Proof of 'God particle' found

Burt Lancaster

delad wrote: »

Called.

Yep. You have been.

Chavways

Judgement Day wrote: »

It's an 'almighty' waste of time and money which won't produce a single tangible benefit for mankind - scientists are like engineers and they just love spending money on the latest gadgets/experiments etc. The Large Hadron Collider is to Science what Sean Scully is to Art - a load of bollocks. If the same money and brains were devoted to something useful in the medical field but then that's not so sexy. I heard some ****ing eejit on TV tonight saying that maybe these experiments could lead to time travel - ffs! The ****ing Large Hadron Collider should meet the same fate as the e voting machines.

:pac::pac::pac:

Judgement Day

Chavways wrote: »

:pac::pac::pac:

Well go on then, start listing them - I'm happy to stand corrected.

Chavways

Judgement Day wrote: »

Well go on then, start listing them - I'm happy to stand corrected.

For one-The Internet

And a simple Google search finds these:

• semiconductor industry
• sterilisation - food, medical, sewage
• radiation processing
• non-destructive testing
• cancer therapy
• incineration of nuclear waste
• power generation (energy amplifier)?
• source of synchrotron radiation (biology, condensed matter physics...)
• source of neutrons (biology, condensed matter physics...

ArtSmart

Judgement Day wrote: »

It's an 'almighty' waste of time and money which won't produce a single tangible benefit for mankind - scientists are like engineers and they just love spending money on the latest gadgets/experiments etc. The Large Hadron Collider is to Science what Sean Scully is to Art - a load of bollocks. If the same money and brains were devoted to something useful in the medical field but then that's not so sexy. I heard some ****ing eejit on TV tonight saying that maybe these experiments could lead to time travel - ffs! The ****ing Large Hadron Collider should meet the same fate as the e voting machines.

rofl. (THIS IS THE FUTURE YOU LAUGHING, EM, AT YOU)

Judgement Day

Chavways wrote: »

For one-The Internet

And a simple Google search finds these:

• semiconductor industry
• sterilisation - food, medical, sewage
• radiation processing
• non-destructive testing
• cancer therapy
• incineration of nuclear waste
• power generation (energy amplifier)?
• source of synchrotron radiation (biology, condensed matter physics...)
• source of neutrons (biology, condensed matter physics...

What are you on about - these things have been as a result of the Large Hadron Collider?

ArtSmart

Judgement Day wrote: »

What are you on about - these things have been as a result of the Large Hadron Collider?

No, they came from the large Hagrid Collider.

Magic.

take everything

This could lead to some amazing discoveries in Physics, with the help of God.

ArtSmart

take everything wrote: »

This could lead to some amazing discoveries in Physics, with the help of God.

Hence the term....God Particle....I guess...

steddyeddy

Judgement Day wrote: »

What are you on about - these things have been as a result of the Large Hadron Collider?

A better understanding of physics resulted in these things.

ArtSmart

steddyeddy wrote: »

A better understanding of physics resulted in these things.

Steady, Eddy.

take everything

Captain Darling wrote: »

All this is of no conCERN to me.

Geddit?

*gets coat*

Don't be making light of the matter.
This thing makes matter of light.

sink

Judgement Day wrote: »

It's an 'almighty' waste of time and money which won't produce a single tangible benefit for mankind - scientists are like engineers and they just love spending money on the latest gadgets/experiments etc. The Large Hadron Collider is to Science what Sean Scully is to Art - a load of bollocks. If the same money and brains were devoted to something useful in the medical field but then that's not so sexy. I heard some ****ing eejit on TV tonight saying that maybe these experiments could lead to time travel - ffs! The ****ing Large Hadron Collider should meet the same fate as the e voting machines.

You must realise that even electricity was little more than a curiosity at one stage,no one knew of any practical purpose for it when it was first investigated, yet without knowledge of it we would not have the modern world. Knowledge really is power, who knows what knowledge we gain today will lead to in the future.

take everything

ArtSmart wrote: »

Hence the term....God Particle....I guess...

I'm just trying not to offend atheists or religious.

