Higgs boson wasn't there, they'd see one thing. If it was, they'd see something else.
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
...and when you bang e.g. two photons against each other often enough you are able to read where 'mass' is written down on their charactersheet?
(I'm being serious here, this shit is hard for non-physics. =P)
Edit: Or rather, the entire book which is written down on them is smacked against the wall and you try to decypher what you know from what you don't know and the only part you didn't know is called 'mass' and that's how you find out what it is?
Well, imagine that there was a box that you can throw money into. If you throw in $10 dollars, then when you look inside, you'll find items that can only total $10.
The Higgs particle costs $12.5 +/- 0.6 billion dollars. So in order to find it you had to throw in at least $12.5 +/- 0.6 billion dollars. The problem is that you can't actually see the Higgs particle. After it's been made, it falls apart. However, you can see what's left over and add up what you find. The CMS was sensitive to 5 channels. If the Higgs boson wasn't there, they'd see one thing. If it was, they'd see something else.
I am not a frequent twitter user but it's kinda funny to see how people now only rave about Comic Sans. Fabiola Gianotti is famous for always using Comic Sans and odd colour boxes. It's Italian feminine style.
On July 04 2012 17:14 Sandtrout wrote: Why is listening to a presentation that I only understand partly so much more interesting than actually studying for my physics exams? QQ
Because it gives you an excuse to not learn. Same here with my math exam...
On July 04 2012 17:10 NeoLearner wrote: Whoa, nice job on the 5 sigma. I''m going to jump on this physics-bandwagon and claim Higgs-boson confirmed
So now we have confirmed the model, I have 2 questions: 1) Anyone have an idea what's next? A collider the size of the planet to confirm even more elimentary particles? 2) When can I expect my gravity gun?
Discovered is accurate as 5 sigma is the normal threshold used for "you definitely found something" but it isn't definitely the Higgs. They found a boson that acts like the Higgs and is at near the predicted mass for the Higgs. So it's likely but not definite.
1) Confirming this data and improving on the result. The LHC should be able to find other particles besides the Higgs.
Whatever it does, it will be called Higgs anyway. It was predicted that there was a Boson in this mass range and now it was basically found if this data is correct.
On July 04 2012 17:10 NeoLearner wrote: Whoa, nice job on the 5 sigma. I''m going to jump on this physics-bandwagon and claim Higgs-boson confirmed
So now we have confirmed the model, I have 2 questions: 1) Anyone have an idea what's next? A collider the size of the planet to confirm even more elimentary particles? 2) When can I expect my gravity gun?
Discovered is accurate as 5 sigma is the normal threshold used for "you definitely found something" but it isn't definitely the Higgs. They found a boson that acts like the Higgs and is at near the predicted mass for the Higgs. So it's likely but not definite.
1) Confirming this data and improving on the result. The LHC should be able to find other particles besides the Higgs.
2) Nobody knows when episode 3 will be released.
You should probably add that "likely but not definite" sounds like 90% when you think about daily language, not like the 99.9999% their 5 sigma implies. =P
On July 04 2012 17:17 alderamin wrote: I am not a frequent twitter user but it's kinda funny to see how people now only rave about Comic Sans. Fabiola Gianotti is famous for always using Comic Sans and odd colour boxes. It's Italian femine style.
That's because she's part of a well known organization by scientific community named "Comics sans frontieres"
On July 04 2012 17:10 RodrigoX wrote: I'm sorry, but I mean I took physics in highschool, but I don't understand a thing theyre saying. Did they discover it or not lol?
Not quite... but they highly suspect its there... they have found the equivalent of a Higgs Boson silhouette... just needs a bit more data until they confirm its the real thing
So I guess from what I saw in the higgs boson explained video, that there is a bump in the data for them to say hey holy crap, we might have something, and only need a little more to say have a statistical "yes" to it?
I mean, this might be over everyones head, how do they say predict what a higgs boson has? Like charge etc. Like, the the quanity that each particle is slowed down in say the field that higgs presented?
On July 04 2012 17:10 NeoLearner wrote: Whoa, nice job on the 5 sigma. I''m going to jump on this physics-bandwagon and claim Higgs-boson confirmed
So now we have confirmed the model, I have 2 questions: 1) Anyone have an idea what's next? A collider the size of the planet to confirm even more elimentary particles? 2) When can I expect my gravity gun?
Discovered is accurate as 5 sigma is the normal threshold used for "you definitely found something" but it isn't definitely the Higgs. They found a boson that acts like the Higgs and is at near the predicted mass for the Higgs. So it's likely but not definite.
1) Confirming this data and improving on the result. The LHC should be able to find other particles besides the Higgs.
2) Nobody knows when episode 3 will be released.
You should probably add that "likely but not definite" sounds like 90% when you think about daily language, not like the 99.9999% their 5 sigma implies. =P
The likely but not definite is about what the particle they found is not if it is actually there which is the 5 sigma value.
The scientific community is very skeptical of new results so to be conservative, we usually don't accept a discovery until you're past the 5 sigma level.
A general person would have already accepted this.
Imagine, if you wanted to go to a casino and gamble all of your money. You might like a 5:1 that you win. Maybe you won't bet until it's 2:1 odds that you win.
Particle physicists demand a 3.5 million : 1 before they bet.
On July 04 2012 17:23 OptimusYale wrote: I understand most of this.....like 'the' 'and' 'a' etc, however when they're strung together with all this gobbledygook It makes a mess in my brain.
What I'm getting is they used some method to make the higgs, not sure IF it's higgs, but it seems similar
This is what people who have never heard of SC hear when we talk about it in front of them :p
On July 04 2012 17:23 kingjames01 wrote: The scientific community is very skeptical of new results so to be conservative, we usually don't accept a discovery until you're past the 5 sigma level.
A general person would have already accepted this.
Imagine, if you wanted to go to a casino and gamble all of your money. You might like a 5:1 that you win. Maybe you won't bet until it's 2:1 odds that you win.
Particle physicists demand a 3.5 million : 1 before they bet.
As long as you don't expect a 3.5mil : 1 payment for an hour of your time compared to an average person..
As a poker player I'm used to taking 51:49 bets, so you guys always confuse the hell out of me. =(
I just want to point out that they DO NOT know if this is the Higgs boson. They know it's a Boson, and that it shares some characteristics of the Higgs, like its high mass. All of this data they are showing is proving that the Boson exists. Not that it is in fact the Higgs boson.
I was doing a coop placement with a University in Canada. There was a group that was collaborating with the ATLAS detector and they were in danger of falling behind with a shipment. They came to my group to ask for a volunteer to string tungsten slugs before they were shipped away.
I volunteered and maybe, just maybe, my contribution helped! =)
On July 04 2012 17:32 Uncultured wrote: I just want to point out that they DO NOT know if this is the Higgs boson. They know it's a Boson, and that it shares some characteristics of the Higgs, like its high mass. All of this data they are showing is proving that the Boson exists. Not that it is in fact the Higgs boson.
Well, the whole analysis was based on the theoretical expectations of how a Higgs would behave. All observed properties match the theoretical Higgs boson. While that's not sufficient to say with absolute certainty that it can't be something else, it's extremely likely that the new particle is the Higgs boson.
On July 04 2012 17:32 Adreme wrote: What I want to know is if they have been able to confirm that this Boson does what the Higgs is suppose to do or if they havnt gotten that far yet?
It looks very Higgs like but they need more data to confirm it.
On July 04 2012 17:32 Uncultured wrote: I just want to point out that they DO NOT know if this is the Higgs boson. They know it's a Boson, and that it shares some characteristics of the Higgs, like its high mass. All of this data they are showing is proving that the Boson exists. Not that it is in fact the Higgs boson.
That's very true. However, it's in the mass range where the Higgs should be. There are no bosons predicted to be there other than the Higgs.
Even if it turns out to not do anything that the Higgs should, it's still convenient to label it as the Higgs for now.
Where the standard model predicts that the Higgs bosun would occur, they have in fact proven that there is A bosun that occurs there. Which means it probably is the Higgs bosun, but that they need more data.
And applause because - very clear, unambiguous data presented in graphs spiking which shows yes, there's something there. And it would appear to be exactly what they are looking for.
On July 04 2012 17:36 felisconcolori wrote: So what I'm hearing is...
Where the standard model predicts that the Higgs bosun would occur, they have in fact proven that there is A bosun that occurs there. Which means it probably is the Higgs bosun, but that they need more data.
And applause because - very clear, unambiguous data presented in graphs spiking which shows yes, there's something there. And it would appear to be exactly what they are looking for.
On July 04 2012 17:36 IronManSC wrote: So...... does this mean the big bang theory is true now?
The two are not really related.
But if the big bang came from a massive explosion, essentially from nothing...
and here we discover what comes from mass...
I mean, i'm not a scientist or anything, and science and math were my worst subjects in high school, so... I don't know, I just somehow found that they correllated someway.
You misunderstand--the big bang is not a creation of mass, but rather an expansion of what we call the "universe" from an infinite dense, hot singularity.
On July 04 2012 17:36 IronManSC wrote: So...... does this mean the big bang theory is true now?
The two are not really related.
But if the big bang came from a massive explosion, essentially from nothing...
and here we discover what comes from mass...
I mean, i'm not a scientist or anything, and science and math were my worst subjects in high school, so... I don't know, I just somehow found that they correllated someway.
On July 04 2012 17:36 felisconcolori wrote: So what I'm hearing is...
Where the standard model predicts that the Higgs bosun would occur, they have in fact proven that there is A bosun that occurs there. Which means it probably is the Higgs bosun, but that they need more data.
