Higgs Boson Particle May Spell Doom For the Universe

Okay, so I just wanted to illustrate exactly how foolish the tech press has gotten, as it works to somehow compete with the rest of what's become of our mainstream media. Let's face it, this "news" piece is pretty damn foolish.

BOSTON — A subatomic particle discovered last year that may be the long-sought Higgs boson might doom our universe to an unfortunate end, researchers say.

The mass of the particle, which was uncovered at the world's largest particle accelerator — the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva — is a key ingredient in a calculation that portends the future of space and time.

"This calculation tells you that many tens of billions of years from now there'll be a catastrophe," Joseph Lykken, a theoretical physicist at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Ill., said Monday (Feb. 18) here at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

"It may be the universe we live in is inherently unstable, and at some point billions of years from now it's all going to get wiped out," added Lykken, a collaborator on one of the LHC's experiments. [Gallery: Search for the Higgs Boson]

The Higgs boson particle is a manifestation of an energy field pervading the universe called the Higgs field, which is thought to explain why particles have mass. After searching for decades for proof that this field and particle existed, physicists at the LHC announced in July 2012 that they'd discovered a new particle whose properties strongly suggest it is the Higgs boson.

To confirm the particle's identity for sure, more data are needed. But many scientists say they're betting it's the Higgs.

...more where that came from

A friend of mine sent me another report (a few days ago) that suggested that there may be a whole "family" of Higgs bosons, each sibling with slightly different core properties. Fascinating stuff, I guess. Unless you're trying to stick with the original idea of what the Higgs boson was supposed to be, and what it was supposed to indicate.

Personally, I think that the whole idea of the Higgs Field is ludicrous. I mean, seriously...a ubiquitous "molasses-like" firmament that "slows down" particles (other than photons, apparently) enough to cause them to group together into molecules? This is science? I wonder how much longer the Standard Model has to exist? Not much longer, by the looks of it.

Statements like 'strongly suggest it is the higgs boson' make me think that they don't know anything.

"To confirm the particle's identity for sure, more data are needed. But many scientists say they're betting it's the Higgs."

This also says that they don't know.
It is no more than speculation.

"This is science? I wonder how much longer the Standard Model has to exist? Not much longer, by the looks of it."

I wonder what will scientists do when they realize the truth.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
What will scientists do when they realize the truth?

What they won't do is issue a press release. That much is certain.

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
What will scientists do when they realize the truth?

What they won't do is issue a press release. That much is certain.

At present they say atoms are made of 99.99999% empty space - I wonder when will they say it is 100%

The scientists are controlled by the establishment. The establishment will not want the truth getting out.
Most could not handle the truth anyway.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


"Oh, Sariputra, Form Does not Differ From the Void,
And the Void Does Not Differ From Form.
Form is Void and Void is Form;
The Same is True For Feelings,
Perceptions, Volitions and Consciousness."

- Heart Sutra

reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit


Yep - emptiness is form.

It's perfectly acceptable. The Standard Model has been in the works for a century, even longer. Everything adds up, all they missed was a particle that behaved like the Higgs Boson. The model predicted the existence of such a particle/field. And guess what, they found it. So why are you saying this isn't science? Did you spend all your life working as a physicist?

I think they've absolutley missed the real secret of the Higgs Bos-zoe-zon. I'll whisper it really quite, here it is, and its SO perfect for the tech media guys, ready? The Universe spells the doom for The Universe. Shhhhhh, pass it along . Even if they did find the Higgs-Beezelbrok, the time scale needed to define when the Universe would end is so vast, it has to be broken up into 'epochs' just so our feeble grey matter thought stoppers can get a grasp of what the heck we're being told. If a Higgs-Boson falls in the forest, do the trees still make a noise if it's windy?

This article is too vague.

There's not enough explanation as to why some of these scientists think the mass of the Higgs Boson would make the Universe unstable.

I've heard some interesting recent theories about how the Universe might have started out as one-dimensional and then two-dimensional and then three dimensional and that our three-dimensional Universe could eventually transform into a four-dimensional Universe. I don't know if there's any correlation to what they think about the Higgs Boson.

If we don't mess with Higgs maybe it will be safer for the universe. Nothing like a mad scientist to mess with things that they shouldn't. We have no evidence to prove what they are doing is safe. I guess we will find out in the future if their liberal ideology is safe because there is no way of getting them to examine their beliefs for possible flaws.

reply to post by Razziazoid


I think there is a green monster in my closet - I have named him Higgs. I have never seen him but because I have named him I can search for him forever.

Originally posted by rickymouse
...their liberal ideology...

What makes you think scientists have a liberal ideology?

Any scientist worth his or her salt would have no ideology.

It wasn't until Kepler put his opinions aside and only focused on facts that he had his 'Eureka' moment.

Originally posted by Junkheap
This article is too vague.

There's not enough explanation as to why some of these scientists think the mass of the Higgs Boson would make the Universe unstable.

