Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'

  • 74 Replies
  • 10387 Views
?

Thork

Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« on: December 13, 2011, 12:23:23 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16158374

Desperate and under-fire Round Earth Scientists are grasping at straws, as public pressure to explain 'gravity' is heaped upon them. With a suspicious population demanding a better answer than 'magic' for why things fall to earth, SCIENTISTS are resorting to phrases such as
Quote from: Guido Tonelli
As of today, what we see is consistent either with a background fluctuation or with the presence of the boson.
So ... they found something or nothing. They don't know.

This news comes just months after reports that there was no Higgs particle, left furious taxpayers wondering whether the $9 billion dollar LHC had just been part of the EU gravy train.

Embarrassed officials have flip-flopped again to quell anger and to cast doubt and conjecture upon the subject. With Dr Stephen Hawking waiting in the wings to say "I told you so" before stuffing another $100 into his already bursting wallet, even RET scientists on the same side can't get their story straight.

They may have glimpsed the particle? I may have glimpsed the yeti. It was dark, something was moving, I can't confirm it. It was either something or nothing. And RErs ask how can a conspiracy make money from RET?

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2011, 12:39:51 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16158374

Desperate and under-fire Round Earth Scientists are grasping at straws, as public pressure to explain 'gravity' is heaped upon them. With a suspicious population demanding a better answer than 'magic' for why things fall to earth, SCIENTISTS are resorting to phrases such as
Quote from: Guido Tonelli
As of today, what we see is consistent either with a background fluctuation or with the presence of the boson.
So ... they found something or nothing. They don't know.

This news comes just months after reports that there was no Higgs particle, left furious taxpayers wondering whether the $9 billion dollar LHC had just been part of the EU gravy train.

Embarrassed officials have flip-flopped again to quell anger and to cast doubt and conjecture upon the subject. With Dr Stephen Hawking waiting in the wings to say "I told you so" before stuffing another $100 into his already bursting wallet, even RET scientists on the same side can't get their story straight.

They may have glimpsed the particle? I may have glimpsed the yeti. It was dark, something was moving, I can't confirm it. It was either something or nothing. And RErs ask how can a conspiracy make money from RET?
You really do need to do a better job. No one claimed that "no Higgs partical". From your reference's title: "CERN: Higgs boson ‘God particle’ likely does not exist". Following the lay journalist's reference, we get to the article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14596367 which claims only: "New results to be presented this week at a conference in India all but eliminate the mid-range where the Higgs - if it exists - might be found.", not what the journalist claimed.

Next, the scientists are 94% and 98% sure they've found the Higgs boson. If so, it's in the lower range, by the way. So there has been no flip-flop either.

Once they get more measurements over the course of 2012, they hope to get to a one-in-a-million level of confidence. Reference: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/science/tantalizing-hints-but-no-direct-proof-in-search-for-higgs-boson.html?_r=1
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Thork

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2011, 12:43:31 PM »
Next, the scientists are 94% and 98% sure they've found the Higgs boson.

I would love a citation for this please.

A citation looks like this.

Quote from: http://www.extrahype.com/the-god-particle-may-not-exist-after-all-stephen-hawking-wins-the-bet
They state that, with a 95% probability, the Higgs does not exist within the range of energies the LHC has so far explored, between 145 and 466 billion electron volts.

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2011, 12:47:23 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16158374

Desperate and under-fire Round Earth Scientists are grasping at straws, as public pressure to explain 'gravity' is heaped upon them. With a suspicious population demanding a better answer than 'magic' for why things fall to earth, SCIENTISTS are resorting to phrases such as
Quote from: Guido Tonelli
As of today, what we see is consistent either with a background fluctuation or with the presence of the boson.
So ... they found something or nothing. They don't know.

This news comes just months after reports that there was no Higgs particle, left furious taxpayers wondering whether the $9 billion dollar LHC had just been part of the EU gravy train.

Embarrassed officials have flip-flopped again to quell anger and to cast doubt and conjecture upon the subject. With Dr Stephen Hawking waiting in the wings to say "I told you so" before stuffing another $100 into his already bursting wallet, even RET scientists on the same side can't get their story straight.

