posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 05:27 AM
Although I wouldnt dare to assume anything about the correct way to interpret the results of an experiment as complicated and utterly fantastic as the
LHC , I must point out that when scientists say "soup" they are rarely suggesting a liquid state. Sometimes , especialy in physics, they refer to
collections of matter, in a way that objectifies them , so that you or I can attempt (poorly) to visualise them.
The word they used here, may suggest that , like soup, the mixture of particles after the big bang, was dense, and prone to convection like movements
within its total mass, caused by the heat they refered to. They use words like this because particle physics is often utterly outside the bounds of
human experience, something that we find difficult to paint a picture of in our minds. Funnily enough, until recently it was thought that attempting
to visualise a particle, or a reaction in terms of colours, shapes, and familiar concepts was a huge fallacy, and it is only recently that physicists
have thrown that old rule to the wind. Since they put that old rule away, they have made leaps and bounds of progress, with developments like string
theory and the creation of bigger and better experiments. Its unfair to say that these advances would be impossible without that loosening of the
intellectual boundaries , but they wouldnt have come as far or as fast as they have.