10 Sep 08
2 edits
Stephen Hakkins has bet 100 dollars that a mega-experiment this week will not find an elusive particle seen as a holy grail of cosmic science.
In the most complex scientific experiment ever undertaken, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) will be switched on Wednesday, accelerating sub-atomic particles to nearly the speed of light before smashing them together.
"The LHC will increase the energy at which we can study particle interactions by a factor of four. According to present thinking, this should be enough to discover the Higgs particle." Hawking told BBC radio. He went on to say, "I think it will be more exiting if we don't find the Higgs. That will show something is wrong, and we need to think again. I have bet of $100 that we will not find the Higgs."
Physicists have long puzzled over how particles acquire mass. In 1964, a British physicist, Peter Higgs, came up with this idea; there must exist a background field that would act rather like a treacle.
The standard quip about the Higgs is that it is the "God Particle" because it is everywhere but remains frustratingly elusive. Hawkins said, "Their existence would be a key confirmation of string theory, and they could make up the mysterious dark matter that holds galaxies together." he told BBC.
So my question is this, what kind of a bet is a $100, especially for a man making the money he is and has made in the past? In fact, I bet he doesn't even tip at restaurants and such.
10 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeyI object strongly to the very name "god particle" because it sets the mind in a wrong direction. It has nothing to do with god, not a bit.
Stephen Hakkins has bet 100 dollars that a mega-experiment this week will not find an elusive particle seen as a holy grail of cosmic science.
In the most complex scientific experiment ever undertaken, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) will be switched on Wednesday, accelerating sub-atomic particles to nearly the speed of light before smashing them together. ...[text shortened]... and has made in the past? In fact, I bet he doesn't even tip at restaurants and such.
Yes, I know the minting of the "God Particle" because it is everywhere but remains frustratingly elusive. Why not call the particle for the "popes penis", we all knows it's there, but we don't understand its use?
This is not a critic directed to whodey.
10 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasIf you can live with the Big Bang, you can put up with the God particle.
I object strongly to the very name "god particle" because it sets the mind in a wrong direction. It has nothing to do with god, not a bit.
Yes, I know the minting of the "God Particle" because it is everywhere but remains frustratingly elusive. Why not call the particle for the "popes penis", we all knows it's there, but we don't understand its use?
This is not a critic directed to whodey.
10 Sep 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageThe Higg's particle has nothing to do with god, nor any religion, more than any other particle.
If you can live with the Big Bang, you can put up with the God particle.
..exept the tachyon, it doesn't exist, either.
You know the story behind the etymology of 'Big Bang', don't you?
10 Sep 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageYou were a bit unclear on that.
Obviously, hence my comment.
Yes, you're right. The very term "BigBang" was not created by the followers of the BigBang theory, but its opposers, more exactly the most anti of them all: Sir Fred Hoyle. He believed in the anti-religious Steady State theory, and fought for that.
When BigBang theory won after the observation of background readiation the christians cheered. The christians nowadays don't cheear, because they say that god created the universe, it didn't happen by itself.
Well, it did. No obesrvations suggest anything else.
Neither has the Higgs-particle anything to do with god.
11 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasOk then, for all you God phobic people out there we will begin calling it the "whodey" particle. As for all you whodey phobic people out there.....well....tough luck!! 😠
[b]I object strongly to the very name "god particle" because it sets the mind in a wrong direction. It has nothing to do with god, not a bit.
11 Sep 08
Originally posted by dannyUchihaYou are telling me we have to wait a month? Hawkins made it sound like we would have some results as of today. Geesh.
Actual tests will begin in about a month. Right now they started running the LHC, checked that everything was working properly, etc.
I can only hope he has his hundred dollars ready on hand for the next month instead of blowing it all on whatever it is he does.
11 Sep 08
Originally posted by whodeyHere is a piece about John Ellis, the British physicist directly involved with the big machine, nice article:
You are telling me we have to wait a month? Hawkins made it sound like we would have some results as of today. Geesh.
I can only hope he has his hundred dollars ready on hand for the next month instead of blowing it all on whatever it is he does.
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/10/1357334.aspx
11 Sep 08
3 edits
Originally posted by dannyUchihaAs if calling that theoretical particle by the stupid name "the God particle" wasn’t bad enough, the other day I heard the news media (in the UK) say that the hadron collider was about “searching for the meaning of life” -what a load of stupid hyped-up crap -why can’t the news just tell the truth?
If it was a "God particle", then no matter how potent the hadron collider is, we wouldn't be able to detect it. If we can detect it, then we shall say goodbye to that ridiculous name.
The truth is perfectly interesting and easy for the layperson to understand -the hadron collider is simply about finding out about the building blocks that make up our universe.
11 Sep 08
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonAnything for a story and a buck. How bout the BS that went on, law suites even, about how the collider was going to destroy the earth by making a black hole that eats up the planet? Especially when cosmic rays already have a million times the energy of the collider and hit the atmosphere all the time and we haven't been blown away yet🙂
"God particle", then no matter how potent the hadron collider
As if calling that theoretical particle by the stupid name "the God particle" wasn’t bad enough, the other day I heard the news media (in the UK) say that the hadron collider was about “searching for the meaning of life” -what a load of stupid hyped-up crap -why can’t the news just tel ...[text shortened]... on collider is simply about finding out about the building blocks that make up our universe.
11 Sep 08
2 edits
Originally posted by sonhouseYes, I know.
Anything for a story and a buck. How bout the BS that went on, law suites even, about how the collider was going to destroy the earth by making a black hole that eats up the planet? Especially when cosmic rays already have a million times the energy of the collider and hit the atmosphere all the time and we haven't been blown away yet🙂
It also said on the news that the scientists “plan to use the hadron collider to recreate the big bang!”
This got my mother worried and she said “this sounds very dangerous” (which it does) and then I reassured her that it was just an expression. This is yet another example of the news media trying to irresponsibly hype it up.