They may have glimpsed the particle? I may have glimpsed the yeti. It was dark, something was moving, I can't confirm it. It was either something or nothing. And RErs ask how can a conspiracy make money from RET?

If they find the Higgs, science wins; if they don't find it, science also wins. How are you not understanding this?
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Thork

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2011, 12:51:30 PM »
If they find the Higgs, they can prove gravity, the Jesus bolt of RET. Without it, RET cannot explain even its most fundamental principals. That would be a massive RET fail.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2011, 12:54:29 PM »
UA and celestial gravitation definitely don't use any form of magical energies, they must trump gravity!

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2011, 01:11:43 PM »
Next, the scientists are 94% and 98% sure they've found the Higgs boson.

I would love a citation for this please.

A citation looks like this.

Quote from: http://www.extrahype.com/the-god-particle-may-not-exist-after-all-stephen-hawking-wins-the-bet
They state that, with a 95% probability, the Higgs does not exist within the range of energies the LHC has so far explored, between 145 and 466 billion electron volts.

Fine:
Quote from: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/12/13/mass-effect-maybe-higgs-maybe-not/
For one experiment, the bump at 125 times the energy of the proton has a confidence level of about 94%, the other experiment sees it at about 98%.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41922
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2011, 01:14:44 PM »
If they find the Higgs, they can prove gravity, the Jesus bolt of RET. Without it, RET cannot explain even its most fundamental principals. That would be a massive RET fail.

As I recall, FET relies on celestial bodies having the same inexplicable gravity that you keep deriding RET about, doesn't it?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Thork

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #8 on: December 13, 2011, 01:16:42 PM »
As you know, I have only ever advocated UA.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41922
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2011, 01:18:21 PM »
UA still requires the celestial bodies to exert a gravitational influence on the FE in order to explain tides and measured local variations in g.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2011, 01:19:41 PM »
Also, even if the Higgs particle is not discovered, there are other theories that may very well be true.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #11 on: December 13, 2011, 01:20:06 PM »

This news comes just months after reports that there was no Higgs particle, left furious taxpayers wondering whether the $9 billion dollar LHC had just been part of the EU gravy train.


Anyone who would be furious if the LHC did not detect the Higgs Boson is a moron. For a comparable example, it's like being furious at your smoke detector for not detecting smoke if there isn't a fire. It doesn't mean the detector is faulty, it means what you're detecting isn't there. And if the Higgs Boson doesn't exist, it's very important to know that so we can rethink the structure of physics. This is called science.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #12 on: December 13, 2011, 01:21:32 PM »
As you know, I have only ever advocated UA.
Could you tell us then what you advocate causes the moons of Mars and the Galilean Moons of Jupiter to revolve around their respective planets? With a decent scope you can observe all six moon's revolutions.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #13 on: December 13, 2011, 01:22:53 PM »
As you know, I have only ever advocated UA.

Oh, BTW while you were off screaming at the media or whatever it is you do when you're not working yourself into a rage on here, one of the other FE'ers clued us in to your admission of trolling. I've seen the posts in which you admit it. They detailed the history of your posts before I came here. It was quite enlightening. So cut the "I believe" crap. Because we know you don't.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41922
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #14 on: December 13, 2011, 01:24:33 PM »
Also, the Higgs boson is not thought to be responsible for gravity (at least not directly responsible).  It's thought to be responsible for mass.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Thork

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2011, 01:44:11 PM »
As you know, I have only ever advocated UA.
Could you tell us then what you advocate causes the moons of Mars and the Galilean Moons of Jupiter to revolve around their respective planets? With a decent scope you can observe all six moon's revolutions.
Celestial gearing.

Next, the scientists are 94% and 98% sure they've found the Higgs boson.

Fine:
Quote from: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/12/13/mass-effect-maybe-higgs-maybe-not/
For one experiment, the bump at 125 times the energy of the proton has a confidence level of about 94%, the other experiment sees it at about 98%.

