Higgs boson particle

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Digi
Apparently it has been discovered:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/scientists-unveil-proof-god-particle-165431909.html

The quotes from the scientists are appropriately reserved, but with the reputations and funding that are on the line with this sort of stuff, the evidence must clearly be strong enough to warrant general release.

I feel this is somewhat akin to black holes - they were theorized before they were discovered. It's classic induction (or deduction? I always get the two confused)...based on what we know, something of a certain nature must also exist.

And the particle accelerator in the picture look so happy. He's like "Hey guys! I found it!"

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Digi

I feel this is somewhat akin to black holes - they were theorized before they were discovered. It's classic induction (or deduction? I always get the two confused)...based on what we know, something of a certain nature must also exist.

It's induction. Deduction only occurs when a sound, valid argument cannot fail to reach a true result by virtue of basic logic.

My Ethics Professor explained it to me with the 'Socrates is a man, all men are mortal, ergo Socrates is mortal' example.

Colossus-Big C
what does it do?

Lestov16
It's more or less The Force

Shakyamunison
Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
what does it do?

It creates a field that permeates all space. When a partial moves through this field it gains mass.

Robtard
"Scientist" messing round where they shouldn't be messing. Could destroy reality; yet they foolishly proceed ahead like blind children into a forest filled with wolves and pedos and pedo-wolves.

Symmetric Chaos
As admittedly awesome as this is I often wonder what other disciplines could do if they were given "several billion dollars" and ninety squares miles to build research laboratories.

In fact that funding is why they're not reporting a discovery yet. Not for political reasons but because their machines can be so very precise. Physics has refined its technology so much that it can get more certain than the "999,999 in a 1,000,000" odds of being right they have right now.

Digi
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
As admittedly awesome as this is I often wonder what other disciplines could do if they were given "several billion dollars" and ninety squares miles to build research laboratories.

I feel like, long-term, this kind of research is as potentially beneficial as any. It's easy to place more importance on immediate concerns, and not those we won't be alive to see come to fruition. But it's not like useful stuff hasn't come from studying physics before.

I'd also put this in line behind many, many other endeavors that I feel are wasted money. If I made a budgetary chopping block for the planet, things like the LHC would be relatively safe.

jalek moye
Originally posted by Digi
I feel like, long-term, this kind of research is as potentially beneficial as any. It's easy to place more importance on immediate concerns, and not those we won't be alive to see come to fruition. But it's not like useful stuff hasn't come from studying physics before.

I'd also put this in line behind many, many other endeavors that I feel are wasted money. If I made a budgetary chopping block for the planet, things like the LHC would be relatively safe.

Curious about that view. What do you think useful may come from them beyond simply having more proof for a theory?

I myself no very little about this but am curious about what beneficial effect you see.

Digi
Originally posted by jalek moye
Curious about that view. What do you think useful may come from them beyond simply having more proof for a theory?

I myself no very little about this but am curious about what beneficial effect you see.

I have no idea. And I wouldn't even want to speculate due to not having enough knowledge.

But, speaking generally, knowledge of the universe we exist in can't be a bad thing. And while it's true that some findings are purely academic right now, there's a lot that recent findings have done. Here's a blurb from a wiki article on quantum mechanics, for example:
A great deal of modern technological inventions operate at a scale where quantum effects are significant. Examples include the laser, the transistor (and thus the microchip), the electron microscope, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The study of semiconductors led to the invention of the diode and the transistor, which are indispensable parts of modern electronics systems and devices.

And do you imagine any layman imagining these applications 50-100 years ago when quantum mechanics were just beginning to take root in the public?

So this may indeed end up being purely academic. But a LOT of other stuff that was, initially, purely academic became very useful, from Aristotle to Hawking and beyond. Or maybe this bit of information won't prove useful, but will in 200 years contribute to a theory that will. We don't know, but it's exciting and gives us more potential. And, worst case scenario, we know more about our universe. It's a win/win.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Digi
I feel like, long-term, this kind of research is as potentially beneficial as any. It's easy to place more importance on immediate concerns, and not those we won't be alive to see come to fruition. But it's not like useful stuff hasn't come from studying physics before.

I'd also put this in line behind many, many other endeavors that I feel are wasted money. If I made a budgetary chopping block for the planet, things like the LHC would be relatively safe.

