Proof of 'God particle' found

Duggys Housemate

LordSmeg wrote: »

Yeah, you'd swear this was AH or something. :rolleyes:

oook, but I am pretty sure that after hours threads are sometimes on topic.

paddy147

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

No my point is that a non scientist has as much faith in scientific theories as a believer in a priest. That is, the "mysteries" of the thing are not understandable to him. For different reasons, sure.

This thread is an example, there is no discussion of what this means for the Standard Model, very little understanding about the standard model, very little attempt to understand, no questions asked - well one - and just an attack on religion - off topic - and meta discussion on whether belief in scientists is the same as belief in priests.

Thats because nobody understands the science, or even the implications of this, and - lets be honest - y'all don't care.

Huh??..Who said what now???:D

Duggys Housemate

paddy147 wrote: »

Huh???:D

Tom Cruise.

delad

paddy147 wrote: »

Unless this particle can produce 50 euro notes for us all?

It will open up the possibility of a free energy source, which is an indirect way of giving us all 50 euro notes.

Burt Lancaster

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Thats because nobody understands the science, or even the implications of this, and - lets be honest - y'all don't care.

Personally I don't trust any of that Ron L. Hubbard related stuff

paddy147

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

Tom Cruise.

Ah yeah...Tom Cruise.

Scioch

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

No my point is that a non scientist has as much faith in scientific theories as a believer in a priest. That is, the "mysteries" of the thing are not understandable to him. For different reasons, sure.

But we can understand the tools a scientist uses such as mathematics, logic, reason, testing and peer review. Its not faith in what they tell us, as we know the methods they use to get this information. As opposed to a priest who has nothing only his word. I dont know how a car engine works but expecting it to start is not the same as expecting a prayer to work.

This thread is an example, there is no discussion of what this means for the Standard Model, very little understanding about the standard model, very little attempt to understand, no questions asked - well one - and just an attack on religion - off topic - and meta discussion on whether belief in scientists is the same as belief in priests.

Its AH, its an off topic forum dedicated to religion bashing, social welfare bashing, single mother bashing etc etc. Its nothing new. The is a physics forum where those who wish to discuss this without the nonsense will go. What you see in this thread is what this forum is for.

Thats because nobody understands the science, or even the implications of this, and - lets be honest - y'all don't care.

No its because this isnt the physics forum. And I havent seen you do much to clarify the science either just jump in with comparing faith in a scientists findings with faith in a priest. Which doesnt exactly bring us back around to discussing the implications. You as well as everyone else is contributing to the level of discussion here so you have absolutely no grounds to come along now and cry about it.

paddy147

delad wrote: »

It will open up the possibility of a free energy source, which is an indirect way of giving us all 50 euro notes.

Ooooh Im sure all the goverments and oil companies will like that then.

So will the 50 euro note be in my bank acount this Friday then???:D

Scioch

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

oook, but I am pretty sure that after hours threads are sometimes on topic.

Now who's the one with the faith ?

steddyeddy

LordSmeg wrote: »

But that is completely different than comparing faith in a priest with faith in a scientist which is what Duggy's housemate did. Its easy to say now "look at this theory that was wrong" but at the time the may have been nothing whatsoever to suggest it was wrong. So the possibility of something being wrong is really no grounds to distrust it when all evidence suggests it isnt. It would be an absurd conclusion to come to.

People here are not accepting the scientists word (because sceintists are not basing this on their word) they are accepting the possibility of it being correct because all evidence suggests that (assuming it stands up to scrutiny).

Fair enough but Im talking about theories that had nothing going for them which were upheld at the time.The giant panda, bonobo and giant squid had multiple witness sightings which uphelp consistent anatomical and ethological observations yet were dismissed as myth. THe chemical theory of absorption had enough evidence to overturn the previous thoery but was ignored by scientists and the scientist who came up with the theory wasnt even allowed to present it.

paddy147

I think theres more chance of seeing this monkey than seeing free energy from this expensive yoke of a machine.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcHniFDLrQ4

steddyeddy

Im not saying people should dismiss this but rather not use it as a stick to beat other people's beliefs. I do think everyone can and should look at the science for themselves though.

diabloro

I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of physics but what they are doing at CERN is amazing. The discoveries this could lead our understanding of the origins of the universe plus all the other experiments from the LHC are transforming science yet again with more knowledge. Im looking forward to their announcements tomorrow for sure.

and please leave God talk out of the thread. We know its about science theory.

steddyeddy

I think everyone can access physics at varying levels. If you dont understand the maths you can understand the theory.

Scioch

steddyeddy wrote: »

Fair enough but Im talking about theories that had nothing going for them which were upheld at the time.The giant panda, bonobo and giant squid had multiple witness sightings which uphelp consistent anatomical and ethological observations yet were dismissed as myth. THe chemical theory of absorption had enough evidence to overturn the previous thoery but was ignored by scientists and the scientist who came up with the theory wasnt even allowed to present it.

But that doest change the fact that people are not just accepting a scientists word on this. Yes there is a certain amount of faith in the community to make these things known but you cant expect people to distrust it to such a degree than they hold no faith in it just in case its wrong when all known evidence suggests otherwise.

