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.

 

LHC results put supersymmetry theory 'on the spot'

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   



Researchers failed to find evidence of so-called "supersymmetric" particles, which many physicists had hoped would plug holes in the current theory.



www.bbc.co.uk...

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.



Theorists working in the field have told BBC News that they may have to come up with a completely new idea.


I don't like the sound of this personally, that's a lot of money wasted for a non starter and the above comment. "May have to come up with a completely new idea", doesn't sound very scientific does it ?




posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


Actually it does. You have a theory, then you test experimentally. You either get the results you expect validating the theory or you don't, in which case you need to amend/discard that theory.

Thats how all science works.

Experiment is the only way know if theorists are drinking their own bathwater. Progress isn't cheap when you are dealing with physics at this level.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by justwokeup
 


Maybe your missing my point, it's a little worrying that a 20 year old theory could actually be nothing but a bag of beans ?



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 05:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


its not worrying at all, theories get outdated as we learn new stuff.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 05:52 AM
link   
There have been quite a few experiments that show super symmetry does exist. Just because we cannot find a particle for it does not take away this phenomena. Maybe it does not need a particle to perform this feature, in a way it would disrupt other theories if a particle could travel instantly across vast distances. With CERN failing to find Higgs boson as well it looks like we are missing something about energy and matter thinking that everything is a particle.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


There has been no "failiure" to locate the Higgs. The people running the LHC and the atom smasher at Fermilab seem to believe they are really on to something on the subject of the Higgs at the moment.

We must remember that these enormous machines can test MANY theories about the universe and the elementary particles of which it is made, not just a small limited few. These colliders are incredibly versatile within a certain field, so throwing out the baby with the bath water on this one, and assuming that they fail in all particulars, when they actualy have much more to teach us, is foolish.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 


There has been no "success" to locate the Higgs either. I know the search ain't over as the LHC is still just warming up.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Quarks are not fundamental particles but bound states of three spin-1/2 particles (subquarks). Hence, squarks do not exist. Instead, supersymmetry applies to the subquarks. Read news item #6 (March 3, 2011).
smphillips.8m.com...
Any failure to detect evidence of supersymmetry is due not to the failure of the idea but to the lack of validy of the Standard Model, which is based upon the assumption that quarks are fundamental. The website linked to above provides overwhelming evidence that this assumption is wrong because it proves that quarks were remote-viewed over a century ago and described paranormally as bound states of three discrete objects (see here).



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


I think that if anyone really thought that one of the answers to a question which is FUNDAMENTAL to the next surge of understanding of the cosmos and its existance, was ever going to come fast and furiously from the first small steps taken by the truely epic LHC , then they were never going to be pleased by ANYTHING it did.

Fact is, theres so much potential in the LHC and similar experiments, that in all likelihood the people that designed the damn thing havent begun to understand its full implications and strengths, as a tool for peering into the guts of reality .



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by justwokeup
 


Maybe your missing my point, it's a little worrying that a 20 year old theory could actually be nothing but a bag of beans ?


Scientific theories are like that. Don't tell the science enthusiasts though; they believe currently known science is gospel.
edit on 27-8-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Noooooooooooooooo.

This was my baby! Grrr. If supersymmetric particles aren't found...then the predictions of M Theory may be wrong and therefore M Theory may not be correct and meh. I guess we have to move to spacetime grains then


So much work for the physicists. It's frustrating how generations work on one theory and bam, it possibly may not be right.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 


I hadnt realised that I ought to think that all science is gospel ! I am surely a fan of the scientific explorations of physics chemistry and biology though... perhaps Im doing it wrong... Or perhaps someone ought to learn not to generalise so damned much , that might be a better idea.

Anyone who respects science and understands even the barest scrap of it knows that for one thing, science is full of theories , and that even its laws can bend and break, and others become utterly moot over time. Another thing that anyone who gives a rats behind about scientific discovery knows, is that those who do NOT understand the principles, meaning, and or intention of the scientific community , will always get an inferiority complex over it, and claim all sorts of skullduggery and time wasting by people who are just trying to figure out the universe, rather than accepting ignorance.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Maybe the next time these superbrains want to test their "theories" then maybe the should use their own fkn money to justify their smug existence..