I don't think the LHC is wasted money, suffering from diminish returns for sure but not a waste. I just think its a shame that particle physics is the only area of research that gets this kind of overwhelming support.

Stanley Milgram was one of the most earnest scientists I've ever come across. He developed a dozen versions of his key experiment and tried them on various group in the US and flew to Europe to trying them on corresponding groups there before running put of money in Germany (I think) and having to return home. Particle physics is able to reach metaphorical Asias, Africas, and South Americas for their work.

The LHC doesn't get crazy accurate results because their math is so awesome. It runs the same experiment millions of times in a row.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
As admittedly awesome as this is I often wonder what other disciplines could do if they were given "several billion dollars" and ninety squares miles to build research laboratories.

I agree with your line of thinking--the FSU writing program should get several billion dollars and ninety square miles to build a replica of Walden Pond along with a facsimile of William Wordsworth's old property in the Lake District, the forest in Russia where Tolstoy used to walk through to compose his thoughts, the various prisons where Miguel Hernandez wasted away, and the Roman villa where John Keats died.

dadudemon
So, a Higgs-Boson walks into a church....


Then the priest immediately stops it and says, "we don't allow your kind in here!" The Higgs-Boson retorts, "but without me, how can you have Mass?!!?!?!"

Digi
Originally posted by Omega Vision
I agree with your line of thinking--the FSU writing program should get several billion dollars and ninety square miles to build a replica of Walden Pond along with a facsimile of William Wordsworth's old property in the Lake District, the forest in Russia where Tolstoy used to walk through to compose his thoughts, the various prisons where Miguel Hernandez wasted away, and the Roman villa where John Keats died.

This would actually be awesome. Imagine the media attention they'd receive, and as a result the influx of world-class instructors and students.

I think Sym was talking more about other sciences though. Realistically, no English program needs billions of dollars for anything.

Ascendancy
Originally posted by dadudemon
So, a Higgs-Boson walks into a church....


Then the priest immediately stops it and says, "we don't allow your kind in here!" The Higgs-Boson retorts, "but without me, how can you have Mass?!!?!?!"
eek!

Morridini
Originally posted by Robtard
"Scientist" messing round where they shouldn't be messing. Could destroy reality; yet they foolishly proceed ahead like blind children into a forest filled with wolves and pedos and pedo-wolves.

Everything in this quote is false, LHC can in no way destroy reality.

Also for those wondering if CERN was worth the time and money...internet.

dadudemon
WTF is it with the internet trolling from idiot atheists telling the "Christf*gs" that it's all over now that the God Particle was discovered?

It's as if they don't even understand what function in quantum physics that the Higgs Boson was to have and instead fixate on the word "god" in "God Particle" and think it somehow means "science has disproven a need for God".

That's ALMOST as annoying as the theists saying that this discovery PROVES God's existence!


Why can't we just enjoy the "potential" discovery for it's own sake and not inject religion or anti-religion?



/diatribe

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Digi
This would actually be awesome. Imagine the media attention they'd receive, and as a result the influx of world-class instructors and students.

I think Sym was talking more about other sciences though. Realistically, no English program needs billions of dollars for anything.
What about a program for cancer research?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by dadudemon
Why can't we just enjoy the "potential" discovery for it's own sake and not inject religion or anti-religion?

You're just angry we disproved God.

Morridini
Curious, how do anyone reach the conclusion that this disproves God?

Digi
Originally posted by dadudemon
WTF is it with the internet trolling from idiot atheists telling the "Christf*gs" that it's all over now that the God Particle was discovered?

It's as if they don't even understand what function in quantum physics that the Higgs Boson was to have and instead fixate on the word "god" in "God Particle" and think it somehow means "science has disproven a need for God".

That's ALMOST as annoying as the theists saying that this discovery PROVES God's existence!


Why can't we just enjoy the "potential" discovery for it's own sake and not inject religion or anti-religion?



/diatribe

Where is anyone saying this in the scientific community, instead of just internet trolls? I mean, really, are we going to care about any claims made by laymen. The media is responsible for the "God particle" label more so than any scientist anyway. Your gripe would be legitimate if the claims were coming from a reputable source.

