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.

 

Atom Smasher Makes New Discovery

page: 1
13

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Atom Smasher Makes New Discovery


news.discovery.com

Scientists at the world's biggest atom smasher said Tuesday they appeared to have discovered a previously unobserved phenomenon in their quest to unravel the deepest secrets of the universe.

Results from one of the detectors in the Large Hadron Collider experiment indicated that "some of the particles are intimately linked in a way not seen before in proton collisions," the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) said on its website.

"The new feature has appeared in our analysis around the middle of July," physicist Guido Tonelli told fellow CERN scientists at a seminar to
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I don't pretend to understand the significance of this.
And I don't understand the whole ridge like structure comment.

However any new discovery is pretty cool.

And I'm pretty sure more new and cool discoveries will be comming out of the lhc in the future.

btw. please explain what in the world this means in words a normal person can understand?

news.discovery.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Amazing stuff, check out this video that explains it in laymen terms.


news.discovery.com...



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
unless someone can get a hold of the paper they've submitted there really is no way to put it into layman's terms. so far as i can gather the connected in a way never seen before comment suggests a connection on the quantum level similar to quantum entanglement, only different. but with such spare comments to go on, i'm most likely wrong.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aquarius1
Amazing stuff, check out this video that explains it in laymen terms.


news.discovery.com...


Frankly, this doesn't explain much at all.

As to the "ridge structure", it sounds similar to what have been observed at RHIC in heavy-ion collisions so maybe another manifestation of color glass condensate.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   
They seem pretty vague about it. A few drawings or graphs would help me a lot.

"Nonetheless, Tonelli, a physicist from Italy's University of Pisa and scientific spokesperson for the CMS detector, underlined that during weeks of cross-checks and critical debate among the team, "we didn't succeed to kill it.""

It sounds like they wanted or tried to disregard it altogether! What does that mean we didn't kill it?

"The phenomenon showed up as a "ridge-like structure" on computer mapping graphs based on data from billions of proton collisions..."
Sounds very mysterious. Hopefully more will be revealed soon.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:49 PM
link   

"some of the particles are intimately linked in a way not seen before in proton collisions,"


it makes me think that M-Theory or string theory is more accurate than what is believed.

I hope more updates on this find come out.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
"some of the particles are intimately linked in a way not seen before in proton collisions,"

If its not a new force, then some inspection need to be done why they behave like that, just new findings, as said in the news.

If this particle link caused by a new unknown force, expect major revamp of physics formulas and possible of changing the entire view of universe. Probably become part of the disclosure. Big stuff!.


I pick the first, just new finding.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
This hasen't been the first time the protons confused us.
It's like the more we find out the less we know.

I think particles mess with us on purpose just to make our smartest people feel like retards.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by RainCloud
 


I think its going to lead to a new way of measuring how particles are shaped, what their made of, and how they are related/connected to all other matter in the universe.

Ill bring this up again as i have before regarding LHC. Nassim heramain, love him or hate him, but i think his swarschild (i know i spelled that wrong) proton formula will be of some use to LHC once they process the data. that's what i think anyway.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Just to put it in perspective, when the particles collide a relationship is created, it is this relationship and not simply the collision that is a new finding, as opposed to what the above video infers.

However I remember a while back they did a study with particles spinning in opposite directions and the particles always had a non-distance dependant relationship.

So what I would like to know is how is that different from this?
I'm guessing it's simply the collision part.

In any case here is a possible explanation:

One interpretation of the results is that the protons are being forced together at such high energies that the quarks that form them are released, becoming a free-flowing fluid of quarks and gluons like that which existed immediately after the big bang.

www.telegraph.co.uk...


However, he is keen to emphasise that the "big bang" state is just one of many interpretations of the data. "The other possibilities are much less exciting", he stresses.