Now lets read  more of the quote.
Quote from: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/12/13/mass-effect-maybe-higgs-maybe-not/
After a year of runs, both experiments see something that might be Higgs, but they’re not 100% sure. One sees something at about the 94% confidence level, the other at 98%. That’s pretty good, but it’s not enough to be completely sure. It seems likely they’ve found something, but it’s like a fuzzy picture: it looks like Higgs, but it still might be something else.

So they are 94% sure they have found something. Not 94% sure they have found the Higgs Boson. They don't know what the hell they may or not have found. Also ... since when is a blog a valid source?

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2011, 01:47:40 PM »
As you know, I have only ever advocated UA.
Could you tell us then what you advocate causes the moons of Mars and the Galilean Moons of Jupiter to revolve around their respective planets? With a decent scope you can observe all six moon's revolutions.
Celestial gearing.
Please explain. Provide the evidence you personally collected on the existence of these gears. I'd expect that you've recently travelled to both systems. Then submit the evidence to peer review.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

Thork

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2011, 01:53:32 PM »
As you know, I have only ever advocated UA.
Could you tell us then what you advocate causes the moons of Mars and the Galilean Moons of Jupiter to revolve around their respective planets? With a decent scope you can observe all six moon's revolutions.
Celestial gearing.
Please explain. Provide the evidence you personally collected on the existence of these gears. I'd expect that you've recently travelled to both systems. Then submit the evidence to peer review.
That would be a major thread derailment. I wish to keep my thread on topic and would ask you to respect that wish.

Feel free to use the search function. Celestial gearing has been discussed at length in your absence.

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2011, 01:54:09 PM »
Now lets read  more of the quote.
Quote from: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/12/13/mass-effect-maybe-higgs-maybe-not/
After a year of runs, both experiments see something that might be Higgs, but they’re not 100% sure. One sees something at about the 94% confidence level, the other at 98%. That’s pretty good, but it’s not enough to be completely sure. It seems likely they’ve found something, but it’s like a fuzzy picture: it looks like Higgs, but it still might be something else.

So they are 94% sure they have found something. Not 94% sure they have found the Higgs Boson. They don't know what the hell they may or not have found. Also ... since when is a blog a valid source?
You're quite right. The assumption is that this new something must be the missing piece of SM. It might not be; however, it's in one of the energy ranges and otherwise decays like SM predicts.

I guess blogs have always been a valid source. This one hosted by Discover Magazine and written by Dr. Pliat is one of the best at explaining science to those without a science background. You, of course, should following the links of his references rather than complaining.

Of course, I have to point out that you infamously believed a marketing statement on a website that glass could be made 'perfectly' flat before.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2011, 02:57:59 PM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16158374

Desperate and under-fire Round Earth Scientists are grasping at straws, as public pressure to explain 'gravity' is heaped upon them. With a suspicious population demanding a better answer than 'magic' for why things fall to earth, SCIENTISTS are resorting to phrases such as
Quote from: Guido Tonelli
As of today, what we see is consistent either with a background fluctuation or with the presence of the boson.
So ... they found something or nothing. They don't know.

This news comes just months after reports that there was no Higgs particle, left furious taxpayers wondering whether the $9 billion dollar LHC had just been part of the EU gravy train.

Embarrassed officials have flip-flopped again to quell anger and to cast doubt and conjecture upon the subject. With Dr Stephen Hawking waiting in the wings to say "I told you so" before stuffing another $100 into his already bursting wallet, even RET scientists on the same side can't get their story straight.

They may have glimpsed the particle? I may have glimpsed the yeti. It was dark, something was moving, I can't confirm it. It was either something or nothing. And RErs ask how can a conspiracy make money from RET?

Yeah, why don't those stupid scientists look for Moon shrimps instead!
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2011, 07:46:27 PM »
UA still requires the celestial bodies to exert a gravitational influence on the FE in order to explain tides and measured local variations in g.

Yes you are correct.

Thork, if gravity is magical and not real, please explain to us how tides work and why there are measured variations in gravity/UA based on altitude.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #21 on: December 13, 2011, 08:22:51 PM »
Certain parts of the earth are created of less dense aether materials resulting in the UA passing through the earth and into the atmosphere, gaining velocity and pushing things up with more force as it goes. It affects things at the surface usually only over land. This is why the UA is measured less over land.