Because I'm sure somewhere, as you mentioned, there's a Christian minister going on about how the atheist claims of the God particle mean nothing to faith, and he's just as uninformed about the situation. But neither is worth listening to. Only difference, as I see it, is that internet armchair atheists don't speak for the scientific community. But priests, who are just as ill-equipped to comment on this discovery, do speak for large sections of the religious community.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Morridini
Curious, how do anyone reach the conclusion that this disproves God?

God requires faith.
Evidence of God's existence disproves him.
The Higgs Boson is made of God.
Thus we found God.
Thus God does not exist.

Digi
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
God requires faith.
Evidence of God's existence disproves him.
The Higgs Boson is made of God.
Thus we found God.
Thus God does not exist.

Not sure this really holds up. But...

More generally, we're pretty damn close even before this to being able to say the universe definitely needs no outside creator to be in existence and function as it does. While this isn't a blow to faith in general, it's a sharp blow to many of the claims made by religions and their holy texts. We once had to appeal to the unknown to explain large aspects of our existence. We no longer need to do so.

This is just a small step in that process.

Morridini
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
God requires faith.
Evidence of God's existence disproves him.
The Higgs Boson is made of God.
Thus we found God.
Thus God does not exist.

Point 2 and 3 are false.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Morridini
Point 2 and 3 are false.

I don't make the rules.

Symmetric Chaos
Oh, it's now official by the way. CERN found results that show "a particle consistent with the Higgs Boson".

Digi
Originally posted by Morridini
Point 2 and 3 are false.

They're contentious, not necessarily false. I don't agree with Sym's overall statements either, though I reframed them in perhaps more acceptable terms, but we have to be cautious in our statements.

Omega Vision
The article discussing this on the New York Times' home page--an article with the tagline "Discovery of Particle Could Redefine Physical World" is the second article...


...after an article with the tagline "Midwest’s Heat Dashes Hopes for a Bumper Crop of Corn"

Digi
Originally posted by Omega Vision
The article discussing this on the New York Times' home page--an article with the tagline "Discovery of Particle Could Redefine Physical World" is the second article...


...after an article with the tagline "Midwest’s Heat Dashes Hopes for a Bumper Crop of Corn"

At least it's second. Some won't give it that kind of billing.

Morridini
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Oh, it's now official by the way. CERN found results that show "a particle consistent with the Higgs Boson".

Yeah, that's what they said from the very beginning (or at least from 40 minutes into the talk).

Mindship
Yay for the higon.



*chuckles* '...how can you have Mass...'

Endless Mike
EDIT: Dammit ninja'd

Also are Symmetric Chaos and I the only two here who have read HGTTG? roll eyes (sarcastic)

Ascendancy
All the talk about it doing anything for theism is ridiculous. Nothing that comes out of this will prove that there is or isn't a God, thousands of gods, or nothing at all but the matter that is the Universe.

Why can't people just enjoy science for science's sake anymore? =p

Digi
Originally posted by Ascendancy
All the talk about it doing anything for theism is ridiculous. Nothing that comes out of this will prove that there is or isn't a God, thousands of gods, or nothing at all but the matter that is the Universe.

God, no. Religion, yes in many cases.

Originally posted by Ascendancy
Why can't people just enjoy science for science's sake anymore? =p

This seems to be a bit of a red herring. Outside of, say, idiotic facebook news feeds, I haven't seen anyone associated with this discovery try to make any claims about theism.

Hell, Fox News' coverage of this mentions that the physicists involved don't refer to it as a God particle.

...making something out of nothing. No one who matters in this discussion is doing anything but enjoying the science.

parenthesis
2 million years of evolution, and we've finally completed level 1!

Digi
Originally posted by parenthesis
2 million years of evolution, and we've finally completed level 1!

I don't know what you mean by this, but it sounds oversimplified and flippant.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Digi
Where is anyone saying this in the scientific community, instead of just internet trolls? I mean, really, are we going to care about any claims made by laymen. The media is responsible for the "God particle" label more so than any scientist anyway. Your gripe would be legitimate if the claims were coming from a reputable source.

My gripe is perfectly legit.

I think you missed the part in my post where I said:

"WTF is it with the internet trolling from idiot atheists...."

