It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Shocking! CERN may not have discovered elusive Higgs Boson particle after all

page: 2
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 06:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Denoli

….that's been, respectfully submitted, quite some time ago, I'm pretty sure, but then I know (the death warrant or ticket or whatever)(added on editing, that's an oxymoron or something)


0.000000000000002

that much about anything and everything. They tell me that actually might make me kinda smart, knowing that's what I know.
edit on 9-11-2014 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 08:03 AM
link   
okay first off, it's lame that this guy is trying to name dark energy after him. Unless the guy is black as midnight.

I wouldn't suggest naming yourself after the guts of stars.

Also, These guys still believe in the big bang theory.

Want me to explain what the collider is doing? The outer layer of any given sub-atomic particle is defined sort of the same was as its expanded counterpart the Atom. The particles in the atom follow along a linar path tho. And so generate the surface area through vibration.

These sub-atomic particles are made up of even smaller particles that bond together based on magnetic polarity.

There is no solid state for these particles because they cannot touch, It is the pull of these tiny north and south Proto- partcles.

People are going to need to drop the big bang theory in order to understand how energy is created in order for particles to be *charged*

Varying ammounts of internal charge effect the ability of a proto particle or a sub-atomic particle to bond with a nabouring cluster of particles.

Basically when you smash particles together, The intense interaction of these sub-atomic particles loosing stabability momentarily and rapidly combining towards the linar path of motion can create one multipul different particles with signifigantly reduced imputes of energy that may seem to bleep out of existance for some *unkown* reason when the reason is pretty obvious. The energy is spent.

Also what isn't mentioned is the power source for this collider? How much energy was present in the particles before launching them? Well since it's not exactly a properly documented phenomenon ( Only the Aspect of Entropy and radation however interest the community)

It seems in a universe created by the big bang, Entropy has us beat. Radiation is not only what fuels life on Earth it is also what is slowly draining the entire universe of energy. At least in the case of the big bang. But since It's not. And the universe relies on completely different mechanisms. The implosions in space big enough to cause an Anchor are the ones that take a long time to finish. Once a black hole begins it's difficult for it to close. That's because the traditional black hole has enough surface area to feed off enough decaying material that gets sucked into it.

The entire galaxy, the milkyway around us is pumping out tons of spent particles, Tons of radiation and any other outlets of energy pouring out because of radioactive decay/entropy.

Getting back to what the particles they find in the collider. Basically since the energy is at a set ammount. The particles they create may not be exactly the same as the next because the internal energy differences. Say, you can send a certain ammount of electrons into a copper wire for a desired *voltage* It however does not increase the power of the individual electrons themselves. Just produces more in abaundance. And that is how we calculate.

So knowing this, The estimations will obviously seem mysterious when the sensors are displaying *unknown* energy ect.

Coming back to how energy is created in the first place. When decaying particles such as proto-electrons/ proto-protons / proto-neutrons.

A atom may hold a given number of electrons protons neutrons. And each of these sub-atomic particles have the proto- partcles i guess people call them axioms? they are more like shards with north and south points. The shards themselves are what hold the charges, Collectively these particles are governened by how much charge remains and can fly off and attach to nearby particles. Sometimes in a clump. And sometimes they clump up but the general idea is that the bound up energy inside them is what causes the magnetic force to be generated.

When a black hole sucks in decaying matter it contains it, So it cannot move. The reason it cannot move is because the way physical mass assembles itself is based off collect charge. So proto- electrons need to be bonded along with a neutron which carries the electron. But moving matter such as light and energy can be electrons or protons or even sometimes neutrons themselves.

But these all rely on magnetic forces to achieve these collective states. Otherwise they would seemingly cease to exist. An atom cannot exist unless an electron is orbiting it. And we wouldn't beable to tell the surface area unless it did because the particles are so tiny in comparison to how much *space* they take up. For instance hypthetically speaking. They are the lid on a 5 gallon jug. The jug is the space the atom takes. Where as the lid is the actual space of the particles themselves when not moving. But in reality the lid would be barly visible compared to the size of the jug.
So knowing that atoms require movment of polarized magnetic force such as all the proto-particles spinning in one specfic direction. That matter interacting only does so because of proper polarized magnetic activity. If such a particle as *black matter* *black energy* is forced together so that even these very basic tiny particles cannot align along their north and south poles then the particle cannot spin. So has little effect on physical matter as far as stealing energy.

If a particle cannot move, then tension will rise. As the particle tries to expand it builds up energy, This is where energy comes from. There are literal physical objects but they are much to tiny and do not reflect the image of what we see as a whole simply because they move to fast and generate surface area. Like if the flash were to run in circles. It would look like a cyclone but we know it's just one person. So in theory black matter would actually be several times smaller than regular matter. The only reason why a black hole has so much suction power is because its a falling current.

The rate of implosion is constant because they are constantly absorbing spent decaying proto-particles/sub-atomic particles and atoms. Since a particle can only get so small, there's no room for anymore. Simply because black matter is at its ultimate combined state. The pull of the particles magnetic force is so strong it closes itself off becoming a passive particle.

Passive particles cannot become subject to magnetic fusion as there is no charge present, No spinning movement. Think of it like a microwave. When you microwave dehydrated food it will have no effect. 0 moisture will cause sparks.

Just like in a black hole, These sparks are seen as emitting gamma-rays. At the same time. The flow of the current of passive particles causes the jetstreams to emerge. Escaping passive particles as well as the *sparks* being generated spew out of the north and south poles of a galaxy. Decaying material is being drawn in, So as this jet stream shoots out. These passive particles nudge the incoming decaying material. Some of it gets caught in the streams and lights up because it is pinning off of highly dense areas of passive particles. The density is what we would describe as dark matter.