ArtSmart

take everything wrote: »

I'm just trying not to offend atheists or religious.

now that's finding a Higg's Boson (practically impossible task) if ever I heard one.

lol

ferretone

Yeah, can see how we wouldn't want to bother with a better understanding of how the universe works, flat earth, centre of the universe, 4 elements, we defo shoulda just stuck with that

MagicSean

Judgement Day wrote: »

It's an 'almighty' waste of time and money which won't produce a single tangible benefit for mankind - scientists are like engineers and they just love spending money on the latest gadgets/experiments etc. The Large Hadron Collider is to Science what Sean Scully is to Art - a load of bollocks. If the same money and brains were devoted to something useful in the medical field but then that's not so sexy. I heard some ****ing eejit on TV tonight saying that maybe these experiments could lead to time travel - ffs! The ****ing Large Hadron Collider should meet the same fate as the e voting machines.

I disagree. Being able to control the Higgs field around a person would allow you to convert them from matter to energy. Energy can be transported a great deal further than amtter in a much quicker timeframe. If you could then reassemble the energy back into matter you would effectively have transporters.

Or if you want to get evil, you could disrupt the Higgs field around a person and effectively disintegrate them.

MagicSean

ArtSmart wrote: »

Hence the term....God Particle....I guess...

i would have thought that by now someone would have pointed out that the term god particel was actually coined from Goddam Particle, named such because it was so hard to find. Nothing to do with God.

Like all science really. It may answer the question how but not the question why.

hooradiation

Judgement Day wrote: »

It's an 'almighty' waste of time and money which won't produce a single tangible benefit for mankind - scientists are like engineers and they just love spending money on the latest gadgets/experiments etc. The Large Hadron Collider is to Science what Sean Scully is to Art - a load of bollocks. If the same money and brains were devoted to something useful in the medical field but then that's not so sexy. I heard some ****ing eejit on TV tonight saying that maybe these experiments could lead to time travel - ffs! The ****ing Large Hadron Collider should meet the same fate as the e voting machines.

Did you have to practice at being this wrong or is it just a natural talent?

Cú Giobach

MagicSean wrote: »

Like all science really. It may answer the question how but not the question why.

People shouldn't expect answers to stupid questions.

Judgement Day

hooradiation wrote: »

Did you have to practice at being this wrong or is it just a natural talent?

I consider myself a good judge of crap when I see it - e Voting machines, Sean Scully, most Space Exploration etc.etc. I think things like the Hadron Collider are about as much use to the people of Europe as nuclear weapons are to the average person in India or Pakistan. It is a plaything of the overpaid elite 'so-called' intelligentsia class. It just stuns me that nobody else here seems to support my view and to me it just shows how gullible people are. We may not have the level of poverty in the West that prevails in the Third World but we do have a lot of people who are struggling to survive/waiting for life saving surgery etc.etc. that the money could be better spent on. Anyway don't worry this is positively my last post on the subject. Ignorance is bliss.

nacho libre

Pushtrak wrote: »

Because gods don't make religions. Or, in my mind, universes. Well, maybe they would, if they could get over the obstacle of non-existence.

If energy cannot be created or destroyed, then how can there ever have been true nothingness. For all we know there could have been another earth in a universe 90 billion years ago. It maybe that big bangs are an never ending process. We simply don't know.

Captain Chaos

Judgement Day wrote: »

I consider myself a good judge of crap when I see it - e Voting machines, Sean Scully, most Space Exploration etc

Wow, just wow. Space exploration. That is the one thing that will extend the survival of our species in the long term. Without any of it we a doomed to a very short existence on this planet.

We only learned to fly just over 100 years ago and we have been in space just over 40 years. Its a major learning curve.

You cannot seriously compare the scientific exploration and advancement on the sub atomic and large scale level to eVoting machines and Sean Scully because if you are you have a vary seriously flawed logic system and if the human race all thought like you we would still be in the Dark Ages. It's the greater good in the long run and the trivial and now.

nozzferrahhtoo

nacho libre wrote: »

If energy cannot be created or destroyed, then how can there ever have been true nothingness.

I have read quite a few answers and hypothesis on this question and some of them are very interesting. In this one for example the answer is that we technically do still have nothing.

What they are finding is when they add up the numbers for all the energy in the universe, the positive and negative, the matter and anti matter and so on, the answer they are getting out the other end is Zero.

I am good at physics but not so good at Lay Science Writing. The best analogy I can come up with, and it is fairly crap, is to imagine you have no money. You open two bank accounts with zero balance but one has an over draft on it. You transfer money from one to to the other. You now have balances of 200 and -200.

Technically you still have no money, but you can go to the ATM and take cash out of the former and spend it. You have nothing and something at the same time.

Much of the message Krauss gives in the linked video is similar. We seem to have a whole lot of "something" but when we add it all together there is actually nothing there.

