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.

 

CERN: Higgs-Boson decays to two fermions!

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Mamatus
reply to post by jimmyx
 


There is more to this. 99.9% of Scientists are atheists. They are working hard to prove they are right. Personally I think that proof of no God is way overdue. Religion is truly the root of all evil. Until it goes the way of the dinosaur people will always fight.



I'll play. As long as its related to this news, which I don't understand but enjoy looking at because it makes more sense the longer you look at this structure and its resounding effects. God existing or not is immaterial to this discovery. It's like the JFK assassination, almost any theory you throw up will have physical or indictable evidence to back it up if you look deep or shallow enough, so God, Goddess, Wood Fairies, or maybe the greatest southpaw pitcher/picture in history - Lefty Grove - might eventually be explained and proven by this discovery and totally refuted by this discovery, depending on the angle that you look at it. And, ah, "the way of the dinosaur", check out in the yard, there are birds! Birds are dinosaurs! Explain that, Mr. Higgs (not the poster, the real Mr. Higgs, who must be a happy camper this week).


edit on 30-11-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-11-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
snoopy11
This is important because the Higgs when it is attached to force carrying particles it decays to those force carrying particles.

" Fermions are the subatomic particles which make up real matter.

While it was known that Higgs bosons gave mass to force carrying particles.

There was no proof that it gave mass to ordinary matter particles, until now that is.

Proof of Higgs decaying to fermions means it gives mass to fermions.

It seems the Higgs is indeed responsible for how things gain mass and therefore inertia and all that kind of stuff.

We still have a lot to learn about Higgs...."

SO, does this mean that the speed of light can be broken? I remember reading that a major hurdle to breaking the speed of light was the mass to speed ratio, in that infinite speed requires infinite size or something other. However, now if the mass of an object can be seperated from its inertia through manipulation of the Higgs, then FTL speed can be achieved. If I am correct, then this discovery more than pays for itself ten-fold.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Mamatus
reply to post by jimmyx
 


There is more to this. 99.9% of Scientists are atheists. They are working hard to prove they are right. Personally I think that proof of no God is way overdue. Religion is truly the root of all evil. Until it goes the way of the dinosaur people will always fight.



you are right...but, the people that put up the money for this must have some other reason, than to just satisfy some scientists curiosity. I'm suspicious of their motivations, however altruistic they could be. It raises my BS flag, as far as the public explanation.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   

lostbook


SO, does this mean that the speed of light can be broken? I remember reading that a major hurdle to breaking the speed of light was the mass to speed ratio, in that infinite speed requires infinite size or something other. However, now if the mass of an object can be seperated from its inertia through manipulation of the Higgs, then FTL speed can be achieved. If I am correct, then this discovery more than pays for itself ten-fold.




No it doesn't mean that at all... even if your mass is zero which is the theoritical lower limit of the photon then you still cant go faster than light

Ek = Mo(y-1)c^2

where y = 1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

so where Mo= 0 or very close to zero.

Ek = (y-1)c^2

so if v > c you get 1/sqrt(of a minus number)

this gets into the veil of numbers covered by imaginary numbers in terms and in theory you start to time travel into the past... look what happens to your energy as well it too goes negative.... some postulate that you need negative energy to get to this state of affairs in the first place, but really who knows..

However if your mass is zero then you can go at the speed of light which would be a pretty cool trick... as your inertia would also be in theory zero so you would be immune to getting splatted by severe accelerations.

You dont need to really go 'faster' than light as 99% or 100% light speed is quite fast enough really.

Of course I say all this with a slight sense of humour as we dont know how to initiate higgs into going away for something like say a space shuttle but you never know one day we might.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Please keep on topic, this is not a discussion about religion or lack of it.

Thanks in advance.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   
i wounder if ISON split in two,, when stripped by the sun of all its basic elements,,,guess it would have been nice too see,,,,two fragments,,,of some type of composition.




posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy11
 


" even if your mass is zero which is the theoritical lower limit of the photon"

you cannot have, potential Energy at zero Mass.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
will make me laugh if they keep splitting fundamental particles and can find no end or fundamental unit.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   

AthlonSavage
will make me laugh if they keep splitting fundamental particles and can find no end or fundamental unit.


In the end all scientists become mystics and all mystics
become scientists. Wait until they finally manage to
probe the sub-plank distance. There may be entire
sub-universes in there.

That said, I'm not taunting science. I'm one of science's
biggest fans. At it's best, science is a mechanism for
determining what is true. At it's worst science draws
circles around what can be possible and misses what
lies behind the curtain through pure arrogant small
mindedness.

KPB



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   

BobAthome
reply to post by snoopy11
 


" even if your mass is zero which is the theoritical lower limit of the photon"

you cannot have, potential Energy at zero Mass.


No your potential Energy would be zero at rest mass but you would still have momentum and therefore invaraiant mass if you were moving and therefore have Kinetic Energy or Ek...

As I say I was only having a little fun and wasnt serious....... now booo..... I bet that scared you !



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   

KellyPrettyBear

Wait until they finally manage to
probe the sub-plank distance. There may be entire
sub-universes in there.

That said, I'm not taunting science. I'm one of science's
biggest fans. At it's best, science is a mechanism for
determining what is true. At it's worst science draws
circles around what can be possible and misses what
lies behind the curtain through pure arrogant small
mindedness.

