Has the Higgs boson been found? Signs point to ... almost

[guest194]

Dont think theyve found it yet they had problems with the collider not sure if its running at full speed yet plus funds were cut so we may have to wait a while longer, all there doing is trying to prove there theory is right.

 

[PhenoMenal]

Well CERN seems fairly confident they've found it, even saying "we've found it" and declaring sigma 5, and Peter Higgs had no reservations with the standing ovation, even stating he's glad this has happened within his lifetime ... and Professor Brian Cox (who has worked on the project) tweeted "So, in very simple language. ATLAS and CMS have independently discovered a new particle mass ~ 126 GeV which behaves like Standard Model Higgs" ... (thats TWO SEPERATE systems that have detected this) ... you are correct however that a lot more testing/datamining needs to be done, but it's probably fair to now say that we've PROBABLY found the Higgs - that is afterall what the physicists are now saying

 

[g0dzilla]

Well CERN seems fairly confident they've found it, even saying "we've found it" and declaring sigma 5, and Peter Higgs had no reservations with the standing ovation, even stating he's glad this has happened within his lifetime ... and Professor Brian Cox (who has worked on the project) tweeted "So, in very simple language. ATLAS and CMS have independently discovered a new particle mass ~ 126 GeV which behaves like Standard Model Higgs" ... (thats TWO SEPERATE systems that have detected this) ... you are correct however that a lot more testing/datamining needs to be done, but it's probably fair to now say that we've PROBABLY found the Higgs - that is afterall what the physicists are now saying

 

[PhenoMenal]

from icmag chat...

21:12 g0dzilla: lol i told u, u make my brains explode

Well SORRRRYYYYYY!!!! lol

To be honest though, trying to get your mind around something of the alleged nature of the Higgs boson isn't easy ... a lot of its properties just dont seem to make any sense in our "normal, visible, physical world" ... it's only when you break it down with models such as those proposed by Peter Higgs where it can ever possibly hope to work ... models that make sense to the worlds foremost particle physicists, but to you, me, and Alice n Bob next door, won't make much sense at all

 

[Suspect]

too many formulas too many numbers to crunch for my taste

 

[PhenoMenal]

Suspect... that's why you're not working on the worlds most advanced particle physics experiment

These are the best scientists the world has to throw at this, and they've come up with a SIGMA 5 result ... there is just a 5-in-10 million chance that this is a fluke. Not only that, the results suggesting the existance of the Higgs were observed independtly at TWO different observatories - the CMS and the ATLAS.

 

[Hank Hemp]

I bet Sheldon gives Amy some. He'll be so frisky.

 

[PhenoMenal]

Hank ... if there's only one thing that happens as a result of this ..........................

 

[Infinitesimal]

what about the Alpha Olympus Resonance Frequency?... could be the key the early formation of matter and the link between string theory and Einstein's theory of relativity.

Just give me Trillions of your tax payer dollars, unimaginable equipment, and vast amounts of human resources. And I will effectively measure this frequency and identify the vibrational spectrum necessary to sustain the atom.

see I can make something up, make some grandiose claim about its possible implications, and then if people believe me I can spend the rest of my life and others can spend their lives searching for proof of things that don't exist like Higgs particles, Gravity waves, dark matter, dark energy, Weakly Interacting Massive Particles... all of which they have figured out ways to measure if they exist yet all they ever yield are false positives.

mathematics and science can't even count from 1 to 2

we can't reach zero by division... there is always a remainder, meaning you can never define the smallest unit

we can't accurately measure the surface area of a one inch circle

so how then can scientists say there is not enough matter in the universe to hold the formation of galaxies together and therefore there must be some form of "dark matter" we can't see.

and there is not enough matter, so not enough gravity to overcomes Hubble's expanding universe to account for the galactic clustering and mergers that have been since observed... so there must be some "Dark energy" moving these cosmic bodies around in space.

Einstein's theory of relativity doesn't fit with quantum theory because of their two descriptions gravity do not work together on one another's scale.