Until the passive particles are thinned out it then becomes dark energy. As the difference is in how much % takes up*space* Black holes have dense amounts of *black matter* But black matter itself is rare in such a case... because its strickly made on a situational basis like in the case of a black hole where passive particles are created and spew from.

If this process didn't exist then bound up energy would be a problem to explain. And also to mention all the paradoxs of trying.



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: MasterKaman


the universe is a Giant Mind that blew itself to pieces, and we are now struggling to comprehend what happened, so that with new-found Wisdom we don't do it again.

Thats what Oppenheimer thought. Or he just wanted to be the object of Hindu Worship. What an ego. He wasn't sad at all. He was proud of his accomplishment. With new found atomic wisdom they were going to save the world. As proud as Orson Wells was after his War of the Worlds radio broadcast. "I'm sooo sorry." (snicker)


the Final unanswerable Mystery (FUM) is Where / Why /How did it all come FROM, and even the smart-arse "god" doesn't know that

Stretch out your arm as far as it will go, past everything we know, past even what you think you know. There is no barrier to bump against. The "Universe" goes on forever, it is infinitely big, therefore it has always been there. There was no beginning, there will be no end. Except in books and movies and on the clock on the wall.



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

This article refers to the Higgs Boson, not just any Higgs particle. I was referring to the Higgs boson referred to in the article.

From the article: there's no conclusive evidence of it being the Higgs boson.

Read more: www.techtimes.com...

Now, conclusive evidence is what science is supposed to be using. The article in the OP is correct in stating that the evidence could be misapplied. I did state in my last post that: they aren't saying that they definitely did not find the Higgs particle they said they found. I like real science, I read the parameters of the evidence.



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 11:03 AM
link   
why does the article, and many people in this thread, keep using the word creation? I thought that the entire purpose of finding this article is to eliminate the possibility of creation all together?



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Max_TO
Yes shocking they wanted to explain what a gravity wave was by discovering .................. wait for it .......................
another wave.

Since they can (so they say) see back 4.7bn years to the big bang then you would think they could see the answer blowing in the solar winds.

My computer games has gravity and things stick to the floor so if you find out how to turn it off then give me the hack because I wanna shoot em all up and flying would put me ahead of everyone else.

In other words the laws of physics are merely the instruction set of the CPU and gravity is just one of the laws, it can all be programmed which answers quite a few modern day questions

My next version of MaineCraft will allow you to zoom in on anything down to each atom you care to examine because they all zoom down to about 100 elements, some you know off already from the periodical table but I only need to store one example of say an Iron atom in the database to cover every Iron atom in the game.

OK doing molecules might get a bit more difficult but you still don't need to compute something if it is not being used so the processing power with our slime mould computers we have today could even start to simulate the world.

Our DNA is computer code, our brains works like a computer and physics is all about maths which a computer is very good at using but apart from that I have no other reason to even suggest that we are living inside some type of machine and finding ET inside the game still won't get you much closer to the answer because he is stuck just like you.

In another 20-40 years you won't care about what I am saying because the latest entertainment will be plug this in to the back of your head and strap this on but if you are brave then do a bit of research on what I am saying because you might think that my 40 year outer limit is a bit too high.

I'm off now to talk to my x-box (Ok the thing that won't even play mp3's)

XBOX SNAP PARTY



edit on 9-11-2014 by VirusGuard because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Max_TO




CERN may not have discovered elusive Higgs Boson particle after all

Of course when the military decides that something is going to be their domain it is undiscovered, like the faster than light particle.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 03:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Char-Lee

What does the military have to do with CERN? Which military, exactly?

And no, the FTL neutrino wasn't some military coverup, it was a mistaken measurement.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 10:12 AM
link   
There is even a documentary about this whole experiment and they do explain they never actually did find the particle, i don't know why people think they did. It wasn't in the parameters that they expected it to be in, they actually found something else.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Char-Lee

What does the military have to do with CERN? Which military, exactly?

And no, the FTL neutrino wasn't some military coverup, it was a mistaken measurement.


Yes I know they make mistakes and publish them all the time guess they are just in a hurry huh.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Char-Lee

Most published science turns out to be dead ends. That's how science works. Provisional results are reported, the scientific community scrutinizes the data, critiques the methodology and attempts to reproduce the results.

Not only that but you have offered up zero evidence for some laughably bizarre military coverup. Occam's Razor comes into effect here.
edit on 10-11-2014 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: strongfp

I saw that same movie this past weekend .
I found it odd that throughout the entire movie they never realy got into the "nuts and bolts" of what they look for, or how the data is analyzed .



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Char-Lee

What does the military have to do with CERN? Which military, exactly?

And no, the FTL neutrino wasn't some military coverup, it was a mistaken measurement.


It should be obvious to any reasonable human that anything in the total world that can be used as a weapon will be involving military.



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Char-Lee

This is not only an unsupported assumption but also a non sequitur. What does any of this have to do with the erroneous FTL neutrino mistake?



posted on Nov, 12 2014 @ 01:16 AM
link   
This should be known to anyone who looked past the hasty press releases, the Higgs was never a confirmed find.

As an aside, the claims of significance based on 5 or 7 sigma or whatever are quite meaningless; its based on an assumed model and all models are wrong (just the degree of wrongness differs). We have no clue whether such as statement of probability is even in the ballpark and we certainly cant claim that level of precision/significance for anything that is not data-based) It's like me claiming that the likeness of Jesus on a piece of toast must be God's work because the chance of it occurring is incredibly small based on a probabilistic model.

Of course i'm about to be told that the mathematics is irrefutable, but whatever....







 
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join