Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 15, 2024, 3:48 am

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
The conference isn't over yet, maybe something interesting still comes out...
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition

Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
Good luck!
Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
Is it really bad for physics, though? Doesn't it just mean that our current understanding is closer to reality? Or by bad for science, do you mean 'a lot of excitement just disappeared?'
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great

PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
(August 5, 2016 at 1:47 pm)Irrational Wrote:
(August 5, 2016 at 11:38 am)Bella Morte Wrote: So..I'm thinking...bad?

Yes, it means that any one of us could disappear into nonexistence at any moment, even the next second, if we're one of the extremely unlucky ones in this cosmos.

Good one
Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
(August 5, 2016 at 8:24 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: Is it really bad for physics, though? Doesn't it just mean that our current understanding is closer to reality? Or by bad for science, do you mean 'a lot of excitement just disappeared?'

I don't see how that follows. If a new particle was discovered, science would advance, there's no reason to celebrate that our current understanding appears to be closer to reality, when there's reason to believe it could be even closer.
Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
(August 5, 2016 at 4:07 pm)Alex K Wrote: Yes. Haha, no

let's take it step by step.

Go slowly.  Remember my age.
Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
(August 5, 2016 at 10:20 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: I don't see how that follows. If a new particle was discovered, science would advance, there's no reason to celebrate that our current understanding appears to be closer to reality, when there's reason to believe it could be even closer.

True, it only appears to be closer. My point is that I don't think it's a blow, it may only be a neutral discovery. This isn't a hindrance to the advancement of science, it just means it won't advance in this particular direction.

It must be a blow to certain physicists who really thought that that original data was more than an anomaly. But I don't think it's a blow to science in general.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great

PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
(August 6, 2016 at 12:51 am)SteelCurtain Wrote:
(August 5, 2016 at 10:20 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: I don't see how that follows. If a new particle was discovered, science would advance, there's no reason to celebrate that our current understanding appears to be closer to reality, when there's reason to believe it could be even closer.

True, it only appears to be closer. My point is that I don't think it's a blow, it may only be a neutral discovery. This isn't a hindrance to the advancement of science, it just means it won't advance in this particular direction.

It must be a blow to certain physicists who really thought that that original data was more than an anomaly. But I don't think it's a blow to science in general.

Yeah, I agree with that. Now I don't know why we were arguing. Tongue
Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
Were we?
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great

PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Reply
RE: First collisions at the LHC with unprecedented Energy! (Ask a particle physisicist)
In principle, you should be right... but here's the fear everyone has right now -

Before the Higgs particle was discovered, we knew not only that our understanding of nature was incomplete, but also that new phenomena, be it a Higga boson or something else taking its place, had to appear at the energy range which the LHC could probe - simply because the theory without the Higgs boson breaks down at a point that was within range of experiments, so anything would have been a discovery. This was informally called the "no lose theorem" for the LHC.

Now that they have found something that looks just like the Higgs boson, the theory is mathematically complete.

Now, there are several open questions left, most notably what is dark matter made of, and also, why is there matter but no antimatter. The big question is now - do these phenomena have answers that can be discovered in a man made lab like the LHC or are they so far removed that you'd need a collider the size of the moon to investigate them? There is no guarantee that nature is set up in a way that we can glimpse these things, unlike with the higgs. A new boson would have been a signal - new physical phenomena are indeed accessible to man! It would have cracked the window to these questions wide open. Now, we're back to the place where there might be no new discoveries in the forseeable future.

(August 6, 2016 at 12:51 am)SteelCurtain Wrote:
(August 5, 2016 at 10:20 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: I don't see how that follows. If a new particle was discovered, science would advance, there's no reason to celebrate that our current understanding appears to be closer to reality, when there's reason to believe it could be even closer.

True, it only appears to be closer. My point is that I don't think it's a blow, it may only be a neutral discovery. This isn't a hindrance to the advancement of science, it just means it won't advance in this particular direction.

It must be a blow to certain physicists who really thought that that original data was more than an anomaly. But I don't think it's a blow to science in general.
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition

Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Earth’s energy budget is out of balance Jehanne 5 787 August 20, 2021 at 2:09 pm
Last Post: popeyespappy
  Science Nerds: Could Jupiter's Magnetic Field be harvested for energy? vulcanlogician 28 3335 August 7, 2021 at 9:43 am
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Rethinking Dark Matter/Dark energy.... Brian37 11 2963 January 26, 2018 at 7:50 pm
Last Post: Jehanne
  LHC rainbow universe dyresand 9 2142 October 22, 2017 at 9:32 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  Are Photons the Particle Associatid with the CMB? Rhondazvous 5 1349 September 9, 2017 at 12:34 pm
Last Post: Rhondazvous
  Newest super-sensitive test failed to catch a Dark Matter particle. Why? theBorg 40 7119 August 21, 2016 at 2:13 pm
Last Post: Alex K
  Could this explian what Dark matter and Dark energy is? Blueyedlion 49 8434 June 13, 2016 at 10:28 am
Last Post: Jackalope
  Alleged Weasel heroically sacrifices himself to stop LHC Alex K 18 2024 May 6, 2016 at 3:05 pm
Last Post: dyresand
  LHC Weasel defense - play the exciting browser game Alex K 2 1145 May 4, 2016 at 10:09 am
Last Post: vorlon13
  Does the Law of Conservation of Matter/Energy Disallow Time Travel? Ari Sheffield 52 12210 March 24, 2016 at 5:04 am
Last Post: robvalue



Users browsing this thread: 17 Guest(s)