I believe einsteins theory of space-time gravity; where matter sits on this fabric of space-time and its mass bends space time so that objects moving in straight lines now curve when in the presence of another body in space... is incorrect

and brings on its own paradox's; since gravity is a mutual attraction between two bodies in space then their gravity and mass can only be measured relatively as compared to the mass of another object... out in space you are every bit as massive but weightless because there is no other body pulling you towards it with a scale in-between the two of you... but if it were just you and a scale out in open space; what could explain your massive size, lack of weight, and without weight how do you affect the space-time that einstein invented?... enter Higgs and his particle

so in order to stay in line with einstiens theories, and not have to conclude that maybe he wasn't right about everything and have to go back and rework physics... we can create this particle that is responsible for imparting mass onto matter.

so now with the higgs particle solitary objects in space now posses the weight necessary to affect space-time due to the mass possessed within the higgs particle... instead of mass being inherent to all matter

It's analogous to the war on drugs... science like the government is using the effects of things they have caused as causes to further their agenda... Ie. spending loads of taxpayer dollars on things that are imaginary all while devaluing national currency and causing runaway Inflation....

oooh Higgs particle... what would I have done without it

 

[Hank Hemp]

Whoa, there cowboy. You don't think I meant coitus do you? LOL It ain't like they invented the warp drive now.

 

[SacredTHCRitual]

"What if God ain't hearing you? That's your only fear
Each day you think more about your psychosis
No one but you can help you, and you know this
That's the craziest part of it all"

 

[PhenoMenal]

mathematics and science can't even count from 1 to 2
Actually it turns out we can

we can't reach zero by division...
Granted this generates Exception errors in software, but we can handle them fine, Structured Exception Handling etc

we can't accurately measure the surface area of a one inch circle
Oh, we can, but I can't help but feel I'd be answering a question on your homework

 

[LouDog420]

Infi, it is mass that warps space time, not weight. Weight is simply the measure of gravitational pull on an object, like you mentioned. Mass will stay the same, and weight will change depending which hunk of rock you are sitting on or your location in the universe. It is mass that bends the space-time fabric.

As far as all matter having mass, yes that is the definition of matter, as defined by us. Now, where this mass originates is another question, as an atom is mostly empty space with a set of swirling electrons, and a nucleus... Which again are made of a miniscule amount of matter.

So now, how can we possibly explain a nearly mass-less photon bending around objects in space, as shown in the early 1900s...

The only logical answer in my mind is due to gravity... And Einstein's space time theory tries to explain gravity as a warping of the space-time fabric. But the truth is, we have no idea how the gravity mechanism actually works, and only measure it. In essence, it's a theory, like the higgs boson, but we've done enough experiments to say, yes gravity exists, and this is how the object will behave... And we can say this with relative certainty...

We sent and returned men from space, with this theory of gravity, so obviously, enough measurements and calculations will allow a better understanding of the phenom... Just as will eventually happen with the higgs boson or whatever other theories they come up with. But the fact that two experiments, found evidence for the boson, exactly where they predicted it, is enough for me to say wow as opposed to discrediting their theories without as much as an equation



PS I don't claim to be a physicist, I just used to play one in college, and I was stoned through most of my physics classes

 

[HempKat]

Ask a physicist to explain conciousness. The physicist is unaware that he is the god particle.

Hempkat they don't call it the god particle because of the power it will yield. They call it that because it is supposed to be te particle that causes all others particles to exist when and where they do.

Gee I thought they called it that because it decides which particles have mass and which don't and that it also gives creedence to concepts such as supersymmetry or the existence of dimensions other then the ones we know.

Why they call it the God particle isn't really relevent to what I'm saying though. The LHC was created for the purpose of finding this particle but on the day they first fired it up many were worried the result could destroy the earth. It didn't of course but the thing is nobody was certain it wouldn't.

