The discovery of the Higgs boson would only explain the origin of mass. It wouldn't explain the origin of the Big Bang and that's all the Church cares about. As long as physicists are nowhere near solving the mystery of the Big Bang, the Church would point to the divine.

origin of mass???

which leads to??

origin of universe la my friend... it is all interrelated.....

They had a malfunction in the LHC last year. There was a bad connection in one of the superconducting cables, which quickly heated up, and I can't remember exactly what happened now, but it involved a heck a lot of the magnets (very strong ones too, 5-8T iirc - note they might sound low but they provide an extremely uniform field) going out of alignment, and then they also went boom, causing a lot of damage). Took a year to fix, implement new safety systems, and hopefully low energy collisions will happen in the next 2-3 weeks.


No it isn't.


By church you probably mean the catholic church; not all (christian) churches, or religions are against this.
The discovery of the Higgs boson would be experimental confirmation that the Higgs mechanism for particles exists.

I just watch this documentary..... you guys might consider watching it....

http://www.tom365.com/movie_2004/html/6803...9823132429.html


p/s you need to DL the Ovod player in order to watch it


"scientist use the word "singularity" to hide our ignorance on creation of universe" Dr mitchio kaku

which mean, we always talk about singularity and this and that but know nothing of it... which is true....

we talk about god this and god that but know nothing about god...

---

Added on November 6, 2009, 9:06 amin the doc, the pope ask stephen to leave some secret of god to be kept....

This post has been edited by Awakened_Angel: Nov 6 2009, 09:06 AM

Actually, physicists use the word singularity to describe the Universe the instant before the Big Bang because the Universe then had zero volume and infinite density. Also, it's called a singularity because physicists really have no idea on the behavior and mechanics of the Universe at point time = 0.
And this has nothing to do with religion.
We physicists are agnostic basterds =)

it is an analogous concept that i use....

A cat is put in a box with 50% chance of the poison gas will be released within 2 minutes. If the gas releases, the cat die. If not, the cat alive. We wait for 10 minutes. After 10 minutes, without opening the box, is the cat alive or dead?

The answer is the cat is in half dead/half alive state.

Many people say this result is ridicules, as their brains have been long "trained/damaged" by the incomplete/incorrect frog view paradigm of the world. They say (Are you one of them?) the cat is either dead or alive, cannot be in half dead/half alive state.

This is the famous Schrodinger cat to explain the Quantum Mechanics characteristic. In subatomic level, the behavior of electron or other sub particles are purely random in nature. To predict where the electron is going to exite is meaningless. All we can do is to study the probability of it behaviors.

There are two branches of paradigms on how we perceive the world.

1) The "frog" view (Aristotelian paradigm)
The subjectively perceive of the world is "physically" real, and the mathematical language is merely an approximation.
Or

Maths/Science is just an approximation of how we view our real physical world

In our childhood (even in majority of university syllabus), we were taught to observe the world using "frog" view, that said, the truth is out there, our maths/sciences merely approx it.

Eg. Classical Newton mechanic, Gravity, Special/General theory of relativity.

2) The "bird" view (Platonic paradigm)

The mathematical structure is physical real, and all human language we use to describe it is merely an approximation for describing our subjective perceptions. Eg, the Schrodinger cat.
Or
How we view our world is just an approximation or merely a perception, not necessary real, maths/science equation covers all possible physically real scenarios.

When Plank, Neil Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrodinger proposed Quantum Mechanics, it revolutionized the way we perceive the world, that said, the "bird" view, how we perceive the world is just a perception, a probability, not necessary real. What is real is we could express mathematically about the behaviour of subatomic particles using forier, laplace or matrix functions.

This is where Einstein did not agree with, as he mentioned God doesn't play dice. For him, universe is deterministic while quantum mechanic suggests that it is free willing.

If Theory Of Everything (Quantum Mechanic, Gravity, Strong force, Weak force) (TOE) has been successfully derived, it shows us that the equation is "real" and it represents all possible outcome of reality. Reality is no longer like what we perceive as it could be misleading. The impacts:

- We would have different view in the context of free will or determinism. In fact, it already influences our view now
- It challenges our religion view of the deterministic universe
- Our education would be leaning more towards bird view, rather that the restricted frog view

One thing for sure is human being have tendency of throwing away any new ideas that contradicts with what they learned/hold for a very long time "even though the new ideas is the correct/better one". The old/wrong ideas that has been implanted way long ago will stubbornly stay forever.

Sad, isn't it.

This post has been edited by nice.rider: Dec 1 2009, 06:29 PM

Lately had been studying on anti-matter. Long time never read on the string theories anymore, as I feel it is not simple enough yet to be complete as the theory of everything.

Not really, Heisenberg postulated that "measurement" or "observation" would influence the final outcome to become "less accurate"

The principle you're generally looking for is the GIT, or Godel's Incompleteness Theorem.

I honestly don't think that Godel's Incompleteness Theorems actually apply to these things (well, they do, because most, if not all of physics rely on the Peano axioms for natural numbers)

I think he's talking about if a GUT/TOE can actually be found, would this mean that we'd be able to predict every single thing that will happen next? (determinism)

This post has been edited by bgeh: Dec 16 2009, 02:02 AM

thread ressurection:

it seemed that special relativity/standard model might need to be modified

neutrinos are not what we think them to be