Tides are caused by the aether wind rushing off the land. High tide = no aether wind. Low tide = high aether wind.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2011, 08:24:37 PM by Irushwithscvs »

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #22 on: December 13, 2011, 09:09:48 PM »
Certain parts of the earth are created of less dense aether materials resulting in the UA passing through the earth and into the atmosphere, gaining velocity and pushing things up with more force as it goes. It affects things at the surface usually only over land. This is why the UA is measured less over land.

This does not explain the inverse relationship between altitude and measured gravity/US. Please address this hole in your theory.

?

Thork

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #23 on: December 14, 2011, 02:36:17 AM »
Thork, if gravity is magical and not real, please explain to us how tides work and why there are measured variations in gravity/UA based on altitude.

Tides
I dispute that gravity varies around the earth. I have documented this in many threads.

?

Mr Pseudonym

  • Official Member
  • 5448
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #24 on: December 14, 2011, 03:14:35 AM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16158374

Desperate and under-fire Round Earth Scientists are grasping at straws, as public pressure to explain 'gravity' is heaped upon them. With a suspicious population demanding a better answer than 'magic' for why things fall to earth, SCIENTISTS are resorting to phrases such as
Quote from: Guido Tonelli
As of today, what we see is consistent either with a background fluctuation or with the presence of the boson.
So ... they found something or nothing. They don't know.

This news comes just months after reports that there was no Higgs particle, left furious taxpayers wondering whether the $9 billion dollar LHC had just been part of the EU gravy train.

Embarrassed officials have flip-flopped again to quell anger and to cast doubt and conjecture upon the subject. With Dr Stephen Hawking waiting in the wings to say "I told you so" before stuffing another $100 into his already bursting wallet, even RET scientists on the same side can't get their story straight.

They may have glimpsed the particle? I may have glimpsed the yeti. It was dark, something was moving, I can't confirm it. It was either something or nothing. And RErs ask how can a conspiracy make money from RET?

If they find the Higgs, science wins; if they don't find it, science also wins. How are you not understanding this?
Science never wins as the system itself is inherently fail.  It seems you haven't done the slightest of lurking still.
Why do we fall back to earth? Because our weight pushes us down, no laws, no gravity pulling us. It is the law of intelligence.

?

momentia

  • 425
  • Light abhors a straight line.
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #25 on: December 14, 2011, 03:25:55 AM »
Thork, if gravity is magical and not real, please explain to us how tides work and why there are measured variations in gravity/UA based on altitude.

Tides
I dispute that gravity varies around the earth. I have documented this in many threads.

Sorry to disappoint, but gravimeters do not read the same thing everywhere. You can say that acceleration changes do to some weird effect or other, but the instrument still gives different readings for g in different locations. You can't change that.

For example:
http://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2115/8666/1/2(2)_p247-250.pdf

People get different reading on their gravimeters at different locations.

As for tides being caused by pressure? no
yes, pressure does change tides by a little.
but to even change the tides by 2 meters would need a pressure change of ρgΔh = ΔP = 1000*9.8*2 / 100 = 196 millibars between areas of high and low tide bi-daily.
In fact if you look at a classic barometer, the range of pressures is only about a 100 or so millibars:


Usually the needle never comes near those points.


Also, if you have ever looked at a chart of barometric pressure, it typically does not change that much in a day on a daily basis. This means there is different driving force at work, not atmospheric pressure

*

spanner34.5

  • 4642
  • feck arse drink
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #26 on: December 14, 2011, 03:55:31 AM »
This particular branch of the conspiracy will never definitely find anything. If they do succeed, their funding will disappear for that project.

To the people supplying the money for the Higgs particle project.

I will maybe glimpse one for a lot less money..

Please PM me for my contact details. Discount given for cash.
My I.Q. is 85. Or was it 58?