The aversion to genetic modification is the possibility it could be misused or that the results of messing with it might have harmful consequences for mankind. What's more harmful though then destroying the planet we live on? Nothing that I can think of and yet that possibility didn't stop them from firing up the LHC. So I'm questioning why were we so willing to throw the dice with using the LHC to pursue the quest for the God Particle but we're so reluctant to pursue genetic modification. Genetic modification could eliminate disease, eliminate undiserable behavior characteristics, minimize our weaknesses and enhance our strengths. What does proving the God Particle exists do for us? Make theories less theoretical and more factual?

 

[Treetroit City]

Nothing to do with God actually.

Originally tabbed the "Goddamn particle".

Look into it.

 

[ChronicCanuck]

now that we can prove its there, can we do anything useful with it? time will tell.

 

[flubnutz]

so now somebody's gonna be able to do what einstein couldn't, come up with the model that describes *everything* about sub-atomic particles?

 

[lost in a sea]

this higgs boson stuff is a load of bollocks,, they are just propping up thier imaginary mathamatics with at least something that looks real this time and not just more computer modelling,, doesnt mean what they have found proves anything about the big bang or dark matter or any of their theories,,

all of those men weaving this rubbish are heritics to science but high priests in the church of science so they are happy, they are high on their egos,, and this means they can start to roll out all the technology they mastered for the last 20+ years and say its all thanks to this new faux scientific "discovery"..

i wish i could explain how childish and inane all of this stuff is,, only when people can see how much it flies in the face of truth for themselves would they understand how i could make what appears such a pompous statement,,

all i can say is at the very least please keep an open mind that you may be being manipulated(all the time) and hopefully one day soon their will be a revolution in science and the masses will finally be enlightened and have their birth rights returned to them..

it is already happening,, which is exactly why they are trying harder than ever to prove what more and more scientists are seeing through everyday..

the general public just assume whatever the tv tells them is true so they are a given, its the scientific community that is under attack with this faith based nonsense,,

there are seriously alot of physicists that dont agree with this crap at all,,, so lets not say they are some sort of hive mind moving to one beat.. its just you arent exposed to what the other physicists think through the media..

and the idiot box is the highway to getting garbage into peoples heads so they can be manipulated later on isnt it ? ..

ever notice that people that dont know shit about physics(ie the general public) or even know anything about the physics behind the big bang/blackholes/dark matter itself so badly want to defend it ? i find it really disturbing.. its a bit like the gangs of literalist christians lead by murderous "saints" for the church that used to get riled up and then go and murder the shamans and witch doctors that searched for truth outside of their brainwashing,, like hypathia and the alexandrian library..

thats religion at work again and not science.. science should be open to all theories but it is quickly becoming dogmatic and demanding the faith of the masses.. imo the sheeple are falling for the oldest trick in the book just with a shiny new fascia.. if we aren't careful we will end up in another dark age..

 

[Infinitesimal]

mathematics and science can't even count from 1 to 2
Actually it turns out we can

I'd like to see you do it... without skipping a single decimal place?... 1.0011 is larger than 1.001 and yet significantly smaller than 1.002... and it keeps going like like this Infinitely

Im more confused about which decimal place to start counting from... 1.0001... no wait 1.00001... no wait 1.000001... no wait 1.0000001... no wait 1.00000001... no wait 1.000000001... no wait 1.0000000001.... do you see where I'm going with this

So go ahead... count to two for me...

we can't reach zero by division...
Granted this generates Exception errors in software, but we can handle them fine, Structured Exception Handling etc

actually... What is One Degree Physicist/ comedian ATTEMPTS to define a non relative definition of temperature or heat... watch the whole thing but pay special attention to 34:49 thats only one example and it works for any measurement you can make, thats why mathematics and measuring in general is only good at scale where there is a realistic margin for error in measurements ... like when building a house.
no two measurements will be the same without rounding off at some decimal point

and please prove me wrong on this... start with 1 divide by 2 until you get to zero... we will miss you

we can't accurately measure the surface area of a one inch circle
Oh, we can, but I can't help but feel I'd be answering a question on your homework

HaHa... no homework here, I learned how we are supposed to measure circles back in 7th grade; ACEd all my tests BTW though. Ive thought about going back to college for enrichment and just to sharpen up a bit on things I've forgotten.

anyways yeah Radius squared multiplied by PI, but what decimal point do you round up to ... it usually depends on what scale your dealing with but PI never ends so where can you say one can make an absolute measurement then.