And applause because - very clear, unambiguous data presented in graphs spiking which shows yes, there's something there. And it would appear to be exactly what they are looking for.
Exactly. They predicted something to be there. They found something where they were looking. They found it using methods that would only work if it was such a particle.
There will still be more work to prove that it does EVERYTHING that it's supposed to but for now, I think we're all going to call it the Higgs.
On July 04 2012 17:39 Boblion wrote: Well Science is quite boring. Lack of space rockets and bombs imo. Too much numbers, sigmas, and comic sans. I'm off.
you are underestimating the devastating power of comic sans.
On July 04 2012 17:39 Boblion wrote: Well Science is quite boring. Lack of space rockets and bombs imo. Too much numbers, sigmas, and comic sans. I'm off.
haha, well, science lead to the development of space rockets and bombs...
On July 04 2012 17:36 IronManSC wrote: So...... does this mean the big bang theory is true now?
The two are not really related.
But if the big bang came from a massive explosion, essentially from nothing...
and here we discover what comes from mass...
I mean, i'm not a scientist or anything, and science and math were my worst subjects in high school, so... I don't know, I just somehow found that they correllated someway.
well this confirms our standard model, and since the big bang also fits in the standard model you could imagine a link somewhere. There is other evidence for the big bang, like the one you were linked to
On July 04 2012 17:36 IronManSC wrote: So...... does this mean the big bang theory is true now?
The two are not really related.
But if the big bang came from a massive explosion, essentially from nothing...
and here we discover what comes from mass...
I mean, i'm not a scientist or anything, and science and math were my worst subjects in high school, so... I don't know, I just somehow found that they correllated someway.
The conditions surrounding the big bang far exceed the range in which the standard model (= the theory of elemetary particles, including the Higgs boson) can make predictions. At the energy levels present in the big bang, distinctions between elementary forces of nature start to fade away.
How the fuck are they going to split the Nobel prize between Higgs, Englert, Brout, Guralnik, Hagen, and Kibble when you can only have 3 people named for a nobel Prize?
Someone is going to be sad. Like really really sad.
Brian Cox @ProfBrianCox So, in very simple language. ATLAS and CMS have independently discovered a new particle mass ~ 126 GeV which behaves like SM Higgs
On July 04 2012 17:45 kingjames01 wrote: Yeah, that's a 50 year oldl prediction for him.
Could you imagine, if you make a prediction about something and 50 years later, over 4000 people have worked to show that you were, in fact, correct?
Way more than 4000 people. ATLAS already has a bit over 3K. Then there's CMS and the general LHC staff managing the accelerator. Of course the LHC is the third particle accelerator that has tried to find the Higgs boson. LEP (at CERN, using the same tunnel the LHC is now in) and Tevatron (at Fermilab in the US) have tried before.
On July 04 2012 17:45 kingjames01 wrote: Yeah, that's a 50 year oldl prediction for him.
Could you imagine, if you make a prediction about something and 50 years later, over 4000 people have worked to show that you were, in fact, correct?
Way more than 4000 people. ATLAS already has a bit over 3K. Then there's CMS and the general LHC staff managing the accelerator. Of course the LHC is the third particle accelerator that has tried to find the Higgs boson. LEP (at CERN, using the same tunnel the LHC is now in) and Tevatron (at Fermilab in the US) have tried before.
Yes, you are definitely correct. I, in no way, want to diminish the work of the other people involved. Also, there are countless numbers of people who donated their computing power to process the data as well who we haven't factored in.
It must be nice to work in a quantifiable field. All these scientists working together with their results and verifiable data, being nice to each other. Pah. In history you put three historians in a room and you'll get four different opinions and two dead historians.
Grats to the scientists and grats to Mr Higgs, it's a grand thing to live to see your theory being proven. Now what does this discovery mean for the world at large, I wonder? And for the LHC?
On July 04 2012 17:36 IronManSC wrote: So...... does this mean the big bang theory is true now?
The two are not really related.
But if the big bang came from a massive explosion, essentially from nothing...
and here we discover what comes from mass...
I mean, i'm not a scientist or anything, and science and math were my worst subjects in high school, so... I don't know, I just somehow found that they correllated someway.
Well, it confirms current theory as to how atoms were first formed, which happened sometime after the big bang. The big bang isn't a theory, it obviously happened, and the evidence is everywhere from cosmic radiation to simply our observing how the Universe is expanding. What's theoretical is what triggered it to ever happen at all - and the Higgs Boson does nothing to answer that rather ultimate and unanswerable question.
We know the big bang happened, and given what we know about particle physics, we can make a lot of safe theories about how the early universe initially formed from pure energy into atoms.
Finding tangible evidence of Higgs Boson just allows science to be more assured with itself. We knew electrons and protons denoted an atom's mass, but without the Higgs Boson, there's no real reason why. My understanding of the Higgs Boson is that it's basically the common regulator that exists in all matter, which makes atomic mass something entirely universal. It's called the "God Particle" because it's purpose seems completely fundamental to matter existing as we know it. edit: actually, I guess Dark Matter theoretically does not contain the Higgs-Boson, so it's not entirely universal.
On July 04 2012 17:57 Sanctimonius wrote: It must be nice to work in a quantifiable field. All these scientists working together with their results and verifiable data, being nice to each other. Pah. In history you put three historians in a room and you'll get four different opinions and two dead historians.
Grats to the scientists and grats to Mr Higgs, it's a grand thing to live to see your theory being proven. Now what does this discovery mean for the world at large, I wonder? And for the LHC?
Considering his first paper on this was rejected back in the 60s I doubt they're all nice to each other all the time. =P
I used to live next to CERN´s boss when I was a kid, helped him in the garden etc.(This was before he moved there.) So weird to see him on the big stage like this. This is quite the discovery, a Nobel or two will come out of this I guess.
On July 04 2012 18:02 Crappy wrote: Excuse me, but what exactly IS the discovery here ? I am serious, everyone seems to be like "this is so cool" but what exactly are we talking about ?
Someone care to explain in simple words ?
Kinda feeling the same thing here, is there anyone knowledgeable enough to explain all this in everyday language?
On July 04 2012 17:59 insaneMicro wrote: I used to live next to CERN´s boss when I was a kid, helped him in the garden etc.(This was before he moved there.) So weird to see him on the big stage like this. This is quite the discovery, a Nobel or two will come out of this I guess.
Yep and you can see those who are going to get it speaking now :p
On July 04 2012 18:02 Crappy wrote: Excuse me, but what exactly IS the discovery here ? I am serious, everyone seems to be like "this is so cool" but what exactly are we talking about ?
Someone care to explain in simple words ?
Kinda feeling the same thing here, is there anyone knowledgeable enough to explain all this in everyday language?
It is the experimental verification of theories used to explain the behavior of particles.
On July 04 2012 18:02 Crappy wrote: Excuse me, but what exactly IS the discovery here ? I am serious, everyone seems to be like "this is so cool" but what exactly are we talking about ?
Someone care to explain in simple words ?
Kinda feeling the same thing here, is there anyone knowledgeable enough to explain all this in everyday language?
Basically this discovery is a step further in proving that the Standard Model is a valid theory (tho this theory fails to describe dark matter or gravitation for example).
On July 04 2012 18:02 Crappy wrote: Excuse me, but what exactly IS the discovery here ? I am serious, everyone seems to be like "this is so cool" but what exactly are we talking about ?
Someone care to explain in simple words ?
Kinda feeling the same thing here, is there anyone knowledgeable enough to explain all this in everyday language?
All elementary particles and their interactions are described by a theory called the Standard Model (SM). When the SM was first conceived, not all particles predicted by it had been observed yet. Over the years, most particles in the SM have been found and the predictions of the SM were tested very thoroughly. Until recently, a single particle had not been observed in experiments.
This particle, the Higgs boson, was part of a mechanism (the Higgs mechanism) that is responsible for the differences in mass between all the other particles. The SM predicts many of its properties, except for its mass.
In the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), protons have been collided at extremely high energies. Due to the equivalence of energy and mass (the famous e=mc^2 equation), high energies can give rise to the production of massive particles. With millions of collisions per second, the detectors at LHC gathered enormous amounts of data.
The presentations today showed that a new particle was found with the properties that were predicted for the Higgs boson. Hints that the Higgs boson existed already came out last year, but the statistical uncertainties were still too large to claim a discovery (~3% chance that the signal was due to random luck). With additional data-taking and more efficient analysis, the researches can now conclusively say that they have found a new particle and that its properties, so far, line up with what was expected of the Higgs boson.
The Higgs boson is the last of the predicted particles of the SM to be discovered, so in a sense, the theory is now complete. It's not the end of the search though, because for all its successes, the SM doesn't answer all questions. There has to be additional physics to explain some observations, possibly through new particles. One of the main open questions is the Dark Matter problem: The amount of observed mass in the universe is not nearly enough to explain the motion of galaxies. The largest part of the matter in the universe is expected to consist of particles that we don't know yet.
For the past 10 - 15 minutes, there have been video segments showing interviews with scientists from around the world discussing the impact of the Higgs boson discovery.
It looks like there's going to be a Press Conference now with a Q&A period!
Nature: Is it a Higgs? It has properties that match. We will continue to work to see
Guardian: LHC is scheduled to have a short shutdown period starting at the end of the year. How far do you expect to get before then? Don't know. We're going to do our best but we won't call it the Higgs at this time.
To Peter Higgs: Please comment. Today is for an experimental achievement and it isn't appropriate for me to comment.
Why are the masses different? Is that important? The measurements are fully consistent with each other.
What does this mean? Did we not understand 'why do we have mass'? Higgs is not what gives you, as a person, mass. The Higgs boson give the fundamental particles mass. Analogy: a room of journalists uniformly distributed through the room. An unknown person passes through and doesn't attract any attention. A famous person attracts a lot of journalists which makes that famous person slow down.
Since the discovery came so quickly, does this change the program at the LHC? Will you change the energy range sooner? We will try to get as much data for these measurements before we stop for maintenance. 'A machine that has been working for 3 years needs some maintenance.'
Science: Before the LHC turned on, Supersymmetry would come first and the Higgs would come next. Did the Higgs come faster than expected? Yes. The capabilities of the detectors, analysis techniques have proven to be more effective than planned for. As for Supersymmetry We have narrowed down the areas to look and will continue to look.
On July 04 2012 18:02 Crappy wrote: Excuse me, but what exactly IS the discovery here ? I am serious, everyone seems to be like "this is so cool" but what exactly are we talking about ?
Someone care to explain in simple words ?
Kinda feeling the same thing here, is there anyone knowledgeable enough to explain all this in everyday language?
All elementary particles and their interactions are described by a theory called the Standard Model (SM). When the SM was first conceived, not all particles predicted by it had been observed yet. Over the years, most particles in the SM have been found and the predictions of the SM were tested very thoroughly. Until recently, a single particle had not been observed in experiments.
This particle, the Higgs boson, was part of a mechanism (the Higgs mechanism) that is responsible for the differences in mass between all the other particles. The SM predicts many of its properties, except for its mass.
In the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), protons have been collided at extremely high energies. Due to the equivalence of energy and mass (the famous e=mc^2 equation), high energies can give rise to the production of massive particles. With millions of collisions per second, the detectors at LHC gathered enormous amounts of data.
The presentations today showed that a new particle was found with the properties that were predicted for the Higgs boson. Hints that the Higgs boson existed already came out last year, but the statistical uncertainties were still too large to claim a discovery (~3% chance that the signal was due to random luck). With additional data-taking and more efficient analysis, the researches can now conclusively say that they have found a new particle and that its properties, so far, line up with what was expected of the Higgs boson.
The Higgs boson is the last of the predicted particles of the SM to be discovered, so in a sense, the theory is now complete. It's not the end of the search though, because for all its successes, the SM doesn't answer all questions. There has to be additional physics to explain some observations, possibly through new particles. One of the main open questions is the Dark Matter problem: The amount of observed mass in the universe is not nearly enough to explain the motion of galaxies. The largest part of the matter in the universe is expected to consist of particles that we don't know yet.
On July 04 2012 18:27 kingjames01 wrote: What does this mean? Did we not understand 'why do we have mass'? Higgs is not what gives you, as a person, mass. The Higgs boson give the fundamental particles mass. Analogy: a room of journalists uniformly distributed through the room. An unknown person passes through and doesn't attract any attention. A famous person attracts a lot of journalists which makes that famous person slow down.
so why do we have mass in your opinion? we have weight because of gravity + our mass but no - we didnt know why we got the mass - we only knew why fat pple are fat =)
€: hope im not telling bs - else im fine if someone correct me :D (and it wasnt ment to be offense to massive pple :D)
On July 04 2012 18:27 kingjames01 wrote: What does this mean? Did we not understand 'why do we have mass'? Higgs is not what gives you, as a person, mass. The Higgs boson give the fundamental particles mass. Analogy: a room of journalists uniformly distributed through the room. An unknown person passes through and doesn't attract any attention. A famous person attracts a lot of journalists which makes that famous person slow down.
I'm confused by your analogy. If a fundamental particle attracts higgs bosons to get mass, why is it that we haven't found any? From what I know of particle physics, the general problem with finding particles is that they are created at extreme energy levels, which is why we build bigger and better particle accelerators. Now, if a particle is needed to "give" mass, why isn't our world completely filled by it?
How many particles were used in this search? If 1 particle collision is a particle of sand, then all of the collisions together would fill an olympic sized swimming pool.
What else does LHC do other than the Higgs? For the rest of the year, we will continue to search and see what else we find.
Do you think that Peter Higgs and the other theorists deserves a Nobel prize? The question should go to the Nobel prize committee. This was an amazing result.
Uh. His explaination was that if a particle would have no mass (aka unknown to the journalists) it would move at the speed of light. However, the higgs field (aka the journalists) create "friction". Said friction can be measured and results in the higgs boson. (Did I get it rite?)
Great random example from the press conference: If you'd fill an olympic sized swimming pool full of sand, each sandcorn would represent a single proton collusion in the LHC. Out of those a few dozen were significant for the results presented today.
On July 04 2012 18:38 kingjames01 wrote: Do you think that Peter Higgs and the other theorists deserves a Nobel prize? The question should go to the Nobel prize committee. This was an amazing result.
if someone should get the nobel prize i guess they had to hand it out to over 5000 pple who worked in (in? at? on?) this project
On July 04 2012 18:27 kingjames01 wrote: What does this mean? Did we not understand 'why do we have mass'? Higgs is not what gives you, as a person, mass. The Higgs boson give the fundamental particles mass. Analogy: a room of journalists uniformly distributed through the room. An unknown person passes through and doesn't attract any attention. A famous person attracts a lot of journalists which makes that famous person slow down.
I'm confused by your analogy. If a fundamental particle attracts higgs bosons to get mass, why is it that we haven't found any? From what I know of particle physics, the general problem with finding particles is that they are created at extreme energy levels, which is why we build bigger and better particle accelerators. Now, if a particle is needed to "give" mass, why isn't our world completely filled by it?
Particles get their mass from an energy field, the Higgs field. Due to the theory of quantum field theory, there's an equivalence between energy fields and particles. Particles represent the fields and fields can be considered a continuum description of particles. Compare this with photons (particles) and electromagnetic waves (fields), which are 2 sides of the same coin.
The Higgs field permeates the entire universe. The Higgs boson, on the other hand, is an unstable particle that is linked to this field. To measure the field, we need to measure the particle. The particle is massive and hard to find, which explains why we don't see it easily.
It's a bit hard to explain this as quantum field theory is an extremely abstract field of science, but I hope this sheds a light on it.
LHC is not only shutting down for maintanance, it's also being upgraded.
The LHC will operate at 4 TeV per beam until the end of 2012, 0.5 TeV higher than in 2010 and 2011. It will then go into shutdown for 20 months for upgrades to allow full energy operation (7 TeV per beam), with reopening planned for late 2014.
On July 04 2012 18:28 kingjames01 wrote: The cluster of journalists is the Higgs boson.
I think the cluster is called the Higgs Field. A single journalist is a Higgs boson
No, the journalists "clumping up" is a metaphor for the higgs field being excited. Think about it like this: an electron is also a particle representing a field excitation. It's an excitation of the electromagnetic field. Basically, it's electromagnetic energy concentrated into one area. The reporters represent "higgs field energy" coming together in order for a higgs boson to "appear". The higgs field is continuous, reporters are not, so the metaphor isn't perfect.
How were the last few days leading up to the press conference? There are so many people involved in this project. I'm so amazed and grateful for all of the work being done and how seamless the process was.
Once you shared the result to the community, how did you feel? It was amazing to be able to share the result personally but also for the entire collaboration. The entire project is very complicated. Emotionally, the CMS project rep did not feel it until today.
The CMS and ATLAS worked separately and sometimes even at times competed. Is today's achievement even more significant because of that? Yes. The collaborations competed with each other, but competition also existed within the collaborations. Without the worldwide computing efforts, this could not have been done. The collaborations have not found time to put their results together.
How similar is the particle similar to the Higgs described by Peter Higgs. It is consistent with everything required by the Standard Model. We need a lot more data. Ask again in 3 or 4 years.
On July 04 2012 18:42 TearsOfTheSun wrote: so long so will they analyze all the data now about the higgs boson while the LHC is down for a couple years?
Of course! They have a lot of people whose jobs are analysis. You can continually improve statistical analysis methods (and come up with new ones) even if you're not getting new data. The higgs events themselves are relatively few in number, so theres a lot of data without higgs events, but now that they've got enough higgs events to say with 5 sigmas of certainty, they can continually work with what they have to find better ways to analyze it and get more signal over it.
Which are the main private companies that contributed to the experiments. Especially, the Italian companies. What is their ROI? 1/3 of the magnets were built by an Italian company, 1/3 by a French company, 1/3 by a German company. Each company involved had to work at the frontiers of technology. The demands asked by the physicists pushed everything to the limit which the companies reaped the benefits for. Also, having their names attached to the projects give a reputation bonus.
On July 04 2012 18:42 TearsOfTheSun wrote: so long so will they analyze all the data now about the higgs boson while the LHC is down for a couple years?
Of course! They have a lot of people whose jobs are analysis. You can continually improve statistical analysis methods (and come up with new ones) even if you're not getting new data. The higgs events themselves are relatively few in number, so theres a lot of data without higgs events, but now that they've got enough higgs events to say with 5 sigmas of certainty, they can continually work with what they have to find better ways to analyze it and get more signal over it.
Will there be a press conference announcing the discovery of a Higgs boson instead of a 'Higgs-like boson'? When would that be? It depends on what you mean. We need to be able to get more data and study it before we can say anything for sure. 3 or 4 years. It's a complicated issue.
On July 04 2012 18:49 kingjames01 wrote: Which are the main private companies that contributed to the experiments. Especially, the Italian companies. What is their ROI? 1/3 of the magnets were built by an Italian company, 1/3 by a French company, 1/3 by a German company. Each company involved had to work at the frontiers of technology. The demands asked by the physicists pushed everything to the limit which the companies reaped the benefits for. Also, having their names attached to the projects give a reputation bonus.