Cú Giobach

Judgement Day wrote: »

I consider myself a good judge of crap when I see it - e Voting machines, Sean Scully, most Space Exploration etc.etc. I think things like the Hadron Collider are about as much use to the people of Europe as nuclear weapons are to the average person in India or Pakistan. It is a plaything of the overpaid elite 'so-called' intelligentsia class. It just stuns me that nobody else here seems to support my view and to me it just shows how gullible people are. We may not have the level of poverty in the West that prevails in the Third World but we do have a lot of people who are struggling to survive/waiting for life saving surgery etc.etc. that the money could be better spent on. Anyway don't worry this is positively my last post on the subject. Ignorance is bliss.

Curiosity is one of the defining traits of our species, you can either moan about it or accept it but you will never change it.

Judgement Day

Judgement Day wrote: »

I consider myself a good judge of crap when I see it - e Voting machines, Sean Scully, most Space Exploration etc.etc. I think things like the Hadron Collider are about as much use to the people of Europe as nuclear weapons are to the average person in India or Pakistan. It is a plaything of the overpaid elite 'so-called' intelligentsia class. It just stuns me that nobody else here seems to support my view and to me it just shows how gullible people are. We may not have the level of poverty in the West that prevails in the Third World but we do have a lot of people who are struggling to survive/waiting for life saving surgery etc.etc. that the money could be better spent on. Anyway don't worry this is positively my last post on the subject. Ignorance is bliss.

You must be in heaven so.

smash

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmzwuYj5w1U

nacho libre

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I have read quite a few answers and hypothesis on this question and some of them are very interesting. In this one for example the answer is that we technically do still have nothing.

What they are finding is when they add up the numbers for all the energy in the universe, the positive and negative, the matter and anti matter and so on, the answer they are getting out the other end is Zero.

I am good at physics but not so good at Lay Science Writing. The best analogy I can come up with, and it is fairly crap, is to imagine you have no money. You open two bank accounts with zero balance but one has an over draft on it. You transfer money from one to to the other. You now have balances of 200 and -200.

Technically you still have no money, but you can go to the ATM and take cash out of the former and spend it. You have nothing and something at the same time.

Much of the message Krauss gives in the linked video is similar. We seem to have a whole lot of "something" but when we add it all together there is actually nothing there.

Thanks for the link. That's a good analogy you've posted. I have an interest in your field of study, but unfortunately a lot of it goes over my head:o

ScumLord

Judgement Day wrote: »

I consider myself a good judge of crap when I see it - e Voting machines, Sean Scully, most Space Exploration etc.etc.

We may not have the level of poverty in the West that prevails in the Third World but we do have a lot of people who are struggling to survive/waiting for life saving surgery etc.etc.

Those people are waiting for scientists to come up with better machines and knowledge of the human body. Modern computing is now at the atomic level, everything we learn about the inner workings of atoms is going to help make better computers, which leads on to more discoveries in every other field and better machines that are smaller and better at what they do. To say space exploration and the work at cern is not and will not be of benefit to the human race is just mind blowingly ignorant of the actual work and it's consequences.

Scioch

Anyone else think Stephen Hawking has a bit of a gambling problem ? 100 euro on this, Penthouse subscription on a black hole with Kip Thorne. Only a matter of time before he's in rehab if you ask me.

Burt Lancaster

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I have read quite a few answers and hypothesis on this question and some of them are very interesting. In this one for example the answer is that we technically do still have nothing.

What they are finding is when they add up the numbers for all the energy in the universe, the positive and negative, the matter and anti matter and so on, the answer they are getting out the other end is Zero.

I am good at physics but not so good at Lay Science Writing. The best analogy I can come up with, and it is fairly crap, is to imagine you have no money. You open two bank accounts with zero balance but one has an over draft on it. You transfer money from one to to the other. You now have balances of 200 and -200.

Technically you still have no money, but you can go to the ATM and take cash out of the former and spend it. You have nothing and something at the same time.

Much of the message Krauss gives in the linked video is similar. We seem to have a whole lot of "something" but when we add it all together there is actually nothing there.

I admire your faith

Pushtrak

Some more stuff...

Higgs boson: Science explained using sugar and ping-pong balls
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0705/1224319426889.html

Rynox45

To people who disapprove of CERN and the like, I'd recommend watching some of the stuff Brian Cox has done on the subject, or just look up some of the benefits we've gotten from research like this.