Originally posted by Digi
Because I'm sure somewhere, as you mentioned, there's a Christian minister going on about how the atheist claims of the God particle mean nothing to faith, and he's just as uninformed about the situation. But neither is worth listening to. Only difference, as I see it, is that internet armchair atheists don't speak for the scientific community. But priests, who are just as ill-equipped to comment on this discovery, do speak for large sections of the religious community.

I do not see how the "scientific community" has anything to do with my point, whatsoever. My statement was not about the viewpoint of the scientific community: it was about idiots who call themselves "atheists" and rage on the internet at the "Christf*gs".


Originally posted by Digi
More generally, we're pretty damn close even before this to being able to say the universe definitely needs no outside creator to be in existence and function as it does.

I have a very large problem with that notion. All it is doing is moving the problem to a situation opposte of "God of the Gaps"...but still shifting it to a 'gap' explanation.

I do not know if there is a label for it so I will make one: "The godless of the gaps."


Those ideas simply choose to ignore the fact that those "rules" that created the universe on their own, exist.



Originally posted by Digi
While this isn't a blow to faith in general, it's a sharp blow to many of the claims made by religions and their holy texts. We once had to appeal to the unknown to explain large aspects of our existence. We no longer need to do so.

This is just a small step in that process.


I agree, here.


Originally posted by Ascendancy
Why can't people just enjoy science for science's sake anymore? =p

lol

Yes. That was my exact argument.


Originally posted by Digi
I don't know what you mean by this, but it sounds oversimplified and flippant.

I think it was a reference to the first hominid species showing up around that time and it took 2 million years to reach where we are. Then...we "discovered" the Higgs Boson.


I do not think it was a statement about evolution only taking 2 years. I guess you thought was trying to say something akin to "medium-aged earth creationists"? lol

jaden101
Originally posted by jalek moye
Curious about that view. What do you think useful may come from them beyond simply having more proof for a theory?

I myself no very little about this but am curious about what beneficial effect you see.

Think about radiation...It took almost 50 between discovery and application and it's something that is still evolving now.

Theoretical applications of being able to manipulate Higgs-Boson is that you would be able to change the interia of products. Changing the mass of matter would be staggering.

I'm not all that good at physics and so the eventual harnessing, manipulation and application of HB is way out of my understanding.

jaden101
Originally posted by Digi


I think Sym was talking more about other sciences though. Realistically, no English program needs billions of dollars for anything.

I think it would cost billions in order to make sure no one in the world ever mixed up "there", "they're" and "their" again.

Or "of" and "have"

Or any of those stupid mistakes that make me want to kill people.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by jaden101

Or "of" and "have"

An example of this kind of glaring mistake? Is it a British thing?

srankmissingnin
I read that they still need to confirm that this new particle has a spin value of 0 before we official confirm that it is the Higgs Boson. Probably is though, so hurrah for the completion of Standard Model of particle physics.

jaden101
Originally posted by Omega Vision
An example of this kind of glaring mistake? Is it a British thing?

Seen it hundreds of times on this forum...People thinking that when you physically say the contraction of "should have" into "should've" it sounds like "should of" so that's what they type...Idiots.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by jaden101
Seen it hundreds of times on this forum...People thinking that when you physically say the contraction of "should have" into "should've" it sounds like "should of" so that's what they type...Idiots.
Ahh. Yeah, that is annoying.

Your/you're is also vexing. Imagine someone warning someone with "watch you are back"

And "I could care less" in place of "I couldn't care less"

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
I read that they still need to confirm that this new particle has a spin value of 0 before we official confirm that it is the Higgs Boson. Probably is though, so hurrah for the completion of Standard Model of particle physics.

They'll probably want to confirm that it has the right charge and parity and all kinds of other vastly more obscure things that the Standard Model predicts about it before they're satisfied.

Lord Lucien
Originally posted by Omega Vision
And "I could care less" in place of "I couldn't care less" This one always irked me. The contractions I can chalk up to typos and carelessness, but that phrase was just poorly thought out.

Omega Vision
Realistically though, the only way you could stamp out those kinds of mistakes would be to institute totalitarianesque reeducation camps.

And even well-educated people occasionally have slips--I catch myself speaking solecisms all the time (though I usually self-correct...aloud...it confuses some people when they see me doing it)

dadudemon
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
They'll probably want to confirm that it has the right charge and parity and all kinds of other vastly more obscure things that the Standard Model predicts about it before they're satisfied.