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #27 on: December 14, 2011, 07:06:50 AM »
Certain parts of the earth are created of less dense aether materials resulting in the UA passing through the earth and into the atmosphere, gaining velocity and pushing things up with more force as it goes. It affects things at the surface usually only over land. This is why the UA is measured less over land.

This does not explain the inverse relationship between altitude and measured gravity/US. Please address this hole in your theory.

Actually, it does. You should read it again.

?

Thork

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2011, 07:49:37 AM »
People get different reading on their gravimeters at different locations.
'People'. What people? This is another assumption.

Let me explain. Today the price of gold is


An ounce is according to Google
ounce/ouns/
Noun:   
A unit of weight of one sixteenth of a pound avoirdupois (approximately 28 grams).
Gold is sold by weight. Not mass.

Weight is mass*gravity. According to the lies you swallowed, in Mexico City gravity =9.779 m/s2. In Helsinki (Finland) and Oslo (Norway) gravity = 9.819 m/s2. A variation of 0.5%.

So if I buy a million dollars worth of gold in Mexico city I make $50,000 selling it in Finland? Does gold vary in price from country to country? No. Are the Finnish people being ripped off? No.

Were your bathroom scales calibrated for your country? No. Do aircraft take on more fuel when flying over areas of increased gravity (which means increased lift required which means more drag and hence more fuel? No. In fact does anyone ever compensate for this alleged fluctuation ever? Does it ever come up? Something so fundamental involving trade or transport or so many other things? No. Never a dickie-bird. Stop just swallowing what you are told and look at the world analytically. Your claim has absolutely no bearing on reality. Its not what happens on earth. Only in NASA fairytale land. 

I might add that the world record for Javelin has been broken in Scandinavia more times than anywhere else in the world. The place with the highest gravity has the best throwing records? 0.5% is a lot in world record terms.

62.32     Eric Lemming            12/09/29  Stockholm
66.10     Jonni Myyrä              19/08/24  Stockholm
66.62     Gunnar Lindström     24/12/12  62.32 Eksjö
69.88     Eino Penttilä             27/10/01  Viipuri
71.01     Erik Lundqvist          28/08/15  Stockholm
71.57     Matti Järvinen          30/08/08  Viipuri
71.70     Matti Järvinen          30/08/17  Tampere
71.88     Matti Järvinen          30/08/31  Vaasa
72.93     Matti Järvinen          30/09/14  Viipuri
74.02     Matti Järvinen          32/06/27  Turku
74.28     Matti Järvinen          33/05/25  Mikkeli
74.61     Matti Järvinen          33/06/07  Vaasa
76.10     Matti Järvinen          33/06/15  Helsinki
76.66     Matti Järvinen          33/09/07  Turin
77.23     Matti Järvinen          34/06/18  Helsinki
77.87     Yrjö Nikkanen          38/08/25  Karhula
78.70     Yrjö Nikkanen          38/10/16  Kotka
80.41     Bud Held                 53/08/08  Pasadena
81.75     Bud Held                 55/05/21  Modesto
83.56     Soini Nikkinen          56/06/24  Kuhmoinen
83.66     Janusz Sidlo            56/06/30  Milan
85.71     Egil Danielsen          56/11/26  Melbourne
86.04     Al Cantello              59/06/05  Compton
86.74     Carlo Lievore           61/06/01  Milan
87.12     Terje Pedersen        64/07/01  Oslo
91.72     Terje Pedersen        64/09/02  Oslo
91.98     Janis Lusis              68/07/23  Saarijärvi
92.70     Jorma Kinnunen       69/06/18  Tampere
93.80     Janis Lusis               72/07/06  Stockholm
94.08     Klaus Wolfermann    73/05/05  Leverkusen
94.58     Miklos Nemeth          76/07/26  Montreal
96.72     Ferenc Paragi           80/04/23  Tata
99.72     Tom Petranoff          83/05/15  Los Angeles
104.80    Uwe Hohn               84/07/20  Berlin

67% of all Javelin world records in Scandinavia. And not one in a low gravity area such India or Mexico?

Re: Higgs particle 'may have been glimpsed'
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2011, 07:55:04 AM »
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards