|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Dec 14, 2011 10:11:26 GMT 1
Physicists at CERN have exultantly announced tha they have now twice discovered a 'hint' of the elusive Higgs Bosun in their atom-smasher.
Now I have no idea what the 'hint' is unless God is somehow telling them that they were nearly right , but it is really called Hogs Bison
I bet some of those phycisist chappes go to Church and ask God to please let them find the God-particle!
|
|
|
|
Post by striker16 on Dec 14, 2011 13:06:27 GMT 1
Physicists at CERN have exultantly announced tha they have now twice discovered a 'hint' of the elusive Higgs Bosun in their atom-smasher. Now I have no idea what the 'hint' is unless God is somehow telling them that they were nearly right , but it is really called Hogs Bison I bet some of those phycisist chappes go to Church and ask God to please let them find the God-particle! I heard this being discussed on radio yesterday and it appears the boffins have made some statistical measurements which seem to indicate signs of the elusive particle. It struck me that, increasingly, science has to resort to very indirect mathematical models with which to describe the universe which makes me wonder whether the universe is really like that or it's all just clever belief systems. It's a pity ol Speaker does not deign to post here anymore to enlighten us 'lesser' intellects. Then again, she'd probably just end up confusing everyone. Oh well. |
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Dec 14, 2011 20:46:53 GMT 1
No, they just announced it. They'll be exultant when it's beyond doubt. Why do you feel the need to distort the message?
Actually several scientists have commented that while the discovery of the Higgs particle would be exciting it would be even more exciting if it wasn't found as this would suggest new physics to be discovered.
Why do you have such a chip on your shoulder against scientists? Were you bullied by a physicist at school?
|
|
|
|
Post by nickrr on Dec 14, 2011 20:58:53 GMT 1
If by "indirect" you mean statistical then this is because quantum mechanics is statistical theory. It's all about the probabilities of things happening so inevitably testing it will involve statistics.
How can anything based on mathematics be a belief system? Maths is the most objective discipline developed by humans. Either the maths works or it doesn't. If it does work (and for quantum mechanics it describes the real world spectacularly well) it can't be anything to do with belief.
|
|
|
|
Post by mak2 on Dec 14, 2011 22:20:58 GMT 1
As good scientists, the people at CERN should have kept quiet until they were reasonably sure that they had found the elusive boson.
I suspect that they are under pressure to produce results to justify the cost of the LHC.
|
|
|
|
Post by striker16 on Dec 14, 2011 22:41:10 GMT 1
How can anything based on mathematics be a belief system? Because the maths just describe a hypothetical model. Laboratory experiments are required for testing such models. This may never be possible in the case of the Higgs boson. |
|
|
|
Post by skeptic on Dec 31, 2011 15:18:45 GMT 1
It's called the "god" particle because it is believed to be everywhere as in having a part in all particles, giving them mass.
This is one possible particle out of trillions of particles produced so will have to be checked again and again to make sure the same results are produced.
No actual particles are seen of course. They are mere tracks on a screen and exactly what they are is decided on the behaviour of those tracks.
|
|
