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.

 

What possible use is the Higgs Boson??? And who cares?? Not me.

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Robert Wright - Robert Wright is a senior editor at The Atlantic and the author, most recently, of The Evolution of God, a New York Times bestseller and a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.


Feynman (who won the Nobel Prize for his work in quantum physics) made that point in his great little book The Character of Physical Law. And if I recall correctly, he literally said that nobody--including him--really understands quantum physics. Because once you get very far down into the subatomic world, the reality implied by the math just isn't amenable to intuitive comprehension. Which was exactly and explicitly the point of my post.


intuitive comprehension.



Garance writes that bosons are a special kind of particle: two of them can inhabit the same space at the same time.
"Bosons have the capacity to share space because they are more like a force than a thing in the way we normally think of 'things' or 'particles.' "

But if bosons are more like forces than like particles, why do physicists keep telling us they're particles?

Higgs boson: it is said to be the reason other particles weigh anything at all; it is the particle that "imparts mass to other particles."

physicists who may be said to "understand" the Higgs boson are people who "have dropped the idea that to truly understand something is to have a crystal-clear metaphor in your mind, a metaphor that doesn't break down at any point and doesn't contain internal contradictions."


I think science and religion are closer than you think.


All the world’s a stage,
edit on 123131p://bSaturday2012 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 

I'm not seeing the parallels. Freynman's quote is very old, our understanding of QM has expanded vastly since then.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I'm naturally a curious person and I strive to understand everything. This is how my brain operates; constantly trying to fill in the blanks..
I thought this was a quality all humans shared.
I guess it varies from person to person.
Some are curious and others aren't as curious
I guess I can't criticize the OP if he lacks some curiosity, or perhaps even vision.

This discovery, to me, after most of my life wondering how everything gets mass, is monumental! The strange spectrum of the masses of the subatomic particles has always plagued me.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


I agree, a technological religion.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


What could be more negative than statistically having a far less chance of living to your teenage years than not?


I understand what you are saying, but we do pay a price, sadly.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by iskander683
 


Dear iskander683,

Sorry people are being so aggressive in their responses. Lets start with this, they have not proven nor found the Higgs Boson and they have not said that they have. They have said that they have found evidence of it, not proof and the evidence is shaky at best. The problem that is faced is that what we know and observe in physics is not true on the subatomic level. All the laws of physics change once you go subatomic. The most basic rule that changes has to do with gravity, with what holds things together.

The standard model assumed that mass (quantity of physical matter) creates gravity, the glue of the universe. The truth is that there is insufficient mass to have the pull that matter does. The standard model assumes that something creates the extra mass and that is the Higgs Boson, the idea that something gives additional mass to particles, more than they should otherwise have. If the Higgs Boson does not exist then we have to come up with a new way to explain physics and the alternatives make even less sense.

One choice is that we live in an electronic universe where attraction is not reliant on mass; but, this has so many problems that it is not accepted. The second choice is even dumber and that is that we live in a holographic universe, one in which that which is above the atomic level is merely a representation of the subatomic. Neither perspective is very useful in the atomic world. We could get into the math or the science or whatever; but, what I have described is the basic issue.

String theory is reliant on the Higgs Boson because it assumes that everything is connected even when it is not. There is a thing that we can observe on a subatomic level called the spooky effect or quantum entanglement. Particles that are separated from one another respond to one another at a speed that is faster than the speed of light and that violates certain rules of physics that Einstein proved. It violates the idea of time.

We define time as the movement of matter through space. For this definition of time to be meaningful, there must be a marker, a top and bottom of speed. Physics says the limit is the speed of light; but, quantum entanglement violates this rule. It says that distance does not matter, that time is meaningless. That is why they rely on there being alternate universes. They assume that there are other factors going on that are invisible to us because this world is being effected by factors that are not observable. It is intellectually insincere.

In the end, the Higgs Boson is supposed to be a force, a particle that "creates" the impossible from the possible. It gives off more than it has, it is a creator or a God. It is the idea that there is something greater than the physical that creates the physical while still being physical.