At CERN people were often bitching about the Italian companies for not delivering the components on time. The split between Italy, France and Germany for the production of magnets was done for political reasons. Without that, the order would've gone 100% to the French or the Germans.
On July 04 2012 18:51 kingjames01 wrote: Will there be a press conference announcing the discovery of a Higgs boson instead of a 'Higgs-like boson'? When would that be? It depends on what you mean. We need to be able to get more data and study it before we can say anything for sure. 3 or 4 years. It's a complicated issue.
What would be the most exciting thing? The Standard Model Higgs? The Standard Model Higgs plus something more exotic? The Standard Model is wrong! The Standard Model would not be wrong. It is incomplete. The ATLAS rep: She would like it if were a Higgs boson but not fulfill everything that it should. The CMS rep: As scientists, we observe nature. There is no bias. We just see what nature gives us. We know the Standard Model is incomplete. Even if we find out that this is not the Standard Model Higgs, it will guide our future.
On July 04 2012 11:52 GDbushido wrote: "hey guys, we accidentally opened a portal to another dimension. you've all played half-life right? yeah, its kinda like that. sorry."
Staring Brian Cox as Gorndon Freeman, I'd live that dream.
But yeah this annoucment is crazy! Can't wait to see how this will change the world... and trying to understand it all is hard LOL
During the talks there were some error bars shown that seemed large. Do you think that these are troubling? Although the error bars looked big, everything is consistent with the Standard Model.
Boson vs. Higgs boson. If it was a new boson, would it remove the need for a higgs boson. Do we still need to search? We need something that does what the Higgs boson supposed to do. The boson found is very likely to be related.
Technical Question: How long before you confirm that this is a Spin 0 particle and not Spin 2? We still need to address this point. Over the next coming months, we will have to get more data and work on that question.
To Peter Higgs: Can you please make a comment. No.
We will examine all of the properties that we can from our data. Perhaps by the end of the year. When we run at higher energies, we will be able to hone in on certain properties.
How does the Higgs boson help with the Dark Matter question? To examine Dark Matter we need to look beyond the Higgs boson. The Higgs only gives us some indications. Anything we learn from the Higgs boson, that will help to constrain specific models.
Are you planning to build a new collider at CERN? Will any discovery help with the plans? It is premature to discuss since LHC will be around for a long time. Any discovery will help to shape any future collider.
What is your favourite/least metaphor used by journalists? Comment on the use of the term 'God Particle'? It is generally disdained by scientists. A technical response instead of a metaphor. No metaphors were given in the end.
On July 04 2012 19:06 kingjames01 wrote: Are you planning to build a new collider at CERN? Will any discovery help with the plans? It is premature to discuss since LHC will be around for a long time. Any discovery will help to shape any future collider.
Following up on this: There are already plans for a new particle accelerator, it's going to be a linear one (rather than circular). It will most likely collide electrons and positrons. It's still in the earliest of design stages.
An electron-positron collider is much more useful for precisely measuring particle properties. The LHC collides protons, but it's only a single quark in each proton that actually interacts. The distribution of energy among the quarks is unknown, which means that you don't know the actual energy of the interaction. Electrons and positrons are elementary particles, so when you collide them, you know precisely how much energy is available in the interaction and this value can be tuned accurately. Proton-proton colliders are brute force machines to find new things, electron-positron colliders are precision instruments to study known particles in more detail.
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
This question is probably the most asked and has been asked a million times.......
To bring science forward, in all subjects this must be done (experimentation with the LHC), simply! That is the most simple way to answer.
And this has been done for the last 100 years, only know it is more known and hyped than before. Particle accelerators has been created many many times in different shapes and forms.
On July 04 2012 19:12 kingjames01 wrote: I really need to go everyone! It was an amazing experience to share with you guys! Maybe someone will continue to summarize the Q&A until I get home?
I've been at the lab all night long doing this but I have to get the car home now.
I can do it. Starting at the next question.
Q: Was the choice to present results in CERN instead of at the Melbourne conference to show the sponsor countries their investment was valuable? A: It's normal for labs to present results at their own institute before they present at conferences. It's also a courtesy towards the funding agencies as well as the staff. People / organizations that have invested (money, people) have a right to hear results at this place.
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
This question is probably the most asked and has been asked a million times.......
To bring science forward, in all subjects this must be done (experimentation with the LHC), simply!
The real world implications aren't really that much right now. Think about it like this: Someone come up with the idea that the big squishy thing in your head was responsible for "you". What implications does that have in real life? Not a whole hell of a lot, but as you learn more and more about it you begin seeing ways to use your data.
The first stage of learning is simply finding new data. The next stage is learning more about how that data works with everything else.
The last stage is finding a way to do something we couldn't do yet with the help of the new found information.
Q: Funding question. Why does the world need to invest in this project rather than some global issues such as poverty, medicine-research, etc... A: Need to balance between fundamental and applied science. Without fundamental science you lose the basis for applied science. Metaphor: If you have a sack of corn, do you eat it (applied science) or plant it (fundamental science)? If you do one to the exclusion of the other, you will starve. If you balance the two, you get good results.
Q: How about emerging countries / less developed countries? A: 100 nationalities working at CERN, 20 member states, 45 countries with collaboration, also emerging countries. Outreach program with education, helps combat poverty.
Closing of the Q&A.
Rebroadcast with "highlights" from the 2 seminar presentations.
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
That's a pretty good answer. Where do you get that 4% number though?
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
That's a pretty good answer. Where do you get that 4% number though?
The number comes from astrophysical observations. We can make pretty accurate estimates of the amount of "visible" matter in the universe. We can also look at the motion of galaxies and determine masses using theories of gravitation. There is a huge discrepancy between the two. There is a lot of mass (energy) that we can't see.
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
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 theory
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
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 theory
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
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 theory
so real world use = none
Real world use = unknown
Yeah. There's absolutely no way to know what impact this could have. This is just the next step in understanding the fabric of our universe. Maybe we'll be able to confirm whether there will be a big crunch, or heat-death. Maybe we'll learn how to better test or super-symmetry, and find a way to detect dark matter. Maybe we'll finally find a way to integrate gravity with the standard model.
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
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 theory
so real world use = none
It's not a confirmation of a theory (SM) but just a step forward (as in they are on the right track).
Although this discovery was largely expected and not too surprising, it does go to show how far we've come in our understanding of the universe. I'm glad to see science getting the appreciation it deserves in the public. Although I have no doubt that many people would not hesitate to reject science had the subject matter been more controversial than particle physics.
As for all the comments about applications of discovering the Higgs Boson: Predicting applications of fundamental science is virtually impossible. I'd bet no one foresaw that the development of differential geometry would lead to general relativity, or that the discovery of the electron would lead to electricity, or that the discovery of electromagnetic radiation would lead to the mobile phone, or that number theory would lead to public key cryptography.
Has the solar system been swallowed by a micro black hole? Nope. Has Earth been obliterated in an epic matter-antimatter annihilation? Nope.
That's great. Now what? What will physicists world-wide be doing or searching now? What's the next debate in modern physics? I'm really curious to know what's the next step !
On July 04 2012 21:56 sorrowptoss wrote: That's great. Now what? What will physicists world-wide be doing or searching now? What's the next debate in modern physics? I'm really curious to know what's the next step !
Finding more weird crap.
It was by splitting atoms that we got our hands on nuclear power technologies.
Finding the boson is a stepping stone to inventing a whole new way of creating and manipulating energy.
Nuclear Fusion? Anti-matter? Warp drives? Insert any Sci-Fi technology here.
On July 04 2012 21:56 sorrowptoss wrote: That's great. Now what? What will physicists world-wide be doing or searching now? What's the next debate in modern physics? I'm really curious to know what's the next step !
Plenty left to do. First of all, the properties of the Higgs boson need to be studied in more detail to make sure it's exactly what we expect it is. There are theories that predict a Higgs-like particle with similar properties and these still need to be excluded.
And then there are plenty of open questions.
One of them is the Dark Matter/Energy problem. Visible matter (= Standard Model particles) only make up for 4% of the matter in the universe according to astrophysical observations. What does the remaining 96% consist of? Candidates for so-called dark matter / dark energy can be found in theories like supersymmetry (SuSy), which predict additional particles beyond those in the Standard Model.
Then there are still some open ends to the Standard Model, with room for additional physics. The aforementioned supersymmetry is one of the most popular theories of physics beyond the SM. There are many SuSy variants with tons of free parameters. The LHC is actively searching for data that can either prove SuSy or that can restrict the set of possible parameters (the so-called phase space) that SuSy can have.
The SM doesn't include gravity. Gravity is essentially a very large-scale phenomenon, described primarily by General Relativity. The SM is built on Quantum Field Theory, which works on very small scales. The unification of the SM with GR is one of the big open problems in physics. It is expected that at higher energies symmetries exist that are broken at lower energy scales. This means that forces that are now separate and distinct have a common "ancestor" at high energies (= very shortly after the big bang). The search for a single "Grand Unification Theory" is still ongoing and evidence from high energy particle collisions may provide hints.
Finally, the SM does an excellent job at describing the elementary particles and their interaction, but it doesn't explain anything. For that, we may have to look at even smaller components. String theory and M-theory are very cutting edge theories that need additional theoretical work as well as experimental verification.
