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.
Originally posted by samaka
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?edit on 21-2-2013 by samaka because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by NorEaster
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?
Originally posted by 1nf1del
I think the answers will come when they figure out how a "black hole" really works and what it's actually made of!
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by 1nf1del
I think the answers will come when they figure out how a "black hole" really works and what it's actually made of!
I fail to see the correlation between a point that displays an incalculable density of suckage and the Higgs Field, but tossing in a black hole reference usually works when chatting up cosmology, so why not. Maybe black holes ooze Higgs Field molasses?
I wonder if there's a phd opening for that theory?
Originally posted by 1nf1del
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by 1nf1del
I think the answers will come when they figure out how a "black hole" really works and what it's actually made of!
I fail to see the correlation between a point that displays an incalculable density of suckage and the Higgs Field, but tossing in a black hole reference usually works when chatting up cosmology, so why not. Maybe black holes ooze Higgs Field molasses?
I wonder if there's a phd opening for that theory?
I'm talking about electric universe theory, in the same way your sock sticks to a towel when you take it out of the dryer is the same driving force holding the universe together!
Originally posted by jonnywhite
So does this mean the current universe will die and be replaced by a more stable one? Another words, it's kind of like asexual reproduction. Will this cycle of stable and unstable go on forever?
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by 1nf1del
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by 1nf1del
I think the answers will come when they figure out how a "black hole" really works and what it's actually made of!
I fail to see the correlation between a point that displays an incalculable density of suckage and the Higgs Field, but tossing in a black hole reference usually works when chatting up cosmology, so why not. Maybe black holes ooze Higgs Field molasses?
I wonder if there's a phd opening for that theory?
I'm talking about electric universe theory, in the same way your sock sticks to a towel when you take it out of the dryer is the same driving force holding the universe together!
Static electricity?
There's a theory that static electricity is holding the universe together?
Originally posted by 1nf1del
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by 1nf1del
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by 1nf1del
I think the answers will come when they figure out how a "black hole" really works and what it's actually made of!
I fail to see the correlation between a point that displays an incalculable density of suckage and the Higgs Field, but tossing in a black hole reference usually works when chatting up cosmology, so why not. Maybe black holes ooze Higgs Field molasses?
I wonder if there's a phd opening for that theory?
I'm talking about electric universe theory, in the same way your sock sticks to a towel when you take it out of the dryer is the same driving force holding the universe together!
Static electricity?
There's a theory that static electricity is holding the universe together?
Umm no, comprehension problems?
What is your theory on what holds it together?
Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by ImaFungi
All I know is that if you have to invent an impossible "always" of any kind, just to make your theory work, then you're better off spending that creativity and effort on a new theory. No theory should need the invention of impossible "always" things in order to not contradict themselves.
Originally posted by ImaFungi
Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by ImaFungi
All I know is that if you have to invent an impossible "always" of any kind, just to make your theory work, then you're better off spending that creativity and effort on a new theory. No theory should need the invention of impossible "always" things in order to not contradict themselves.
Yea well. Do you think mass exists? What is it? How does it exist? What caused it to exist?
Originally posted by eManym
Particle creation? Could have something to do with plasma confinement, such as a z-pinch and the like. The electromagnetism and plasma phenomena have been neglected as a contributing factor in main stream science but in my understanding their presence permeates all scales of measurement from macro to micro to nano to sub atomic. What I mean is, their effect on a macro scale such as the universe is also identical on all other scales. I am not an expert, but the electric universe theory seems more plausable than what is being currently accepted.edit on 22-2-2013 by eManym because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by NorEaster
The basic notion concerning why things bond - even to the point of particles being formed as bonded clusters - is "Identity survival",
Originally posted by NorEaster
Originally posted by ImaFungi
Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by ImaFungi
All I know is that if you have to invent an impossible "always" of any kind, just to make your theory work, then you're better off spending that creativity and effort on a new theory. No theory should need the invention of impossible "always" things in order to not contradict themselves.
Yea well. Do you think mass exists? What is it? How does it exist? What caused it to exist?
Look at H2O molecules as they move around - under a microscope, I suppose. Maybe you can fit two or three within the entire field of view, and there's plenty of room between them. Doesn't look solid. Then you back it up - way up - like 200 feet up and there's a pond where those water molecules were, and it looks pretty much like a "mass" as it lays there and reflects the sky behind you.
Mass is defined by the perception interpretation of the human being defining it. All of material existence is a matter of perspective and relative context. Does mass exist? Yeah, it does. What causes it to exist? The confluence of the quantum of action, holon structure, and the existential imperative that is Identity survival.
No Higgs Field required.
Originally posted by samaka
reply to post by NorEaster
Where did subatomic received it's interactive mechanics?, How did constants become constants? Where did the mechanics of atoms sharing electrons come from? Why do molecules bond and form enzymes? How did the brain evolved processing algorithms between 100 billion cells to process light data it receives from the eyes to "display" visual data?
As humanity is reverse engineering reality, to me it's becoming more apparent that "something" wants "us" or "it" to experience "this". With advance knowledge of programming, looking at reality from a programmers perspective, I can see "logical" reasoning of why things work, you see methodologies that a programmer would use in a scenario such as Modular, Inheritance, Polymorphism , Composition, in order for these methods to exist would require "logical" reasoning to use them in scenarios and these are just some of the methods.
"Something" saw the quantum potential of this reality and guided the potential to form this reality. This is coming from a spiritual sense of course.