Bottom line, merely observing something changes how it acts. This is proven in quantum physics and makes no sense if you assume that physical reality is all that is. You have to deny the effect of sentience on the world to accept what we observe on a subatomic level is merely physical. Science wishes to prove that sentience is a product of the universe rather than a creator of the universe and it cannot do it. This is not a religious discussion, it is a philosophical one. You do not have to believe in a Christian God to understand it.

They called it the God particle because they believe it would disprove the need for a God. That is why Mr. Hawking was so quick to pay off his debt. They were willing to spend billions to prove that you don't matter, that you are an effect rather than a catalyst for things to happen. The alternative is to assume that what you do matters, that you effect the universe rather than merely respond to it. That implies responsibility for your actions and how you effect others.

Science that denies the possibility of God faces a problem, it faces sentience. Self awareness. If we exist and we are self aware and self determinate then we are not merely mechanical, we matter. Our self awareness then becomes meaningful and we do to. If that is true then harming us matters and harming others matters. Science seeks to prove that nothing we do matters, that we are free from guilt and responsibility for our actions. It is the ultimate justification for doing wrong. That is why we spend billions to prove the implausible. Peace.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 





posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 





You have to deny the effect of sentience on the world to accept what we observe on a subatomic level is merely physical. Science wishes to prove that sentience is a product of the universe rather than a creator of the universe and it cannot do it. This is not a religious discussion, it is a philosophical one. You do not have to believe in a Christian God to understand it.

They called it the God particle because they believe it would disprove the need for a God. That is why Mr. Hawking was so quick to pay off his debt. They were willing to spend billions to prove that you don't matter, that you are an effect rather than a catalyst for things to happen. The alternative is to assume that what you do matters, that you effect the universe rather than merely respond to it. That implies responsibility for your actions and how you effect others.

Science that denies the possibility of God faces a problem, it faces sentience. Self awareness.


Thank you



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by AQuestion

They called it the God particle because they believe it would disprove the need for a God. That is why Mr. Hawking was so quick to pay off his debt.




Head -> Wall
Head -> Wall
Head -> Wall
Head -> Wall
Head -> Wall

I actually think that those primitive though patterns are really sad. Is it because of low IQ or deliberate misunderstanding? I'm not sure which, but it's sad anyway.
edit on 7-7-2012 by BagBing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trolloks

Originally posted by biggmoneyme

Originally posted by Outofcontrol
Nice you don't care. But guess what... you're just 1 of 7 billion people standing on a pale blue dot floating in space.

And you have the right to ignorance.


yeh and probably 6.9 out of that 7 billion don't give a # about the higgs boson



Back in the day, it was only the scientists that was interested in the theory of relativity.
Back in the day, it was only the scientists that was interested in electricity.
Back in the day, it was only the scientists that was interested in the force of gravity.
And far, far, far back in the day, it was only the inteligent people that was interested in the power of fire.

But all of these discoverys are vitaly important in modern life, and we are all interested in keeping alive, not just the scientists.


about 6.9 of 7 billion probably don't care about relativity or gravity. they like electricity and fire but to the point they want to understand the mechanics? i doubt it. Even then a big portion of humanity is just worrying about trying to find somehting to eat. Thats how backwards we are on this planet. People are starving to death all over but we're worried about things that really won't have any existential relevance for probably hundreds of years



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by biggmoneyme
 


As much as I love science.
(Feeding people) > science
Unless we needed the science to cure the hunger problem.
But I have a hunch that right now we could feed everyone with current technologies.
It's greed that prevents it from happening.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by iskander683
 


actually most scientists hate that its called the god particle but the higgs, if discovered, would most devinately further our understanding of the universe and so is something that should be sort after



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Could someone explain what this bet was that Stephen Hawkin had with someone please ?