Then Also the author says in the comments section:

I asked about them. Apparently they're pretty mundane, I think to do with bad readings and statistical noise. James Gillies was keen to make it clear that this was only a possible interpretation, but if the others are all dull, it's hardly worth detailing them just to demonstrate how dull they are.




edit on 22-9-2010 by ModernAcademia because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by RainCloud
 


I think its going to lead to a new way of measuring how particles are shaped, what their made of, and how they are related/connected to all other matter in the universe.


No. It's just collective phenomena in the structure of proton (high-density gluon cloud and quarks propagating through it).


Ill bring this up again as i have before regarding LHC. Nassim heramain, love him or hate him, but i think his swarschild (i know i spelled that wrong) proton formula will be of some use to LHC once they process the data. that's what i think anyway.


a) you did spell it wrong
b) Nassim is a charlatan
c) his formula is useless



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Two-particle correlations observed in the CMS detector at the LHC (downloadable pdf):
cms.web.cern.ch...
Here is the CMS website with more details:
cms.web.cern.ch...



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 


Comparison of Monte Carlo QCD lattice calculation of the gluon flux density (colour coded) inside the proton and a diagram published over 100 years ago purporting to depict the interior of a hydrogen atom:
smphillips.8m.com...
(scroll down to third picture).

The Y-shaped configuration of flux tubes/strings is identical. What this implies is that the three particles (the heart-shaped objects in the diagram), which were described over a century ago to compose what has now been identified as the up and down quarks inside protons and neutrons, are bound by the same kind of mechanism (Meissner Effect/hypercolour flux tubes) as that confining quarks, according to the string model/QCD. Quark compositeness will be eventually revealed by LHC. Compelling evidence that quarks were described over a century ago and are not fundamental, as physicists currently assume, can be found here:
smphillips.8m.com...
smphillips.8m.com...



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by xizd1
They seem pretty vague about it. A few drawings or graphs would help me a lot.

"Nonetheless, Tonelli, a physicist from Italy's University of Pisa and scientific spokesperson for the CMS detector, underlined that during weeks of cross-checks and critical debate among the team, "we didn't succeed to kill it.""

It sounds like they wanted or tried to disregard it altogether! What does that mean we didn't kill it?

"The phenomenon showed up as a "ridge-like structure" on computer mapping graphs based on data from billions of proton collisions..."
Sounds very mysterious. Hopefully more will be revealed soon.



What they mean is that every time there is some crazy new thing discovered, there is an effort to try and explain it away as a screwup, or as an anomaly. In other words they are trying their hardest to explain it away as a false positive. This is one of the steps in new discoveries. If they fail at "killing it", then it means there may just be something there. They are not trying to "disregard" it. They are just trying to make sure they are not seeing something that was really just an error in the system.

The fact that they up till now could NOT "kill it", is a very hopeful sign that this truly is a new discovery.

Hope that helps.



posted on Sep, 22 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Thanks for the news...

I'm off to try and figure this out in a cave-manish way at best!

Score for you!



posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   
ridge like structure

Sounds like particles are joined in a wave.
But they must say something different.
Where do all the particles come from.
If you say ether thats no good.
Small particles building up into a wave is just not heard of.
Sounds like they managed to compress the ether.



posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


Thanks for the video link!




posted on Sep, 23 2010 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by xizd1
"Nonetheless, Tonelli, a physicist from Italy's University of Pisa and scientific spokesperson for the CMS detector, underlined that during weeks of cross-checks and critical debate among the team, "we didn't succeed to kill it.""

It sounds like they wanted or tried to disregard it altogether! What does that mean we didn't kill it?

xmaddness described it well, but to expand on that slightly...

It's just a part of the scientific process. Any new discovery goes through this - rigorous testing of the data by other qualified scientists in the field to make sure errors of one kind or another did not creep into the experiment. Could be human errors, could be equipment error, error in interpretation, statistical anomaly, etc. If they can't account for the data as being in error, somehow, then it bears further study.



new topics

top topics



 
13

log in

join