Ill use a larger circle to make the point a little more evident for example...

most consider PI 3.14
60 foot diameter
30 foot radius squared is 900 feet
A) X 3.14= 2,826 FT2
B) X3.1415= 2,827.35 FT2
C) X3.1415926= 2,827.43334 FT2
and on and on and on and on infinitely larger measurements of the same object... and averaging isn't going to give a more true number either

my point being... lets say these 60 foot diameter circles are stars and for some reason you want to know the combined surface area of all the stars in a given galaxy of lets say 3,333,333,333 stars, so multiply that number by all 3 measurements and see if that changes the surface area of the galaxy... now multiply those three new numbers by the number of galaxies in the universe and see if there are any discrepancies between the three measurements that in actuality are very near each other on the PI spectrum.

and no matter how far out in terms of decimal place when making a measurement there will always be yet a slightly smaller Integer resulting in a slightly larger measurement... but as you add these small discrepancies together they accumulate exponentially and can give flawed results... like scientists stating there is not enough normal visible matter in the universe to create the gravity necessary to hold the universe and its galaxies together. Ie. Dark Matter needs to be invented to make up for the matter they are unable to measure because of the inherent incapabilities of mathematics and measurements in general

but since the space time gravity theory doesn't work with quantum mechanics when predicting the affects of gravity... maybe its possible that one or both of these ideas about space time and gravity are simply wrong... throughout history many scientific theories made successful predictions on cosmological observations, only to be proven wrong later. In fact being wrong... thats the nature of science.

what I've noticed lately is... not enough people are willing to try and prove ideas wrong... instead it seems most people have a very emotional almost religious attachment to their scientific "beliefs" and would rather find/invent some way or thing that allows them to rationalize or affirm their already established ideas instead of coming up with creatively probable new ideas.

Infi, it is mass that warps space time, not weight. Weight is simply the measure of gravitational pull on an object, like you mentioned. Mass will stay the same, and weight will change depending which hunk of rock you are sitting on or your location in the universe. It is mass that bends the space-time fabric.

Oh I know that... but when you get definitions of mass its either 3.5 x the mass of the sun or in Kilograms.

I understand that when outside the gravitational field of another body you are weightless but none the less massive... what Im saying is I don't know that the Idea that the curvature of space time fabric is responsible for what we perceive as gravity... no doubt its all about mass and mass density!

googled what is the mass of the earth a while back:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/planet-earth-weigh.htm

Newton showed that, for spherical objects, you can make the simplifying assumption that all of the object's mass is concentrated at the center of the sphere. The following equation expresses the gravitational attraction that two spherical objects have on one another:

R is the distance separating the two objects.
G is a constant that is 6.67259x10-11m3/s2 kg.
M1 and M2 are the two masses that are attracting each other.
F is the force of attraction between them.

Assume that Earth is one of the masses (M1) and a 1-kg sphere is the other (M2). The force between them is 9.8 kg*m/s2 -- we can calculate this force by dropping the 1-kg sphere and measuring the acceleration that the Earth's gravitational field applies to it (9.8 m/s2).
The radius of the Earth is 6,400,000 meters (6,999,125 yards). If you plug all of these values in and solve for M1, you find that the mass of the Earth is 6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 kilograms (6E+24 kilograms / 1.3E+25 pounds).
1It is "more proper" to ask about mass rather than weight because weight is a force that requires a gravitational field to determine. You can take a bowling ball and weigh it on the Earth and on the moon. The weight on the moon will be one-sixth that on the Earth, but the amount of mass is the same in both places. To weigh the Earth, we would need to know in which object's gravitational field we want to calculate the weight. The mass of the Earth, on the other hand, is a constant.

so I follow all of this... but its kind of dumb, its telling us how massive the earth is relative to a one kilogram ball... when the mass of the ball only weighs one kilogram due to the size of the earth and its gravitational field... LOL

so I wonder if you take the same ball that weighs one kilogram on earth onto the sun... what would be the results?

obviously the sun is going to pull that ball with more force and we will be able to infer that the sun is in fact more massive... but what would the ball weigh on the surface of the sun, shouldn't that be accounted for and the ball reduced to 1 kilogram sun measurement to maintain a constant since thats what we did on earth and with that ball...