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


But that is because of humans, not knowledge itself. If we didn't have modern weapons, it would be the same brutality albeit with sticks and stones. One need only look at history to see how barbaric and brutal life in all of the great empires and civilizations was compared to modern society. I'm not saying it's right, but it seems to be... in our blood, as it were.
edit on 7-7-2012 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by AQuestion
 


There's so many things that are demonstrably wrong with your post I don't know where to start, especially this:


In the end, the Higgs Boson is supposed to be a force, a particle that "creates" the impossible from the possible. It gives off more than it has, it is a creator or a God. It is the idea that there is something greater than the physical that creates the physical while still being physical.


How on earth have you walked away with this understanding? It is completely and utterly false. Seriously, where are you even getting information like this?



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by iskander683
 


I agree with you dude its no big deal and what people tend to forget even top scientist is that its all just THEORY not FACT..and if they do discover it it wont change anybodies current lives but maybe in the future generations later it will help in physics and tech..etc etc etc

ps this short 4min n 2 sec vid explains it all from the best theoretical physicist around of our time enjoy


www.youtube.com...
edit on 7-7-2012 by HumanitiesLastHope because: link added



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by HumanitiesLastHope
reply to post by iskander683
 


I agree with you dude its no big deal and what people tend to forget even top scientist is that its all just THEORY not FACT..and if they do discover it it wont change anybodies current lives but maybe in the future generations later it will help in physics and tech..etc etc etc

ps this short 4min n 2 sec vid explains it all from the best theoretical physicist around of our time enjoy


www.youtube.com...
edit on 7-7-2012 by HumanitiesLastHope because: link added


A scientific fact is an objective measurement/observation. A scientific theory explains the how and why of those scientific facts. Scientific theories do not become scientific facts and scientific facts do not become scientific theories. A scientific theory is supported by scientific facts and they are the gold standard of human understanding.
edit on 7-7-2012 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by AQuestion
 


There's so many things that are demonstrably wrong with your post I don't know where to start, especially this:


In the end, the Higgs Boson is supposed to be a force, a particle that "creates" the impossible from the possible. It gives off more than it has, it is a creator or a God. It is the idea that there is something greater than the physical that creates the physical while still being physical.


How on earth have you walked away with this understanding? It is completely and utterly false. Seriously, where are you even getting information like this?


Rather than make a foolish comment, correct and demonstrate your knowledge. Explain it so we can all see your genius. Explain it so that others can understand how foolish I am with my explanation.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by AQuestion

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by AQuestion
 


There's so many things that are demonstrably wrong with your post I don't know where to start, especially this:


In the end, the Higgs Boson is supposed to be a force, a particle that "creates" the impossible from the possible. It gives off more than it has, it is a creator or a God. It is the idea that there is something greater than the physical that creates the physical while still being physical.


How on earth have you walked away with this understanding? It is completely and utterly false. Seriously, where are you even getting information like this?


Rather than make a foolish comment, correct and demonstrate your knowledge. Explain it so we can all see your genius. Explain it so that others can understand how foolish I am with my explanation.


How about you post your sources so we can see how you got such a distorted understanding? The Higgs Boson has nothing to do with god whatsoever. It was supposed to be called the "goddamn particle" due to its elusive nature but this got edited down to the more savoury "god particle". It has nothing to do with supporting the existance of a god or gods in any shape or form. There is no mention of a creator or anything of the sort.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by iskander683

So even Peter Higgs can't think of anything useful to do with this?!

Says it all really.

And the fact that finding the particle will justify the vast money and time spent on the research at CERN is not really a postive, in my humble opinion.

You should never expect a theoretical/pure scientist to look for practical uses for what they discover, it's not part of their job description.

Leave that to the engineers who take what we know from science and turn it into practical use. That's how it works. Albert Einstein didn't have a use in mind for the time dilation effects of fast moving objects when he came up with Relativity, but it's a good thing he did because without an understanding of that things like GPS satellites could not be made to work properly. If we didn't understand that, our GPS systems would be off by miles after just a single day of operation.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join