It is supposed to have no color charge, as well.

As I understand the results, it was surmised that it is the "particle they were looking for" due to how massive it is at at the energy state they were looking. So the properties do go largely unconfirmed.

But, based on where they found their results, they are pretty dang sure (apparently).





Eat all the cupcakes because...


THE HIGGS BOSON IS ITS OWN ANTIPARTICLE!

Originally posted by Omega Vision
And even well-educated people occasionally have slips--I catch myself speaking solecisms all the time (though I usually self-correct...aloud...it confuses some people when they see me doing it)

I do this, as well. I can write a 10 page paper in a few hours with no mistakes but can't have an IM convo longer than 10 minutes without a mistake. Something about the internet makes them stupid.

Astner
Originally posted by Morridini
Curious, how do anyone reach the conclusion that this disproves God?
To call it the God particle is a bit misleading. It doesn't disprove God.

The Higgs particle is a component in the Higgs' field which is a theorized field in the standard model that through various Lie couplings — depending on the particle — attributes the particles with mass. It's all very basic, and I'll be glad to answer any question you have regarding the matter. Because I like flexing my intelligence.

But it would be comfortable if there was experimental verification of it. If we've actually discovered it then I'm curious as to the method employed, I'm looking forward for the article.

Bardock42
Originally posted by jaden101
I think it would cost billions in order to make sure no one in the world ever mixed up "there", "they're" and "their" again.

Or "of" and "have"

Or any of those stupid mistakes that make me want to kill people. Originally posted by Omega Vision
Ahh. Yeah, that is annoying.

Your/you're is also vexing. Imagine someone warning someone with "watch you are back"

And "I could care less" in place of "I couldn't care less"

Your both really close minded. I could care less weather that offends you, you should of some decency! Their is just a lack of respect in your posts.


Put one in for good measure.

Morridini
I know all that, I was just perplexed how anyone would say that discovering a Higgs boson would disprove God...

Bardock42
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
God requires faith.
Evidence of God's existence disproves him.
The Higgs Boson is made of God.
Thus we found God.
Thus God does not exist.

Lol, the Babel Fish argument, I like it!

Astner
Originally posted by Morridini
I know all that, I was just perplexed how anyone would say that discovering a Higgs boson would disprove God...
This is Symmetric Chaos we're talking about, even when he's not intentionally fooling around what he says should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Morridini
Ahh, I didn't know that that was a factor, I don't usually venture outside the Video Game section of this forum (only came here as it is fun seeing how non-physicsists reacted to this).

Astner
Originally posted by Bardock42
Your both really close minded. I could care less weather that offends you, you should of some decency! Their is just a lack of respect in your posts.

Put one in for good measure.
This reminds me of when someone got annoyed with me when I typed: "who're" instead of "who are" because it reminded him of "whore".

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by dadudemon
It is supposed to have no color charge, as well.

As I understand the results, it was surmised that it is the "particle they were looking for" due to how massive it is at at the energy state they were looking. So the properties do go largely unconfirmed.

But, based on where they found their results, they are pretty dang sure (apparently).

Eat all the cupcakes because...

THE HIGGS BOSON IS ITS OWN ANTIPARTICLE!

CERN says they know what they found is a boson as well which narrows things down a lot. A few physicists have said that there are dozens of candidates that are bosons with roughly that mass but the Higgs is considered the most likely due to its pedigree.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
CERN says they know what they found is a boson as well which narrows things down a lot. A few physicists have said that there are dozens of candidates that are bosons with roughly that mass but the Higgs is considered the most likely due to its pedigree.

It was the the energy required and 122? (I have seen 133) proton masses properties that I was talking about.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by dadudemon
It was the the energy required and 122? (I have seen 133) proton masses properties that I was talking about.

Oops, there was supposed to be an "also" in there. With the mass and the type of particle they were able to narrow it down to the Standard Higgs, several Higgs variants, or a few fringe ideas.

Its huge and its the right kind of particle so they're fairly confident. It has to be 133 since its 125 GeV and protons has a mass of less than 1GeV. In looking this up I found that the particle the found is SEVEN times as massive as a water molecule. That's insane.