There are more important things to spend cash on like food for instance, rather some brainiacs lame ideas.



£6.19 BILLION waste of space to keep these conmen in work..



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by 547000
 


I hadnt realised that I ought to think that all science is gospel ! I am surely a fan of the scientific explorations of physics chemistry and biology though... perhaps Im doing it wrong... Or perhaps someone ought to learn not to generalise so damned much , that might be a better idea.

Anyone who respects science and understands even the barest scrap of it knows that for one thing, science is full of theories , and that even its laws can bend and break, and others become utterly moot over time. Another thing that anyone who gives a rats behind about scientific discovery knows, is that those who do NOT understand the principles, meaning, and or intention of the scientific community , will always get an inferiority complex over it, and claim all sorts of skullduggery and time wasting by people who are just trying to figure out the universe, rather than accepting ignorance.


Everyone "knows" science revises itself yet treats our current scientific ideas as undeniable truth.

Oh, I understand basic science though. I still hold my opinion. The sad thing is many of these science enthusiasts don't have the required math background to even begin interpreting the theories they espouse as true. Essentially it's an appeal to authority where the authorities are now esteemed scientists.
edit on 27-8-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 


Good post. I too think it's lack of education or understanding that gives people an inferiority complex when it comes to science. These scientists are no dummies and certainly would love to get to the truth. I'm sure they try their best. And furthermore the mathematics involved in these theories are beyond most humans to understand. They will never, I will never understand it. Although I have had some experience with the mathematic of quantum mechanics. I have a BS in physics(which isn't very impressive). Quantum mechanics was insane. There are no simple mathematics solutions.

I'm raving



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
[more

A theory that yields useful predictions isn't necessarily the "truth"
It's a useful tool. Keyword there is "tool"

I try to think of scientific theories and mathematics as tools. Keeps me out of trouble.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by PaulMcCartney
reply to post by 547000
[more

A theory that yields useful predictions isn't necessarily the "truth"
It's a useful tool. Keyword there is "tool"

I try to think of scientific theories and mathematics as tools. Keeps me out of trouble.


Maybe you do, but there is no shortage of people who treat current theories as absolute truth. Studying science, the math and everything, makes me annoyed at the enthusiasts, having no background, essentially vouching for something they don't understand. Methinks too much science fiction blinds them to the fact that the biggest theories they support are the best explanations based on current scientific assumptions, meaning they are very easy to tear down if we see a mistaken assumption.

Meh, I like the precision and deductive reasoning of math better than the slippery induction of science.
edit on 27-8-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Well if the first results from the CLOUD experiment at CERN are any indication on what is to come, then expect CERN to start proving a lot of these theories wrong.

I still hold to theory that gravity is nothing more than magnetism. In fact comets and other bodies in the universe act exactly how magnets work here on earth when they come into an attraction - retraction relation. Just like the G1.9 dwarf star and how it is reacting upon one of the asteroid belts.

There is also proof backing up this claim on the iron-nitrogen magnet that is currently being developed that has shown that it can align non-metallic particles.

And before you say I'm not a scientist and I don't know what I'm talking about, if you listen to NASA and a lot of these major science institutes man-made global warming is a fact. Where CERN and the CLOUD experiment has just about put the final nail in that coffin.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by justwokeup
 


Maybe your missing my point, it's a little worrying that a 20 year old theory could actually be nothing but a bag of beans ?


Hi. No, I got your point. I just disagree.

It shouldn't really be surprising and certainly isn't worrying. The problem we have now is that our ability to theorise has outpaced our ability to conduct experiments to prove the theory quickly and cheaply. This means theories can go a long time without being tested, this gives them a kind of status, careers are built on them.

Its taken billions of euros and 20 years to be able to run these experiments.

Despite that we shouldn't forget that a positive or a negative result moves us forward and is therefore progress. The difference between science and religion is that science requires the experimental proof before a theory is considered proven (religion simply demands faith). Sometimes its decades before the experiment can occur and sometimes its 'back to the drawing board' when it does. Thats healthy, if uncomfortable to those who spend their best years refining a wrong turn.

Big science is expensive but not when you consider whats at stake. We either move forward or we stagnate and perish on this rock. There is no middle ground.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join