Yes it may not be correct but its not blind faith, just as it was not blind faith that led to the theory of absorption, whatever the reasons that hushed those who were against it the original theory would have been based on what were considered facts at the time. Even though it was wrong it wasnt plucked out of thin air, it was tested and scrutinized. And at some point it would have been the best known explanation.

There just is no comparison between the scientific world and religion in terms of faith.

Mance Rayder

diabloro wrote: »

I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of physics but what they are doing at CERN is amazing. The discoveries this could lead our understanding of the origins of the universe plus all the other experiments from the LHC are transforming science yet again with more knowledge. Im looking forward to their announcements tomorrow for sure.

and please leave God talk out of the thread. We know its about science theory.

Well so far the greatest thing to come out of a CERN scientist is world wide web, and that was a side project.

steddyeddy

LordSmeg wrote: »

But that doest change the fact that people are not just accepting a scientists word on this. Yes there is a certain amount of faith in the community to make these things known but you cant expect people to distrust it to such a degree than they hold no faith in it just in case its wrong when all known evidence suggests otherwise.

Yes it may not be correct but its not blind faith, just as it was not blind faith that led to the theory of absorption, whatever the reasons that hushed those who were against it the original theory would have been based on what were considered facts at the time. Even though it was wrong it wasnt plucked out of thin air, it was tested and scrutinized. And at some point it would have been the best known explanation.

There just is no comparison between the scientific world and religion in terms of faith.

No I agree with you totally. Scientific modeling in my opinion is near perfect Im just saying the scientists themselves are not immune from dogma. You are right though there is no comparison between science and religion. Im not a physicist myself so I will be relying on oppisition to this theory (if any) and the amount of support it gets to determine for my satisfaction its credibility.

MisterEpicurus

I'm getting a bit sick and tired of people trying to compare faith for religion and faith in science.

The reason we have faith in science is because it works!

Blind faith in religion is unreasonable and does not work!

You can trust that science is heading in the right direction whereas religion brings us back a step or two. It's no surprise that this battle of the faiths was attempted to be won by religion as it tried to ban science for so long.

In conclusion, anyone who makes this comparison is an idiot.

paddy147

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

I'm getting a bit sick and tired of people trying to compare faith for religion and faith in science.

The reason we have faith in science is because it works!

Blind faith in religion is unreasonable and does not work!

You can trust that science is heading in the right direction whereas religion brings us back a step or two. It's no surprise that this battle of the faiths was attempted to be won by religion as it tried to ban science for so long.

In conclusion, anyone who makes this comparison is an idiot.

#

Tom Cruise??

Pushtrak

Would be awesome if there was an addition to the "this year we'll be infracting for..." to make, perhaps a "this month..." No prizes for guessing what I'd nominate.

Burt Lancaster

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

I'm getting a bit sick and tired of people trying to compare faith for religion and faith in science.

Agreed, science only deals with the physical, the non physical is totally outside its realm, speciality, and remit. People can't seem to seperate the two.

dlofnep

Burt Lancaster wrote: »

Agreed, science only deals with the physical, the non physical is totally outside its realm, speciality, and remit. People can't seem to seperate the two.

What in the holy fúck does this mean?

bnt

Anyway: "proof" is the wrong word to describe what such an announcement would men. They are running the experiments multiple times and performing statistical analysis on mountains of data. The theory gives them a range of energies within which it ought to exist, and they're calculating how well the data fits the theory. You'll see phrases such as "five sigma", which means 99.99997% certainty. There's a good description of it in this Telegraph article.

GarIT

Burt Lancaster wrote: »

Agreed, science only deals with the physical, the non physical is totally outside its realm, speciality, and remit. People can't seem to seperate the two.

How do you know there is a non physical?

prinz

MisterEpicurus wrote: »

... was attempted to be won by religion as it tried to ban science for so long..

Good one. :pac:

prinz

bnt wrote: »

The theory gives them a range of energies within which it ought to exist, and they're calculating how well the data fits the theory...

+1, plus the range is getting smaller and smaller as they fine tune and eliminate a sliver of possilities. Yer man Brian Cox had a good documentary about it all not long ago on the TV.

Burt Lancaster

GarIT wrote: »

How do you know there is a non physical?

I don't nor do I care, because even if there was Science does not deal with it, its outside its field.

foxyboxer

Higgs me hole.

Super Symmetry is where it's at yo!

delad

I just though of another practical application that will come of all this- a meal replacement pill. It expands and increases mass when you swallow it, and it contains all the vitamins and nutritional and calories that you need for a meal.

It will be great for people who find eating a waste of time and a chore.

prinz

delad wrote: »

I just though of another practical application that will come of all this- a meal replacement pill..

Well done Mr. Wonka :pac:

delad

also penis enlargement will probably be a possibility from all of this, just inject some of dem dere god particles into your mickey and boom, suddenly you have a 20 inch cock

jaydoxx

delad wrote: »

also penis enlargement will probably be a possibility from all of this, just inject some of dem dere god particles into your mickey and boom, suddenly you have a 20 inch cock

20 inches wide, that is:pac:

Rynox45

I wont be happy until someone builds me an infinite improbability drive.