So there's still plenty left to do for particle physics. With the Higgs found, a new era of particle physics is starting. The history of the Standard Model starts in the 1960s (and discovery of a lot of the particles in it precedes the formulation of the model by many years) and it is now complete. We've filled in the gaps in the model and what's left now is a whole realm of unexplored physics.
It sure is nice to wake up in the morning, check TL and see a momentous announcement like this! Though I'm not gonna lie, disproving the Standard Model would have more interesting rammifications. Then again physics likes things nice and stable with revolutions only every now and again.
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.
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.
Source? Names?
Sounds like blissful ignorance on your part. Science rarely has to do with supernatural beliefs, esp in 'christian' world.
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.
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.
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.
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?
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
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 theory
so 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...
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.
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 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
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 theory
so 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 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.
On July 04 2012 12:00 xOny wrote: if we pretty much know it already exists, whats the big deal? you can never "see" it or interact with it, only see the traces of it (afaik).
i guess it's just "official" "proof" that the higgs field exists throughout our universe given all the data they've collected? doesn't change much except our understanding of the universe, which is pretty important i guess ^_^
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
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
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 theory
so 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 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.
Exactly. *20 years later, Flying cars* AHA I TOLD YOU !
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Having two different experiments finding the same result independently gives it much more weight and makes it much less likely to be an error. The entire reason the ftl particle people talked about it was to see if anyone could reproduce their results and when no one could they started checking their results again which is when they realised the error.
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 we had the same bump in two different experiments (CMS and Atlas) last year, and with increased data this year the bump got bigger. TWO separate experiments have produced 5 sigma significant results. It is very hard to argue against two independent experiments giving such strong results. If if using the same beam of particles is somehow still not enough for you, these new results are consistent with the 3 sigma fluctuations noted by the Tevatron team recently in the 115-130 GeV band - also consistent. Still a lot of work to do to determine the exact properties of what is causing the signal, but the fact that there is SOME particle there at that mass is undeniable at this point.
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.
You should stop posting on serious forum. These two occurence have nothing in common whatsoever. And btw the neutrino experiment was not advertised as a big discovery, but as a probable mistake that they failed to find the source. Maybe if you had any physics knowledge we could talk
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.
... In all likelyhood you don't know what probability and statistics are. Kind of the wrong thread to flash your lack of math.. you'll get torn asunder :p
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.
Being a scientist correlates with a lesser degree of religiousness and atheism. ''Many, many'' is just wrong.
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.
Being a scientist correlates with a lesser degree of religiousness and atheism. ''Many, many'' is just wrong.
And though, there still are a good number of scientists who believe in god, and the cohabitation of Science and The Holy Bible (there was TV broadcast about this topic). Care though not to interpret every single sentence in the Bible without the correct context and mindset. Sure the Universe and Earth haven't been created in 7 "Earth" days.
This discussion is far from over. Some believe, others don't, in the end, science go on. I think it's up to everyone to make his own opinion. Science is sometimes itself a matter of "religion" (i.e.: Homeopathy is a good example).
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.
Being a scientist correlates with a lesser degree of religiousness and atheism. ''Many, many'' is just wrong.
Already mentioned John Polkinghorne, James Maxwell, Werner Heisenberg. Could add Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Charles Townes, Seawall Wright, Georges Lemaitre.
I was pointing out the statistics. Naming a couple of scientists who do believe does not change that.
Albert Einstein did not believe in a personal god.
Science is sometimes itself a matter of "religion" (i.e.: Homeopathy is a good example).
Homeopathy is not a science. In the Netherlands it has been forbidden to state that on the packages that the homeopathy products are helpfull with some illnesses/symptoms and on every package you must state that: ''The workings of this product have not been verified with the scientific method''
It's basically just a load of crap to force money out of people's wallets. It works just as well as any placebo does.
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.
Being a scientist correlates with a lesser degree of religiousness and atheism. ''Many, many'' is just wrong.
Already mentioned John Polkinghorne, James Maxwell, Werner Heisenberg. Could add Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Charles Townes, Seawall Wright, Georges Lemaitre.
His point is that there is no correlation. If you do a venn-diagram, you could not make a "systematic" prediction on the intersection of either atheist and scientis or religious and scientist. . . He is being correct in that physics (or being a physicist) doesn't rule out religion; he merely pointed out that there isn't an inherent correlation, and thus saying "many, many" is an overstatement. I don't think there is more to say; other than perhaps that religion has nothing to do with this thread, and anyone talking about or reading about the "God particle" better not mention religion... They got nothing to do with eachother.
In a way, science might conclude with that "anyone" (given the right tools and resources) will be able to create a universe (see Fringe for instance, as an example); but not everyone can be God, so there will eventually be a paradox where we might have to accept that "God" could be "one of us, somewhere, somewhen", or that we're all (potential) Gods.
To avoid this, creation would have to be left out of the bible, or changed to adapt itself to "creation of that which can create", or "the first creation"; which is perfectly fine, since all we're requiering, in the first place, is a little faith.
So far, atleast; only those religious but have doubts in their faith will be threatened by new discoveries. As any correlation, so far, must be subjective. Conversely, anyone thinking science disproves God, does not know that much about either science or faith.
I'm not sure what to say.<engage rant> I don't like the standard model and it never leads to a better understanding of anything. And as someone who studies space-time geometry very closely to hear these people say that we !?now?! have insight into gravity because they added another useless particle to their model. What the fuck have physicists like myself been doing for a 100 years since last time I checked we already figured it out. OH wait, THEY didn't figure it out and just ignored all of the 100% proven science in favor of their twisted and borderline stupid understanding of physics.<rant off>
I understand that all elements of our societies are cultural and are often irrational. But for those who are truely clever, do yourself a favor and just move along. Nothing to see here.
You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
So how would this benefit society, at least in the next five years?
I mean it's great for physicists, finally we're making major discoveries again in that field... but how will this benefit the everyman, or at least any part of humanity?
LOL.. you're just hearing this..... Late post. The particle was already announced at Fermilab with a confidence interval of sigma 4... going to sigma 5.. guess that's a big deal. (I.e. energy band from 115-135 to energy band from 124.5-128; low of one experiment high of other)
To all the religion bashers here, no matter what is discovered, by the definition of faith you'll never be able to disprove God or religion. With my views personally, I "believe" or "have faith" that there is no god...that's not really all that different from being religious in a way. Chill.
Anyhow, count me in the group who is not very wowed by this discovery. People have been assuming for a while now that this particle existed in physics.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
On July 05 2012 04:33 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: So how would this benefit society, at least in the next five years?
I mean it's great for physicists, finally we're making major discoveries again in that field... but how will this benefit the everyman, or at least any part of humanity?
Did Einstein know what techological applications his theory had? Did Newton? Did the person that discovered electrons(can't remember name)? Without these people we wouldn't have the technology we have today, but isn't just understanding our universe just a little bit better enough?
On July 05 2012 04:33 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: So how would this benefit society, at least in the next five years?
I mean it's great for physicists, finally we're making major discoveries again in that field... but how will this benefit the everyman, or at least any part of humanity?
Did Einstein know what techological applications his theory had? Did Newton? Did the person that discovered electrons(can't remember name)? Without these people we wouldn't have the technology we have today, but isn't just understanding our universe just a little bit better enough?
Well Einstein's work did lead to the atom bomb and I guess nuclear power, but then again that took 30 years. But he personally had a part on it.
If FTL travel or creating our own black holes or some other technology comes about in the 2040's... that would actually be pretty cool. Okay, you're right
It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You people arguing about religion are ridiculous..
We should discuss about useful subjects and not about other people beliefs. Telling a christian that this should shut them up is not only offensive, but also a complete waste of fucking time.
Don't you fucking get it?
Now, what are the useful subjects that we can discuss from such an important discovery?
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
We have a rebel.
A rebel who probably doesn't know how huge it is that the Higgs Boson could have actually been discovered.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
For those of you who actually care to know what it means to discover the higgs boson.. I suggest looking at the formula that it derives from.. I'm posting it here from a UCDavis theory professor from one of the advanced Quantum classes. (notice how the problem is question 1)
In layman terms.. discovering the higgs boson implies that the theory that we have is correct. Assuming that its assumptions hold true. "and then the haters beat god with a stick and god said prick."
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
On July 05 2012 06:35 ArC_man wrote: Why are people calling the Higgs the "God" particle? Might as well call the photon the Zeus particle.
my sentiments exactly. People call the Higgs the "God particle" because they don't understand what the Higgs is would be my guess. I don't know who coined the term, but maybe it's just because it's a hype name coined by physicists to get people interested who otherwise wouldn't be.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
On July 05 2012 06:29 tokinho wrote: For those of you who actually care to know what it means to discover the higgs boson.. I suggest looking at the formula that it derives from.. I'm posting it here from a UCDavis theory professor from one of the advanced Quantum classes. (notice how the problem is question 1)
In layman terms.. discovering the higgs boson implies that the theory that we have is correct. Assuming that its assumptions hold true. "and then the haters beat god with a stick and god said prick."
As someone with very limited science knowledge that looks insane. How do you even go about "showing" that? How long does it take to do so?
On July 05 2012 06:35 ArC_man wrote: Why are people calling the Higgs the "God" particle? Might as well call the photon the Zeus particle.
my sentiments exactly. People call the Higgs the "God particle" because they don't understand what the Higgs is would be my guess. I don't know who coined the term, but maybe it's just because it's a hype name coined by physicists to get people interested who otherwise wouldn't be.
it was originally coined the goddam particle but that didn't go over too well so the name was changed to the god particle.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
The "laser" that reads your hard drive. That's why I also mentioned the DVD player. Same principle.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
Lightnings were observable since prehistory and before. We can use the electricity since the1800s. Lightnings were things that were already "existing", right ? How useless it was that some scientists discovered the very basic thing that makes you able to use your computer to post on this forum.