Astner
I was curious what you two meant with 122 and 133, then I Googled it and found out that it Wikipedia describes the energy of these particles in proton masses of those numbers.

If you have any actual questions regarding the standard model of quantum field theory, then I'm your guy.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Astner
I was curious what you two meant with 122 and 133, then I Googled it and found out that it Wikipedia describes the energy of these particles in proton masses of those numbers.

If you have any actual questions regarding the standard model of quantum field theory, then I'm your guy.

You're my guy regardless of that. hug

Astner
Originally posted by Bardock42
You're my guy regardless of that. hug
Nephthys is pissing me off in the Naruto discussion thread and I'm taking out my frustration on these people.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Astner
I was curious what you two meant with 122 and 133, then I Googled it and found out that it Wikipedia describes the energy of these particles in proton masses of those numbers.


Well, no. I got the idea from various ideas on the Higgs Boson from 5-10 years ago because I am outdated.


http://www.news.wisc.edu/5316

I then read that it was 133, apparently, not 122. So I edited my post to include that just in case.

Originally posted by Astner
If you have any actual questions regarding the standard model of quantum field theory, then I'm your guy.


I do not believe I do. But I will ask if I have something come up.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Bardock42
Your both really close minded. I could care less weather that offends you, you should of some decency! Their is just a lack of respect in your posts.


Put one in for good measure.
Du ist schlecht. stick out tongue

manikunis
Higs boson was derived from the name of an British and an Indian scientist.

Morridini
Originally posted by manikunis
Higs boson was derived from the name of an British and an Indian scientist.

Or from the physicist named Peter Higgs who predicted the existence of the Higgs boson. Alsom what a random comment, did anyone question the name earlier?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Morridini
Or from the physicist named Peter Higgs who predicted the existence of the Higgs boson.

Peter Higgs is a British scientist. Doctor Bose, after whom the bosons are named, was from India.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Peter Higgs is a British scientist. Doctor Bose, after whom the bosons are named, was from India.

So, what you are trying to say is, basically, that manikunis was completely right, yes?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Bardock42
So, what you are trying to say is, basically, that manikunis was completely right, yes?

Did I say that? Point to where I said that.

Grr! blarg!

RAGEQUIT mad

parenthesis
I heard this particle proved God.




Not really.

TheGodKiller
*Bump*
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
God requires faith.
Evidence of God's existence disproves him.
The Higgs Boson is made of God.
Thus we found God.
Thus God does not exist.
thumb upthumb upthumb upthumb up

This is exactly the sort of whack-a-doo-doo logic that William Lane Craig applies in all of his debates with atheist scholars. Someone needs to use this sort of reasoning against him the next time he debates.

crystalmaden
Thanks for sharing this post.

focus4chumps
not sure if bot or nitwit

Tzeentch._
its a bot

dadudemon
Originally posted by focus4chumps
not sure if bot or nitwit

Not sure if nitwit, or naive.

Darth Jello
It's not Halloween, it's the NIGHT OF THE LIVING THREADS!

dadudemon
Originally posted by Darth Jello
It's not Halloween, it's the NIGHT OF THE LIVING THREADS!

laughing

I lose the game.

focus4chumps
Originally posted by dadudemon
Not sure if nitwit, or naive.

im fairly certain it was not a bot. spammer, yes. bot, no.

Mindship
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/15/two-higgs-bosons_n_2302897.html?ref=topbar

Curiouser and curiouser.

Symmetric Chaos
While I'm not a particle physicist I wouldn't like data with 95% CIs that overlap either.

Mindship
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
While I'm not a particle physicist I wouldn't like data with 95% CIs that overlap either. They're being cautious, with good reason. Yet, the anomaly persists...

Could be nothing.

I remember all those out-of-left-field surprise discoveries when we first sent robot probes to the outer planets and their moons. More questions than answers. Science is cool like that.

Symmetric Chaos
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/12/two-faced-higgs/

"Heinemann said the four lepton channel has only analyzed about 10 Higgs bosons and the two photon channel about 500 Higgs."

That would do it. However, so far more data has only shrunk the margins of error.

It is weird, by the way, to see physicists working with 95% CIs (and 68% CIs) when their equipment lets them collect enough data to have 99% on certain things. I guess these signals appear very rarely.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.