I've heard some interesting recent theories about how the Universe might have started out as one-dimensional and then two-dimensional and then three dimensional and that our three-dimensional Universe could eventually transform into a four-dimensional Universe. I don't know if there's any correlation to what they think about the Higgs Boson.

That's what this image at Nasca seems to suggest, can't see it too good from this pic, but the shape in the miidle appears 4 or 5D in nature and concentric circles going out and the two squares on the outside seem to suggest a 2D universe maybe? If you are standing on earth with a telescope, the world around you will appear 3D, but if you peer out into space and see planets and other stuff moving around, they might appear 2D!

www.world-mysteries.com...

I predict the LHC could be very dangerous, if they are not careful.

I have a feeling. For very non-scientific reasons.

If there is an energy, a field of energy that spans and inter-connects not just everything on this planet, but through out the universe...

I'm not sure I want man poking, prodding, and doing who knows what else in their quest for more power. Knowledge of it, doesn't make it ours to mess with. I like the fabric that holds this construct all together.

Leave it alone!

Cirque

Originally posted by Razziazoid
It's perfectly acceptable. The Standard Model has been in the works for a century, even longer. Everything adds up, all they missed was a particle that behaved like the Higgs Boson. The model predicted the existence of such a particle/field. And guess what, they found it. So why are you saying this isn't science? Did you spend all your life working as a physicist?

Obviously you're not that familiar with the actual concept of the Higgs Field.



It's pretty hilarious. You should check it out.

Oh I love the the way they have worded it.

'doom our universe to an unfortunate end' ' many tens of billions of years from now'

People can say whatever they want about what is going to happen the universe billions of years from now, they will be long gone.

The higher the velocity of the collision the more fragments you get, not a Higgs a majig, which they might as well call it. More funding and steady pay checks is all that matters. If something new is discovered, a name is tacked on to it and then added to the rest of the convolution. Adding to a lie just makes a bigger lie and those that don't agree with the status quo are considered kooks.

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by Razziazoid
It's perfectly acceptable. The Standard Model has been in the works for a century, even longer. Everything adds up, all they missed was a particle that behaved like the Higgs Boson. The model predicted the existence of such a particle/field. And guess what, they found it. So why are you saying this isn't science? Did you spend all your life working as a physicist?

Obviously you're not that familiar with the actual concept of the Higgs Field.

It's pretty hilarious. You should check it out.

Care to elaborate on your notions as to why you find the concept of the Higgs Field is humorous? I'm curious to see if I can learn anything from your expressions on this subject. Thanks.

Originally posted by samaka

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by Razziazoid
It's perfectly acceptable. The Standard Model has been in the works for a century, even longer. Everything adds up, all they missed was a particle that behaved like the Higgs Boson. The model predicted the existence of such a particle/field. And guess what, they found it. So why are you saying this isn't science? Did you spend all your life working as a physicist?

Obviously you're not that familiar with the actual concept of the Higgs Field.

It's pretty hilarious. You should check it out.

Care to elaborate on your notions as to why you find the concept of the Higgs Field is humorous? I'm curious to see if I can learn anything from your expressions on this subject. Thanks.

edit on 20-2-2013 by samaka because: (no reason given)

The tech press likens the Higgs Field to a sort of "molasses" that slows down particles enough for them to coalesce into molecules, since the Standard Model, on its own, doesn't allow for such coalescence. Here's the "simple wiki" explanation What the Higgs Field assumption (not even a theory) is, is that "something" must exist to make the Standard Model workable, and so far, all we can think of is this ubiquitous swarming mass of existential molasses that gums up the open road that lays out in front of all the stuff racing through the universe as a result of the Big Bang, allowing it all to clump together and become bigger and bigger stuff. Everything, except photons - for no real reason, it seems.

Now, to me, this is no different than trying to patch a inflatable life raft while your taking on water, losing air, and watching the rest of your real boat slide beneath the waves. All without a patch kit. It reeks of desperation, and that has never been how I see reality - as a patchwork of backfilling efforts designed to prop up yet another outed failure of basic understanding by yet another fount of antiquated wisdom by those whose professional careers depend on propping up such stuff.

Reality doesn't need the invention of fixes to make it work. The proponents of this Higgs molasses field admit that they have no idea how such a field could possibly exist or have been initiated - or why such a field would or should exist, and ahead of literally everything else that did not exist before that field was in place. All they know is that the Standard Model doesn't work without something violating the basic tenets of that same Standard Model in the specific manner that is required for mass to exist. After all, mass does exist, even if mass itself is a violation of the Standard Model. Or so it seems to be the case.

I don't know. Is that enough elaboration?

reply to post by NorEaster


I can see why it being a bit of a desperation move to keep the Standard Model alive and I feel this is only going cause more questions than answers, if it were true now they would need to explain how it would got there in the first place that correlates with the Model.

In your opinion what do you believe is causing the particles to bond or what theory or model do you believe has a better explanation?