Also, to suggest that funding should be redirected from CERN to random medical research is ridiculous. Some people want to study particle physics and it's an important factor in finding out how the universe works on a fundamental level.
Sure, we could make medical training compulsory for everyone, then technology grinds to a halt and we have no idea how to stop an asteroid hurtling towards us looking for a hug.

nozzferrahhtoo

Burt Lancaster wrote: »

I admire your faith

Not aware of having any, but thanks all the same.

Pushtrak

He's talking about multiverses, and "before the big bang" on this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTVT-MlRq6o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL7G2DDehA4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cycLnBGqp8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og-Bw7PVwZ0

skelliser

Judgement Day wrote: »

It's an 'almighty' waste of time and money which won't produce a single tangible benefit for mankind - scientists are like engineers and they just love spending money on the latest gadgets/experiments etc. The Large Hadron Collider is to Science what Sean Scully is to Art - a load of bollocks. If the same money and brains were devoted to something useful in the medical field but then that's not so sexy. I heard some ****ing eejit on TV tonight saying that maybe these experiments could lead to time travel - ffs! The ****ing Large Hadron Collider should meet the same fate as the e voting machines.

ur some gobshyte are'nt ya!

you do realise that thanks to particle physics, lasers and accelerators we can now treat people with cancer via radiation and laser therapy!

You do realise that without the research at CERN we wouldnt be here reading your waffle if they hadnt pioneered the early world wide web!

Scioch

Michio Kaku tends to get carried away at times I think. Read a few of his books and although brilliant and very informative he does go further into what might be or might have been than most other physicists. Great to get your imagination going and getting you excited about it but quite often at the expense of better understand of the subject.

Brian Cox seems to do a good job of making the info accessible and is much better keeping things in perspective from what I've seen of him. Haven't read any of his books though. Brian Greene was another one who was great at making this type of info accessible. Might have a root about see if he's given some interviews on it.

Judgement Day

skelliser wrote: »

ur some gobshyte are'nt ya!

you do realise that thanks to particle physics, lasers and accelerators we can now treat people with cancer via radiation and laser therapy!

You do realise that without the research at CERN we wouldnt be here reading your waffle if they hadnt pioneered the early world wide web!

Another intellectual Wiki reader. Nothing you have said has any bearing on the ' 'God Particle' and no need to be so ****ing offensive because somebody holds a different point of view.

Corkfeen

LordSmeg wrote: »

Michio Kaku tends to get carried away at times I think. Read a few of his books and although brilliant and very informative he does go further into what might be or might have been than most other physicists. Great to get your imagination going and getting you excited about it but quite often at the expense of better understand of the subject.

Brian Cox seems to do a good job of making the info accessible and is much better keeping things in perspective from what I've seen of him. Haven't read any of his books though. Brian Greene was another one who was great at making this type of info accessible. Might have a root about see if he's given some interviews on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIj-6fr2SlI

How many physicists were part of a pop group. :pac:

cartell_best

Intelligent design? erm....

sink

Judgement Day wrote: »

Another intellectual Wiki reader. Nothing you have said has any bearing on the ' 'God Particle' and no need to be so ****ing offensive because somebody holds a different point of view.

Those examples may not have a direct bearing on the Higgs Boson but they are analogous i.e. they too came from undirected research. To put it simply, you ask 'what use is it?', to answer that question we must first answer 'what is it?'; for how can we answer the former without first answering the latter?

delad

So what was there before the big bang? What existed before the universe existed?

Captain Chaos

delad wrote: »

So what was there before the big bang? What existed before the universe existed?

That's like asking you how did you feel before you were born. You can only experience existance from your point of view.

delad

Captain Chaos wrote: »

That's like asking you how did you feel before you were born.

no its not, its like asking how I was born

Scioch

delad wrote: »

So what was there before the big bang? What existed before the universe existed?

A perfectly symmetrical collection of particles with no mass according to Mr Kaku.

Scioch

delad wrote: »

no its not, its like asking how I was born

More like asking what were you before you were born. You were your mother.

Captain Chaos

delad wrote: »

no its not, its like asking how I was born

Think about it a bit longer and deeper.

delad

LordSmeg wrote: »

A perfectly symmetrical collection of particles with no mass according to Mr Kaku.

but how did the particles come into existence?

delad

LordSmeg wrote: »

More like asking what were you before you were born. You were your mother.

and how did my mother come into existence? etc etc

Captain Chaos

delad wrote: »

but how did the particles come into existence?

They just "popped" into existence from a random spark of energy. Thats one of theorys anyway. Nobody really knows. All we do know is that something cannot come from nothing.