Otherwise wouldn't you be taking something relative to the mass of the earth to measure the mass of the sun?

As far as all matter having mass, yes that is the definition of matter, as defined by us. Now, where this mass originates is another question, as an atom is mostly empty space with a set of swirling electrons, and a nucleus... Which again are made of a miniscule amount of matter.

I think that is awesome how all of the things we consider to be solid in this world, are by the vast majority made up of empty space... inner space... I love it

but I believe mass is inherent to matter no matter its scale

so I see that all as an illusion of scale... you can only define those protons ,electrons and sub atomic particles as minuscule when compared to yourself or the earth or solar systems or the galaxy or the universe... but there is no way to define the size of any of those things ACCURATELY in a non-relative/absolute fashion.

so how can anyone say how small those particles are?

when we haven't been able to identify an indivisible particle that can't be split into some other divisible particle... in order to find the smallest unit of measure to say OK this is how big everything is... and I don't think its possible, there will always be something left over

So now, how can we possibly explain a nearly mass-less photon bending around objects in space, as shown in the early 1900s...

NEARLY mass-less, and nearly yes; but only when relative to the scale we experience... but there is no telling how truly massive these so called minuscule objects are.

no matter how minuscule,e all matter has mass and therefore gravity... Even pure radiative energy has gravity... E=MC2... because energy is mass and mass is energy just at different vibrations (energy levels when talking radiation frequencies)

only logical answer in my mind is due to gravity... And Einstein's space time theory tries to explain gravity as a warping of the space-time fabric. But the truth is, we have no idea how the gravity mechanism actually works, and only measure it. In essence, it's a theory, like the higgs boson, but we've done enough experiments to say, yes gravity exists, and this is how the object will behave... And we can say this with relative certainty...

no doubt gravity exists, I just don't believe it exists in the way that modern science portrays or understands it... not that I have some mathematical equation to disprove it nor do i believe in the accuracy of mathematics at those scales anyways. Its just that I have made observations that I don't see how they fit into or work with current theories... but this response has taken too long as it is, Ill save those for some other time

We sent and returned men from space, with this theory of gravity, so obviously, enough measurements and calculations will allow a better understanding of the phenom... Just as will eventually happen with the higgs boson or whatever other theories they come up with. But the fact that two experiments, found evidence for the boson, exactly where they predicted it, is enough for me to say wow as opposed to discrediting their theories without as much as an equation

like i said earlier in this post... science often makes predictions that have yielded some substantial results only to be dis proven later... furthering science as a whole.

basically when it comes to Higgs I don't see the need for it to exist; in order for mass, gravity and the universe as a whole to exists just as it has and does.

Good Fun,
peace guys
Infi

 

[lost in a sea]

's well said imo,,

the electric universe physicists would say that

-Energy, Mass and the speed of light are all properties of matter,,

-Electromagnetic energy is stored in the orbital substructure of subatomic particles and manifests as their mass,,

- the mass of a particle is a measure of how much energy is absorbed in deformation of a particle instead of its acceleration..

- Electromagnetic radiation requires the presence of matter

- the speed of light can be seen as a measure of the initial response of the subatomic particles to a varying near instantaneous electrical force. making it an aspect of the material medium,, the aether..

- a near instantaneous electric force implies a universal time..

- quantum energy tranfers occur between resonant orbital systems..

the electrical force is 10 to the power 39 times more powerful than gravity which is one of the weakest forces in nature.. and also the speed of light cannot be the universal limit for speed like e=mc2 assumes because the results of the forces in our universe are obviously instantaneous..

basically this whole higgs boson "god particle" is an attempt to counter these facts (as i see them) and further back the principle of uniformity..