KPB


Hmmm,

I dont really think we will ever find tiny universes in the sub - planck distance...

But I think you were being disingenuous....... I sometimes am like this myself.

I think science can be both closed off and seeking truth.....at the same time

Its closed off for a reason though not everyone should do science some people are more prone to poetry than maths and those who are should not follow science but become great artists instead.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   
I love that the only reason that title makes sense to me is ATS.

Good job science! Good job ATS!



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy11
 


Here, let me say the sentence I've said the most since coming to ATS:

"Its a metaphor".

But that aside, NOBODY knows what is 'sub-plank'. The total energy
output of our entire civilization might be required to probe there.

And I agree.. nothing wrong with some people being small-minded
but very accurate with that small mind.

You know, that some of the greatest scientific minds in history were
quite mystically read and astute: such as schrodinger for example.

I won't talk about Einstein.. everyone wants him on their team.

I certainly don't think that everyone should be 'a mystic'. If everyone
knows they are an actor on the stage, it might not be much of a play.

KPB



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


The "people who put up money" for this are us, the taxpayers of Europe.

CERN Funding

There is no private business or billionaire playboy lurking in the shadows..



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by snoopy11
 



You know, that some of the greatest scientific minds in history were
quite mystically read and astute: such as schrodinger for example.

I won't talk about Einstein.. everyone wants him on their team.

I certainly don't think that everyone should be 'a mystic'. If everyone
knows they are an actor on the stage, it might not be much of a play.

KPB



Ha ha ha,

Agreed, I wont tell you the ending then.... might ruin the whole 'life' experience thingy.... ha ha !



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   

stumason
reply to post by jimmyx
 


The "people who put up money" for this are us, the taxpayers of Europe.

CERN Funding

There is no private business or billionaire playboy lurking in the shadows..


And every discovery of CERN is shared with the people who paid for it - the citizens of Europe - and they all in turn share it with the world. A bounty of data because people cared enough to ask the interesting questions and arrange funding to dig in and find the answers.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   

snoopy11

BobAthome
reply to post by snoopy11
 


" even if your mass is zero which is the theoritical lower limit of the photon"

you cannot have, potential Energy at zero Mass.


No your potential Energy would be zero at rest mass but you would still have momentum and therefore invaraiant mass if you were moving and therefore have Kinetic Energy or Ek...

As I say I was only having a little fun and wasnt serious....... now booo..... I bet that scared you !


Maybe a stupid question, but do you mean there can be no rest mass of zero anywhere, say, if theorized bubble-universes do actually exist in the billions, each universe moving both within itself and as a megaverse, constantly, in many directions at once would be fueling momentum in all space and time? When taking into account the total mass of matter within each universe moving somewhere at each conceivable moment of time, there would be no mass that would exist at zero rest energy.

Correct? Or am I whistling at an echo again (I lol when I scrolled past that section of posts I made with not one star given - I thought of that cricket sound meme - the posts when I was taking the thing as far out as I could to see if someone would discuss how, as a poster submitted, this discovery would end up creating the Star Trek universe. To describe the patterns coming from this discovery and postulate those into the future.



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   

AthlonSavage
will make me laugh if they keep splitting fundamental particles and can find no end or fundamental unit.


That would bring forth the scientific accuracy of the learned statement of one of the wise men of lore, or it may have been one of the three stooges: "It's turtles all the way down."



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Aleister

Maybe a stupid question, but do you mean there can be no rest mass of zero anywhere, say, if theorized bubble-universes do actually exist in the billions, each universe moving both within itself and as a megaverse, constantly, in many directions at once would be fueling momentum in all space and time? When taking into account the total mass of matter within each universe moving somewhere at each conceivable moment of time, there would be no mass that would exist at zero rest energy.

Correct? Or am I whistling at an echo again (I lol when I scrolled past that section of posts I made with not one star given - I thought of that cricket sound meme - the posts when I was taking the thing as far out as I could to see if someone would discuss how, as a poster submitted, this discovery would end up creating the Star Trek universe. To describe the patterns coming from this discovery and postulate those into the future.


No not at all.... you could have a rest mass of zero in fact things in this universe are theorised to have zero rest masses,

however this is hard to prove as everything is in motion.

You could have zero rest mass but this would lead to zero Potential Energy E= mc^2 ie E= 0 X c^2 which is 0.

but the poster forgot about this equatiion Mo^2.c^2= (E/c)^2 - p^2

which takes account of momentum and therefore velocity. So you would still have Energy.

Some might say that you could then know a particles positon and velocity at the same time breaking the 'uncertainty principle' but in experiments the particle would spread out over time so keeping the uncertainty principle intact.

E=mc^2 is just a derivation is what Im saying of something deeper, a simplification if you will.
edit on 30-11-2013 by snoopy11 because: typo



posted on Nov, 30 2013 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by snoopy11
 


"but the poster forgot about this equatiion Mo^2.c^2= (E/c)^2 - p^2 "

well gee guess when i never knew someting it could be forgoten ,, iguess,,

gee silly me,,,"Mo^2.c^2= (E/c)^2 - p^2 "" slap me silly how could i have forgoten that???????????????????


that is sarcasm u know,,gee
edit on 11/30/2013 by BobAthome because: and BOO 2 U 2.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join