Then again, how likely is that?

Cú Giobach

Live feed here if anyone is interested.

danniemcq

For those that haven't access to that they just said on today fm that it HASN'T been found

Edit: breaking news saying they HAVE found it

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/scientists-hail-god-particle-find-557800.html

danniemcq

Rynox45 wrote: »

I wont be happy until someone builds me an infinite improbability drive.

Then again, how likely is that?

hah

but what about an interocitor instead?

brimal

CMS results have just been announced fully.
They have found a new boson (Higgs) in the expected range. They give it a 4.9 sigma (5.0 is needed for a 'discovery')

ATLAS results coming now.

brimal

ATLAS results are at 5.0 sigma - a discovery.

Rapturous applause, cheers, laughs and Peter Higgs in the crowd is in tears.

Well done to all.

Dave!

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

No my point is that a non scientist has as much faith in scientific theories as a believer in a priest. That is, the "mysteries" of the thing are not understandable to him. For different reasons, sure.

A Church/religion is a monolithic organisation that is dedicated to a particular dogma, and disciplines priests who speak out against that dogma. There is no incentive for rebelling against this. They also provide no evidence for their claims.

Science researchers are employed by a whole array of different organisations, and are free to speak out against particular orthodoxies. In fact the scientific community rewards discoveries that overthrow previously accepted theories. Scientists are also expected to present evidence to support their claims, and publish them to be scrutinized by their peers.

Yes there can be a degree of scepticism to new claims, particularly when the existing body of evidence points to a different conclusion, but ultimately if the evidence is there the consensus eventually shifts, if perhaps after longer than it should (it is after all a community of humans, with all their flaws).

Given the adversarial nature of scientific research, and the fact that the evidence is published and debated in public, it's in no way comparable to faith in religion. It's quite reasonable to believe that, if a particular scientist makes an unsubstantiated claim, the rest of the community will scrutinize it and the truth will emerge.

And the significant track record of discovery by these very means is enough evidence for me to continue to "have faith" in science.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

This thread is an example, there is no discussion of what this means for the Standard Model, very little understanding about the standard model, very little attempt to understand, no questions asked - well one - and just an attack on religion - off topic - and meta discussion on whether belief in scientists is the same as belief in priests.

Thats because nobody understands the science, or even the implications of this, and - lets be honest - y'all don't care.

This is the After Hours forum. Most people were probably attracted to the tabloid headline, hence the level of discourse isn't very high. You're right, most people do not care about this discovery, or science in general.

Post a thread in a Science forum and you'll get a better response.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Im not saying people should dismiss this but rather not use it as a stick to beat other people's beliefs. I do think everyone can and should look at the science for themselves though.

It's only natural to defer to expert bodies to analyse and interpret research. I think it's naive to think that everyone can analyse results from research performed by hundreds of people educated to PhD level, and be able to draw appropriate conclusions from it. What's the point of education then?

Should we all learn about aerodynamics before we get on a plane? Should we learn about pharmacology before taking medicine?

We might be able to get a superficial understanding, but there's no way it would be enough to be able to come to intelligent conclusions. We'd just be tricking ourselves.

Certain bodies of knowledge are more accessible than others, though. Evolution and natural selection are simple enough concepts to grasp, and the evidence is pretty easy to understand. Particle physics is in no way easy to grasp, and takes years of study to understand!

johnwest288

JASUS, this is mad.......

So what do we do now?

Was it worth the investment?

granturismo

How much will it cost to find out who made the atomic particles that produced the Higgs boson particle?

Nothingbetter2d

johnwest288 wrote: »

JASUS, this is mad.......

So what do we do now?

Was it worth the investment?

now we build zero point modules and build flying city spaceships called atlantis

opinion guy

Why is this thread about religion ???

RobbingBandit

It all makes sense now, these guys are going to be in a rush to finish before Christmas this year and they will kill us all on December 21st.

Nothingbetter2d

opinion guy wrote: »

Why is this thread about religion ???

the reference to GOD is that a Higg's Boson Particle aka the GOD particle was responsible for creating the universe via the big bang

prinz

opinion guy wrote: »

Why is this thread about religion ???

Because the god botherers and bible bashers came along and shoved it down everyone's throat.....oh wait no.

py2006

I don't know what all this means?

Nulty

Pushtrak wrote: »

Do you know what a theory is?

Oh, and gravity is a theory, music is a theory, atomic theory? Could go on...

Scientific theory just means that the theory has not been disproved it...yet.

Duckworth_Luas

py2006 wrote: »

I don't know what all this means?

To put if simply, the President misplaced his buffalo and lots of scientist chaps were employed to find it. At long last they have tracked down Higgins' bison.

Nothingbetter2d

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

To put if simply, the President misplaced his buffalo and lots of scientist chaps were employed to find it. At long last they have tracked down Higgins' bison.

well isn't that just hunky dory?