It's a good day to be a Physics student! Not many people were expecting such convincing results in such a short amount of time, so this is very exciting.
It's sad to see so many posts saying this discovery is meaningless. Most discoveries do seem meaningless to someone who doesn't know anything about the science in question because it does not present any immediate benefit to their lives.. please acknowledge that science is a process; be patient and appreciate how the breakthrough science of the past decades is improving your life now. The discovery of the Higgs confirms a theory, which enables us to predict other phenomena and check for their existence. The possible breakthroughs from this discovery is endless.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
The "laser" that reads your hard drive. That's why I also mentioned the DVD player. Same principle.
What kind of particles does it use? Are photons considered quantum physics?
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
The "laser" that reads your hard drive. That's why I also mentioned the DVD player. Same principle.
What kind of particles does it use? Are photons considered quantum physics?
Photons, along with all extremely small particles are considered quantum particles.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
The "laser" that reads your hard drive. That's why I also mentioned the DVD player. Same principle.
What kind of particles does it use? Are photons considered quantum physics?
Photons, along with all extremely small particles are considered quantum particles.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
The "laser" that reads your hard drive. That's why I also mentioned the DVD player. Same principle.
What kind of particles does it use? Are photons considered quantum physics?
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
The "laser" that reads your hard drive. That's why I also mentioned the DVD player. Same principle.
What kind of particles does it use? Are photons considered quantum physics?
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
All 'modern' technology relies on modern computers.
Modern computers are only possible due to semi-conductors.
Semi-conductors can only be explained when using a Quantum Mechanical explanation.
Amazing news. I wont claim to know all that much about quantum mechanics, depsite my efforts to learn some, but I have the feeling this is pretty good news for humanity.
I'm really happy about this, I'd have been more happy if it had been dis-proven 100% (well 5 sigma not 100%, but w/e) but this discovery is up there for the number one discovery in the past 60 years. What I'm wondering now is what the next avenue will be. The LHC has spent such a huge amount of effort in gathering information to prove the higgs, will their experiments carry forward and provide additional data at higher energy levels? From what I understand they will, they'll just be looking at the same data for different patterns/anomalies. The problem is that people will be all excited about this and start asking what this means for normal people. Short answer, nothing, not for a while at least. If we can start manipulating the higgs, creating massless or supermassive versions of existing particles THEN we'll have the biggest breakthrough since splitting the atom, for now we're still all theoretical though.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
How do quantum physics effect computers? I thought that it's just "basic" electrical circuits.
The "laser" that reads your hard drive. That's why I also mentioned the DVD player. Same principle.
Also as far as I know, quantum tunneling is used for high quality touch screens these days. Read a few pieces on that some time ago, it's rather interesting really.
On July 04 2012 11:44 kingjames01 wrote: This means that independently two groups have a result that might be a statistic error once in 3.5 million times.
Is once every 3.5 mill a lot? I heard in the video someone said 'we run it 40 million times a second, everyday all year'. So, what does that mean?
On July 04 2012 11:44 kingjames01 wrote: This means that independently two groups have a result that might be a statistic error once in 3.5 million times.
Is once every 3.5 mill a lot? I heard in the video someone said 'we run it 40 million times a second, everyday all year'. So, what does that mean?
It's very little. In social sciences, polls and researches using stats tend to have have a margin of error of 5% - which means that the result is most likely true, with a 5% chance of being wrong (generally slightly). This is generally associated with the issues that come with a small sample size and such.
Here, the sample size is so enormous that there's only a 1 chance in 35 millions that there is some kind of statistical anomaly. In comparison, being dealt a royal straight flush in one hand is a LOT more likely.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
You obviously have no idea how much Quantum Mechanics has already been used in our everyday products. You think your computer would exist without our advances in particle physics? Your DVD player?
Finding the most elusive particle that exists in the matter we live in -- I'm glad I'm not so jaded as to think that's "pointless and boring". This is an important step, and it shows how our scientific engineering is continuing to improve, year after year.
Like I said, I could care less about how quantum mechanics enables me to use DVD players or how particle physics enables all of these technology's that foster a fast paced technologically advanced lifestyle. I'd rather live a life free from most or all technology and be at peace with myself and what I have......
Personally, I don't even have a cell phone and I haven't had one for well over a year, all that technology does and searching for particles is blinds us from realizing the beauty that is already all over around us, the present moment and the beauty and peace that it offers.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
don't derail this thread. Not speaking to anyone in particular.
Today is just so huge. I am floored. I wish I could have seen Higgs' face when he learned that the particle he theorized to exist has finally been found.
It's a milestone of human achievement, and we are all around to bear witness. Purely awesome!
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
Yet you still have the audacity to write 230 posts using a computer. No one believes your crusade against technology.
On July 04 2012 11:52 GDbushido wrote: "hey guys, we accidentally opened a portal to another dimension. you've all played half-life right? yeah, its kinda like that. sorry."
it's okay we've got gordon freema... err stephen hawking!
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
"boring" is prety a pretty personal feeling. Most of the people get bored watching SC2 games, but those who browse TL don't.
On July 05 2012 06:29 tokinho wrote: For those of you who actually care to know what it means to discover the higgs boson.. I suggest looking at the formula that it derives from.. I'm posting it here from a UCDavis theory professor from one of the advanced Quantum classes. (notice how the problem is question 1)
In layman terms.. discovering the higgs boson implies that the theory that we have is correct. Assuming that its assumptions hold true. "and then the haters beat god with a stick and god said prick."
As someone with very limited science knowledge that looks insane. How do you even go about "showing" that? How long does it take to do so?
It is all about how much you use convenient notation. If you use the shortest "standard" notation, you can write the standard model Lagrangian (the formula in the problem) on a line or two. Something you can comfortably fit on a t-shirt.
Here they didn't bother using some of the short-hand notation, which forced them to write out a lot of the sums and functions, which brought them to a page. Still almost every term you see in that problem is still a sum of kindof many terms (each matching index in a term means a sum), so if you wanted to really write it out in it's full form, you could easily fill 10 pages, probably much more.
By writing it out like this, it is much harder to see the structure though.
edit: I should probably also mention that you would never get that question on a test (it essentially asks you to solve physics up to now), and question number 1.1.1.1.1a, together with the unnecessarily long formulation makes it a fake, or at the very least a troll question, to about 5 sigma certainty.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
Technology does not have to mean you have a hectic life. The hectic life is a choice. The smartphone at all times being on the internet making you stressed is only in the head. Technology also means peace of mind through security like the ambulance only being a few minutes away from you should there be the need. There are no worries about enough food, clothes or cleanliness. I think you have more choice to shape your life to find inner peace nowadays than in the past.
And people complain about comic sans, then say that cern is a waste of money! Comic sans just shows that no money has been wasted on scientifically irrelevant issues, like making of tasteful slides for biggest discovery in many decades. It's a sign to the sponsors. "We do NOT waste money!!"
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
Technology does not have to mean you have a hectic life. The hectic life is a choice. The smartphone at all times being on the internet making you stressed is only in the head. Technology also means peace of mind through security like the ambulance only being a few minutes away from you should there be the need. There are no worries about enough food, clothes or cleanliness. I think you have more choice to shape your life to find inner peace nowadays than in the past.
Back on point: it's not like this discovery is going to somehow revolutionize technology. Sure there may be things that come out of it but surely nothing that an average person will be able to use on a daily basis.
I never get these discussions of the advantages and disadvantages of technology that assume "technology = computers". The greatest technological discovery we've ever made is agriculture. All kinds of grains, painstakingly bred over thousands of years to work in different climates and conditions. Then there are all kinds of things that even the Amish and Old Order Mennonites use. Dental technology, for example. People have been doing fillings and bridges for thousands of years, working on better techniques and materials as they go.
I think that the connection between science and technology is often overstated. For example, dental technology would exist, in some form, without any science at all. However, in most cases technological development strongly depends on our ability to examine the world around us, an ability which is directly tied to basic science. For example, a huge chunk of our modern world depends on the microscope. It's not a coincidence that the earliest developers of the microscope was Gallileo.
Being able to examine the world is not enough. You don't want to look through a microscope and say, hey look, there's a few lines there, and wow, look at that pattern. You want to say, hey that's a cell. And you need to know what a cell is, and how it works, and so on, or the whole thing is useless. Discovering the Higgs boson is not about technological improvements. It's a small step in understanding the world a little better. I think that's worth celebrating...
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
Technology does not have to mean you have a hectic life. The hectic life is a choice. The smartphone at all times being on the internet making you stressed is only in the head. Technology also means peace of mind through security like the ambulance only being a few minutes away from you should there be the need. There are no worries about enough food, clothes or cleanliness. I think you have more choice to shape your life to find inner peace nowadays than in the past.
Back on point: it's not like this discovery is going to somehow revolutionize technology. Sure there may be things that come out of it but surely nothing that an average person will be able to use on a daily basis.
At least not anytime soon. Can't really say much for sure what will happen in 50 or 100 years. I myself really can't imagine what those applications would be, but I won't exclude that in the future someone comes up with something that I can't imagine right now.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
A life "free from technology" won't be "boring."
A life "free from technology" will be short, cruel, and unpleasant.
You can thank technology for clean water, ample food, adequate shelter against weather, and medicine.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
On July 04 2012 19:08 La1 wrote: Can any smart people list the real world benefits of this?
