It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by happykat39
1) "It's complicated therefore it must have been designed"
2) "We can't fully explain it therefore it must have been designed"
The logical integrity of your argument is fatally compromised by these two fallacies.
Evidence for evolution: overwhelming
Evidence for designer: none
Anyway, all of this is com
Originally posted by DaRAGE
I think apple should buy the new matter name and call it iMatter
Originally posted by MamaJ
The thing is... IS humanity worth our species survival, by what we find. If we somehow unleash some crazy particle.. ya know? We may not live to talk about it.
Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by happykat39
Then by all means post your "evidence" in the dedicated Origins & Creationism forum. This thread is in the Science & Technology forum and is about the LHC, not whatever religion or creation myth you happen to subscribe to.
Originally posted by flexy123
...But you can't use the same measuring stick to measure thickness of a hair (or atom etc.). We try to get "information" from quantum physics experiments, but we already exceeded the limit to be able to get any information. This would be another scenario - the question here would be is there still an "absolute" reality, beyond what we can "process".
Originally posted by happykat39
I simply stated that it takes more faith to believe in evolution.
"First there are the so-called leptons (from the Greek, meaning light) consisiting of the electron, the muon, the taon and their respective neutrinos. All of these have antiparticles. Then there are the six quarks: up, down, top, bottom, charm and strange. All of these, too, have an antiparticle twin. Then there are the hadrons, made up of groups of quarks: mesons, which contain two quarks: such as the pion, kaon, and J/Psi; and baryons, which have three, such as our favourite proton and neutron - as well as more exotic creatures such as the Sigma (two up quarks and one strange quark) and the charmed Sigma (two down quarks and one charm quark). Confused? Oh, wait - I forgot the gauge bosons of the electromagnetic, strong and weak forces: the photon, the gluon, the W and the Z."
To contribute (slightly) to the subject, this quote demonstrates where my understanding of particle physics begins and promptly dies a horrible puzzled death...
Newton's unfinished business...
What is mass?
What is the origin of mass? Why do tiny particles weigh the amount they do? Why do some particles have no mass at all? At present, there are no established answers to these questions. The most likely explanation may be found in the Higgs boson, a key undiscovered particle that is essential for the Standard Model to work. First hypothesised in 1964, it has yet to be observed.
The ATLAS and CMS experiments will be actively searching for signs of this elusive particle.
An invisible problem...
What is 96% of the universe made of?
Everything we see in the Universe, from an ant to a galaxy, is made up of ordinary particles. These are collectively referred to as matter, forming 4% of the Universe. Dark matter and dark energy are believed to make up the remaining proportion, but they are incredibly difficult to detect and study, other than through the gravitational forces they exert. Investigating the nature of dark matter and dark energy is one of the biggest challenges today in the fields of particle physics and cosmology.
The ATLAS and CMS experiments will look for supersymmetric particles to test a likely hypothesis for the make-up of dark matter.
Why is there no more antimatter?
We live in a world of matter – everything in the Universe, including ourselves, is made of matter. Antimatter is like a twin version of matter, but with opposite electric charge. At the birth of the Universe, equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have been produced in the Big Bang. But when matter and antimatter particles meet, they annihilate each other, transforming into energy. Somehow, a tiny fraction of matter must have survived to form the Universe we live in today, with hardly any antimatter left. Why does Nature appear to have this bias for matter over antimatter?
The LHCb experiment will be looking for differences between matter and antimatter to help answer this question. Previous experiments have already observed a tiny behavioural difference, but what has been seen so far is not nearly enough to account for the apparent matter–antimatter imbalance in the Universe.
Secrets of the Big Bang
What was matter like within the first second of the Universe’s life?
Matter, from which everything in the Universe is made, is believed to have originated from a dense and hot cocktail of fundamental particles. Today, the ordinary matter of the Universe is made of atoms, which contain a nucleus composed of protons and neutrons, which in turn are made of quarks bound together by other particles called gluons. The bond is very strong, but in the very early Universe conditions would have been too hot and energetic for the gluons to hold the quarks together. Instead, it seems likely that during the first microseconds after the Big Bang the Universe would have contained a very hot and dense mixture of quarks and gluons called quark–gluon plasma.
The ALICE experiment will use the LHC to recreate conditions similar to those just after the Big Bang, in particular to analyse the properties of the quark-gluon plasma.
Do extra dimensions of space really exist?
Einstein showed that the three dimensions of space are related to time. Subsequent theories propose that further hidden dimensions of space may exist; for example, string theory implies that there are additional spatial dimensions yet to be observed. These may become detectable at very high energies, so data from all the detectors will be carefully analysed to look for signs of extra dimensions.
Originally posted by captiva
reply to post by happykat39
Does anyone believe that anything positive will be forthcoming from the LHCs work?. Im sure it is an amazing thing they are doing within those sacred halls, but, I also know there will be no benefits to the common man in anything they find, achieve or create. What there will be are new weapons and a multitude of classified information that elevates the elite to the god like status they think they merit.
So much money spent on high end boys and their toys....Better off feeding the starving, curing the ill and safeguarding this planet we live on.edit on 28-11-2012 by captiva because: (no reason given)
The LHC can accelerate a proton up to energies equivalent to around ten thousand times its rest mass: the fastest-moving cosmic rays have energies of about ten thousand million proton rest masses...
They bombard the earth from every concievable angle and with a vast range of energies...
The highest-energy ones are assumed to be coming from outside the galaxy, and there is no known process that can create them. It is as if, somewehere out there in the furthest reaches of the universe, there was the most colossal particle acclerator in Creation...
On their arrival in the upper atmosphere, cosmic rays collide with the molecules of the air, producing showers of new particles in exactly the same way as proton-proton collisions do in the LHC. If you like, you can think of the Earth as being one huge collision experiment that has been running for roughly 4.6 billion years. The very first discoveries in particle physics were made not in man-made accelerators, but in so-called 'cloud chambers' at the tops of mountains where the product off cosmic ray collisions were plentiful.
So when some wonk in Hawaii thinks that the relatively puny collisions of the LHC might cause a microscopic black hole that will devour the planet, or that some scary hypothetical thing like a stranglet or a magnetic monopole might suddenly leap into existence and start munching its way through Geneva airport, we can be sure he doesn't really know his physics...
To summarise: (i) the Universe exists; (ii) the Universe is constantly bombarded with every particle in Creation. It is therefore a racing certainty that (iii) no particle in Creation is capable of destroying the Universe. Not a certainty; science never provides us with those. But a probability so close to a certainty that no sane person would ever bet against it.
Originally posted by ibiubu
Money for nothing and the quarks are free. CERN is the largest scientific fraud since Einstein. Complete nonsense.