I am listening to the conference and it seems they have almost confirmed a theory.. but what is the real world benefit of this?
I want my dark matter car :D
Lets just put it this way ....
Theoretical Scientists figure put how the world works using mathmatical models Practical scientists test those theorys sometimes those theorys are right sometimes wrong sometimes right but slightly different Then Engineers take this knowledge and translate it to the real world vis inventions etc Also theoretical scientists take the results of practical scientists and update their theorys.
Right now were at the practical science part if there is any real world applications they will take time to filter through. But in general what this is, isnt a new hyper car or death ray. Its the POSSIBLE confirmation of a theory.
Right now the standard model explains about 4% of the universe. This expiriment could/can/will/might show that the 4% we know is correct. If we know this 4% is correct it shows that we're on the right track to figuring out the 5th %. Possibly that 5th % has real world ramifications. Possibly just the detail they were getting out of the LHC the increases in sensitivity and precision could be used in real world applications.
In general dont look to the scientists for the deathrays or darkmatter cars. Look to them to find out if its possible then look to engineers to make it possible.
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 theory
so real world use = none
When people were researching semiconductors or the photoelectric effect, people also thought that they would have no real world use.
Not sure what that discussion is about.... I think everyone agrees?
- Yes, the standard model described a large set of data at small scales. - Yes, general relativity describes a large set of data at large scales. - No, we do not currently know how to describe all data with one unified model. - Is Higgs related to the microscopical picture of gravity? Possibly, but nobody knows. - Does the discovery of Higgs change anything for the large scale description of gravity? No. - Does it provide any immediate solutions to a unified theory of everything? Not really. - Will it play an important part of a future unified theory? Nobody knows.
Then we know that (some) journalists always make the most fantastic claims, and it can be quite frustrating for people working in the field. If they get some facts wrong, feel free to correct, but I don't see the need to start an argument here.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.[/QUOTE]
That's by far the most ignorant comment I've ever seen in my life. The Amish are probably the hardest workers in the United States or anywhere else for that matter. I'd love to see a New York business man keep up with one of them. The Amish work ethic is unbeatable.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
General relativity is NOT just length contraction or time dilation--it describes gravity itself as a property of spacetime. Scientists have not found a way yet to combine GR with QM (although you can read up on several candidate theories above)
You should also look at this for a better understanding of what "combine GR with QM" actually means:
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
General relativity is NOT just length contraction or time dilation--it describes gravity itself as a property of spacetime. Scientists have not found a way yet to combine GR with QM (although you can read up on several candidate theories above)
You should also look at this for a better understanding of what "combine GR with QM" actually means:
Okay you lost me by bringing gravity into the equation In a spactime diagram with x, t, x', and t'. Gravity is pretty omitted. All variables are the speed of the moving object and how much time it takes.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
General relativity is NOT just length contraction or time dilation--it describes gravity itself as a property of spacetime. Scientists have not found a way yet to combine GR with QM (although you can read up on several candidate theories above)
You should also look at this for a better understanding of what "combine GR with QM" actually means:
Just to explain further: Time dilation and length contraction come from special relativity, and is included in quantum field theory, which is the foundation of the standard model. So standard model, and particle physics in general, includes time dilation and length contraction. Time dilation is actually a large factor in making rapidly decaying particles travel quite far in the detector, as they are experience time slower, or equivalently they see the detector contracted in their rest rest frame. The same goes for atmospheric muons by the way.
Problem is including gravity at microscopical scale. If you try to add it in the most "obvious" way (obvious for the experts that is), you end up with infinities, and essentially predict that the entire universe should explode with infinite energy all the time. As this is not what we observe, people try to find other ways.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
General relativity is NOT just length contraction or time dilation--it describes gravity itself as a property of spacetime. Scientists have not found a way yet to combine GR with QM (although you can read up on several candidate theories above)
You should also look at this for a better understanding of what "combine GR with QM" actually means:
Okay you lost me by bringing gravity into the equation In a spactime diagram with x, t, x', and t'. Gravity is pretty omitted. All variables are the speed of the moving object and how much time it takes.
You are confusing special relativity and general relativity.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
General relativity is NOT just length contraction or time dilation--it describes gravity itself as a property of spacetime. Scientists have not found a way yet to combine GR with QM (although you can read up on several candidate theories above)
You should also look at this for a better understanding of what "combine GR with QM" actually means:
Okay you lost me by bringing gravity into the equation In a spactime diagram with x, t, x', and t'. Gravity is pretty omitted. All variables are the speed of the moving object and how much time it takes.
Not sure what level you are at, but: Special relativity is calculated in Lorentz space, ie a flat space in time and space. You add a factor -1 (or "i" if you want) in front of the time, but otherwise a lorentz space behaves just like a four dimensional R^4 space.
General relativity is essentially to take this flat lorentz space, and bend it. So that the diagonal of two sticks at straight angle is no longer necessarily sqrt(2) times the length of the sticks. Then redo the special relativity formalism, but on this new bent lorentz space, and you get the effect of gravity. It is very beautiful.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
That is by far the greatest video I have ever seen. My mind is blown. How could one man figure all of that out?
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
That is by far the greatest video I have ever seen. My mind is blown. How could one man figure all of that out?
He took a 'leap of faith' for believing that you can't go over the speed of light.
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
Oh it's accurate as far as we can tell for what it applies to - just no one can reconcile it with Quantum Mechanics, and really smart people have been trying for a really long time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec Go to 6:07 from the link. I think the video explained very well the correlation between the particles and the theory. Really all that it is is the contraction of particles in space relative to a observer.
General relativity is NOT just length contraction or time dilation--it describes gravity itself as a property of spacetime. Scientists have not found a way yet to combine GR with QM (although you can read up on several candidate theories above)
You should also look at this for a better understanding of what "combine GR with QM" actually means:
Just to explain further: Time dilation and length contraction come from special relativity, and is included in quantum field theory, which is the foundation of the standard model. So standard model, and particle physics in general, includes time dilation and length contraction. Time dilation is actually a large factor in making rapidly decaying particles travel quite far in the detector, as they are experience time slower, or equivalently they see the detector contracted in their rest rest frame. The same goes for atmospheric muons by the way.
Problem is including gravity at microscopical scale. If you try to add it in the most "obvious" way (obvious for the experts that is), you end up with infinities, and essentially predict that the entire universe should explode with infinite energy all the time. As this is not what we observe, people try to find other ways.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
A life "free from technology" won't be "boring."
A life "free from technology" will be short, cruel, and unpleasant.
You can thank technology for clean water, ample food, adequate shelter against weather, and medicine.
Me and your definition of technology obviously differs. When I mentioned technology I'm talking about modern technology such as smart phones, not things that have been around for a very long time and are mostly primative. I'm talking about electronics mostly. Celebrating the discovery of a particle seems very weird to me as it has always been around and always will be around and it is just that.....a particle whoop de do hahaha.
While CERN is wasting tons of money and celebrating the "discovery" of a particle thousands still die painful deaths related to hunger. I think that before wasting our time looking far off into space or deep down into particles we should focus on our present problems that are in front of us as a whole. This is also the reason why over 99% of the world population doesn't care about this discovery or anything that they're doing in space....it doesn't concern us in the least.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
A life "free from technology" won't be "boring."
A life "free from technology" will be short, cruel, and unpleasant.
You can thank technology for clean water, ample food, adequate shelter against weather, and medicine.
Me and your definition of technology obviously differs. When I mentioned technology I'm talking about modern technology such as smart phones, not things that have been around for a very long time and are mostly primative. I'm talking about electronics mostly. Celebrating the discovery of a particle seems very weird to me as it has always been around and always will be around and it is just that.....a particle whoop de do hahaha.
While CERN is wasting tons of money and celebrating the "discovery" of a particle thousands still die painful deaths related to hunger. I think that before wasting our time looking far off into space or deep down into particles we should focus on our present problems that are in front of us as a whole. This is also the reason why over 99% of the world population doesn't care about this discovery or anything that they're doing in space....it doesn't concern us in the least.
The first steam engine was originally created in Greece. At that time, no one knew what it could do, or what potential it had. The Aeolipile was described by some:
"…a scientific invention [to] discover a divine truth lurking in the laws of the heavens."
But no doubt, there were many Greeks that had the same feelings as you and thought "man, why are these scientists working on this silly thing that has no practical applications to us, when we could be solving hunger in the streets".
Imagine if the Greeks figured out how to use a steam engine.
Personally, I don't even have a cell phone and I haven't had one for well over a year, all that technology does and searching for particles is blinds us from realizing the beauty that is already all over around us, the present moment and the beauty and peace that it offers.
And yet here we are, on an internet forum operating on that "technology" that you seem to despise as complicating our lives. I see your point of view that there can be such a thing as too much technology in our day to day lives, but is it not possible to live this life and at the same time enjoy everything around us?
Advances in modern science like this allow us to pave the way for future technologies. Of course the vast majority of society does not care or even understand this advancement, but I see it as another crucial piece of the puzzle fitting into place. Nobody can see the entire picture, but with this "piece", at least our understanding is one step closer to completion.
On July 05 2012 05:39 Sovern wrote: It's pretty sad to see people arguing that finding some particle will "prove religious people wrong" and are egocentric about their beliefs. It makes the atheists out to look just as bad as the theists that go around telling people that they're going to hell.
I'm an atheist myself but still find this discovery boring and pointless but that's just my own opinion. I'm sure that those same scientists also find having fun and artistic things to be pointless and boring.
Furthermore, it is in my opinion that all of these scientific finding's based around particle physics or physics in general are pointless as everything that is, will always be there meaning that all of the particles and laws that scientists say are laws actually already exist and "discovering" things that already exist such as this Higgs Boson particle does nothing to change things.
Its just the human nature of labeling things as discoveries, theory's, and laws when in actuality they aren't laws but reality's observed and decoded by the human mind.
It didn't occur to you when you were typing this that these scientific discoveries are what allow us to have the technology that we do? Stuff like this has a lot more significance than just giving a bunch of scientists the ability to say "Ha! We were (almost certainly) right!".
To be honest, I could care less about the technology that it enables. I'd actually prefer to live a live completely free from technology and being attached to materialistic things as its much more peaceful and slower paced than the modern industrial world that we live in.
I refuse to believe that anyone could seriously type this while browsing internet forums for a computer game on their PC. 100% troll.
Not a troll, I said that I'd rather life a life style free from technology even if that means partially free. Its one of the main reasons why I don't have a "smart" phone and could care less about all of the new technology findings. I believe that people that live a life away from technology live a more enjoyable and peaceful life than some business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
Ah yes, because everyone that lives a technologically influenced life is a business man in New York that is always on his smart phone and works 40+ hours a week.
And woe betide anyone that actually ENJOYS that sort of hectic life style, something must be wrong with them, why living a peaceful, albeit boring, lifestyle on a farm in Amish country must be a lot better.
And somehow, all of that contributes towards the discussion point of this thread, being the confirmation of the Higgs Boson particle.
Lmfao, gotta love TL.
I don't know anyone that enjoys a hectic lifestyle, but if you believe that a life free from technology is a "boring" life than I don't think that you have experienced nature for what it truly is.
A life "free from technology" won't be "boring."
A life "free from technology" will be short, cruel, and unpleasant.
You can thank technology for clean water, ample food, adequate shelter against weather, and medicine.
Me and your definition of technology obviously differs. When I mentioned technology I'm talking about modern technology such as smart phones, not things that have been around for a very long time and are mostly primative. I'm talking about electronics mostly. Celebrating the discovery of a particle seems very weird to me as it has always been around and always will be around and it is just that.....a particle whoop de do hahaha.
While CERN is wasting tons of money and celebrating the "discovery" of a particle thousands still die painful deaths related to hunger. I think that before wasting our time looking far off into space or deep down into particles we should focus on our present problems that are in front of us as a whole. This is also the reason why over 99% of the world population doesn't care about this discovery or anything that they're doing in space....it doesn't concern us in the least.
Before I get into a discussion like this, let me say right off, that that video of Einstein's theory of relativity was mind-wrenching. In a good way.
To the above post, I respond with this: if you do not care about understanding the universe around us, you have a very narrow viewpoint (from your perspective, the rest of the universe looks smaller than from my perspective). I'm going with the pathos argument here -- what can be more human than conquering our world, understanding it, and then using that understanding to extend ourselves outside our world? You may as well call nuclear fission a waste of money when living in 1945 -- even though, in 2010, nuclear fission energy produced 13.5% of the world's energy.
Now for the logos argument -- back to nuclear fission. You know how we learned how to harness it? E=mc^2, and the other major particle physics research in the early 1900's that people like you decried. You know what we are trying to learn about in 2012, now? Particle physics. (I use that term loosely, to refer to this Higgs Boson research, for example.)
I'm not saying that we will harness the energy of Higgs Boson particles anytime soon, or at all. But this research is certainly concerning to humankind, because it contributes to our ability to control the universe.
I would go into your "or anything that they're doing in space" comment, too, but that would make this post too long.
Nice video. Sums it up. It did bother me in high school physics that things had no volume but did have mass. I should have made a connection from a previous video on the higgs boson but I didn't.
On July 05 2012 12:53 Cascade wrote: While we are posting educational youtubes... I guess many of you have already seen this one, but anyway: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM
ROFL, was this video done by bored grad students? That's my favorite thing I've seen in this thread, excellent.
On July 05 2012 12:53 Cascade wrote: While we are posting educational youtubes... I guess many of you have already seen this one, but anyway: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM
ROFL, was this video done by bored grad students? That's my favorite thing I've seen in this thread, excellent.
You can't imagine how little there is to do in the CERN area when you are not working....
On July 05 2012 04:03 Myrkskog wrote: You sound like a bitter alternative model physicist who just found out that his life's work was a waste of time.
Just kidding, you don't sound like a scientist at all. It's already all been figured out? Please enlighten us so we can stop spending millions of dollars at CERN. Plus you getting the Nobel prize would spare us the dilemma of the 3 person limit.
My alternative model is called relativity. Remember that? That thing that doesn't just fill charts full of non-descript particles which serve no practical purpose? You know the thing that describes how light, gravity, space, and time work?
Theres a new damn particle every 5 years discovered, a bunch of old men pat themselves on the back and NOTHING CHANGES.
I'm bitter because people like you say it's the standard model or no model. You people act like YOU make the rules instead of understand the existing ones.
General relativity is a classical theory, not a quantum theory. No matter how beautiful and appealing it is to you, it is incompatible with the quantum world, so will need revision. Standard model too will need some revision, but whether you like it or not it is the only theory we have consistent with all particle physics data.
Okay so the whole thing about time travelling to the future by flying closer to the speed of light is all a hoax? There is no such thing as time dilation or length contraction of an object relative to an observer's POV?
Please don't tell me that I have spent 20 hours studying nothing because I did believe that quantum mechanics of particles and the time travel due to relativity could co-exist!
There is no "time travelling" to the future. You have local clocks moving at different rates that allow you to move further into the future relative to, say, the Earth, but that is not really time travel. Also, the quantum field theory of a spin 2 massless particle (graviton) was shown by Feynman to reduce to exactly Einstein's equations in the classical limit, so these things we call "time" and "space" really are just specific backgrounds of gravitons, and all the normal effects of relativity come along with this theory for free.
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
Um, sorry but I'm not with you. Do you mean like the virtual particles that supposedly mediate other forces? Those do not exist... Besides, there is no way you'll convince anyone that a particle 130 times heavier than a hydrogen atom, but which you can not easily detect, is responsible for making random easily detectable hydrogen atoms attract each other. Does not compute... Also I am quite certain that in a system which does not have enough energy for the formation of a higgs there still is gravity, and mass still does its thing just fine. How does that work then?
This is really pretty silly. You think modern physics is silly without good reason?
The theory is that the Higgs field gives particles their mass. If there is a Higgs field there needs to be a Higgs particle which would be a sufficiently big wave in the Higgs field.
Higgs bosons are supposed to be unstable and collapse within a second. So they don't normally exist. That's why they can't be detected..
How does the Higgs field/participles relate to gravitational fields like between large scale astronomical objects such as moons, planets, suns and galaxies?
On July 04 2012 16:57 georgir wrote: I don't get it. Gives other particles their mass? That doesn't even make sense, much like saying it gives other particles their energy or velocity. Why can this particle have its own mass but others can't? What gives the higgs boson its mass then? Is it turtles all the way down?
No, no. Think of it this way. You possess a characteristic called 'mass'. However, does that mean you'll be able to 'feel' other particles with 'mass'? How do you know that they are there? Even if you know they are there, what difference does your 'mass' make? The Higgs boson is the particle that tells your 'mass' what to do. It makes it so that objects with 'mass' are attracted to each other.
Um, sorry but I'm not with you. Do you mean like the virtual particles that supposedly mediate other forces? Those do not exist... Besides, there is no way you'll convince anyone that a particle 130 times heavier than a hydrogen atom, but which you can not easily detect, is responsible for making random easily detectable hydrogen atoms attract each other. Does not compute... Also I am quite certain that in a system which does not have enough energy for the formation of a higgs there still is gravity, and mass still does its thing just fine. How does that work then?
Damn, physics has gone nuts these days...
It's not easily detected because it decays almost instantaneously.
The Higgs Boson does not GIVE matter mass. The Higgs mechanism/field is what defines the mass of matter. When Higgs submitted his paper on the Higgs field/mechanism, it includes a supermassive particle that has never been found before.
On July 05 2012 23:48 archonOOid wrote: How does the Higgs field/participles relate to gravitational fields like between large scale astronomical objects such as moons, planets, suns and galaxies?
It doesn't. Gravity is something completely different from the quantum world of particle physics. Which is why people are having so much trouble combining the two in one theory.
A. Not everyone. In 2000, Professor Stephen Hawking, below, bet the University of Michigan's Gordon Kane $100 that the Higgs would never be found. Yesterday he admitted he would have to pay up.
On July 05 2012 12:53 Cascade wrote: While we are posting educational youtubes... I guess many of you have already seen this one, but anyway: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM
ROFL, was this video done by bored grad students? That's my favorite thing I've seen in this thread, excellent.
You can't imagine how little there is to do in the CERN area when you are not working....
A. Not everyone. In 2000, Professor Stephen Hawking, below, bet the University of Michigan's Gordon Kane $100 that the Higgs would never be found. Yesterday he admitted he would have to pay up.
A. Not everyone. In 2000, Professor Stephen Hawking, below, bet the University of Michigan's Gordon Kane $100 that the Higgs would never be found. Yesterday he admitted he would have to pay up.
On July 07 2012 21:41 Maenander wrote: I found a nice blog post that explains why the Higgs was incorporated into the Standard Model of particle physics in the first place:
The discovery is boring in a way, because it just confirms that the model that was used since quite some time works just like expected.
Boring is a very good thing. It means that we can finally move another thing from the massive list of things we dont know onto the list of things we do.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/M3PF9.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DOKG3.jpg)
