Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Existence of Higgs Boson downgraded from 'honest politician' to 'female orgasm'   (bbc.co.uk ) divider line
    More: Sad, colliders, nuclear research, electron volts, particle physics, charged particles, bosons, new physics, research directors  
•       •       •

8276 clicks; posted to Geek » on 22 Aug 2011 at 10:45 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



74 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-08-22 10:49:51 AM  
"Discoveries are almost assured within the next 12 months. If the Higgs exists, the LHC experiments will soon find it. If it does not, its absence will point the way to new physics."

Neither of these outcomes is deserving of the "sad" tag.
 
2011-08-22 10:55:41 AM  
I don't know why the absence of the higgs could be considered sad, from a physics perspective. it means that there's more to physics than the standard model + GR, however you combine them. i think the saddest thing would be if the LHC found 1 higgs (some theories predict a few flavors -- not flavor in the physics context -- of higgs) right in the precise mass range where people expect it, and that's it.
 
2011-08-22 10:56:58 AM  
So, we need to attach a bunch of dildos and vibrators to the LHC in order to find it?
 
2011-08-22 10:58:26 AM  

Tranquil Hegemony: "Discoveries are almost assured within the next 12 months. If the Higgs exists, the LHC experiments will soon find it. If it does not, its absence will point the way to new physics."

Neither of these outcomes is deserving of the "sad" tag.


True. That's the awesome thing about science - disproving something is just as awesome as proving something.
 
2011-08-22 11:03:21 AM  
Headline makes it sound like it's more likely, can'tgetheroffmitter.
 
2011-08-22 11:04:33 AM  
But, but, but, science can't be wrong. It's made of science.
 
2011-08-22 11:06:22 AM  

chard: I don't know why the absence of the higgs could be considered sad, from a physics perspective. it means that there's more to physics than the standard model + GR, however you combine them. i think the saddest thing would be if the LHC found 1 higgs (some theories predict a few flavors -- not flavor in the physics context -- of higgs) right in the precise mass range where people expect it, and that's it.


So this means warp drives are still a possibility? Zefren Cochran must be ecstatic.
 
2011-08-22 11:07:45 AM  
So it definitely exists?
 
2011-08-22 11:09:13 AM  

Tranquil Hegemony: "Discoveries are almost assured within the next 12 months. If the Higgs exists, the LHC experiments will soon find it. If it does not, its absence will point the way to new physics."

Neither of these outcomes is deserving of the "sad" tag.


Or any media attention.

Right now the news is "We're still collecting data to analyze for several years like we said we would." That's not news that's olds.

WHEN something is discovered they should report it. We don't need status updates until something CHANGES.
 
2011-08-22 11:10:38 AM  
There are 4 types of female orgasm

the religious: where she moans OH GOD, OH GOD, OH GOD
the positive: where she moans OH YES, OH YES, OH YES
the negative: where she moans OH NO, OH NO, OH NO
the fake: where she moans OH insert your name here
 
2011-08-22 11:12:56 AM  

mcreadyblue: Zefren Cochran


Not gonna bite... not gonna bite...
 
2011-08-22 11:15:37 AM  

PC LOAD LETTER: So it definitely exists?


Yeah, jeeze. I came in here to say this. I'm a female and I have orgasms all the time. I guess subby should get out of the basement a bit more often.
 
2011-08-22 11:15:58 AM  
Who is "Higgs Boson"?

...RTFA...

Laughs at subby's headline.

/Sounds like a name for lager...
//I'll have a pint of Higgs, mate...
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2011-08-22 11:17:50 AM  
silvervial

According to the article, you must be a fatty or anorexic. ("Physicists will now search for the boson at lower and higher energy ranges.")
 
2011-08-22 11:19:22 AM  

silvervial: PC LOAD LETTER: So it definitely exists?

Yeah, jeeze. I came in here to say this. I'm a female and I have orgasms all the time. I guess subby should get out of the basement a bit more often.


Go on..
 
2011-08-22 11:21:50 AM  
subby, you're doing it wrong.
 
2011-08-22 11:27:21 AM  
(The) God (particle) is dead - Nietzsche.
 
2011-08-22 11:30:52 AM  

silvervial: PC LOAD LETTER: So it definitely exists?

Yeah, jeeze. I came in here to say this. I'm a female and I have orgasms all the time. I guess subby should get out of the basement a bit more often.


You came in here? Watch your step, that stuff is slippery.
 
2011-08-22 11:41:11 AM  

The My Little Pony Killer: Headline makes it sound like it's more likely, can'tgetheroffmitter.


Yeah, I'd have reversed the order on that one. The joke would have been preserved, and let's face it, not much of anything should count as less likely than an Honest Politician.
 
2011-08-22 11:41:44 AM  
Last night I saw upon the stair
A Higgs boson that wasn't there
It wasn't there again today
Oh, how I wish it'd go away
 
2011-08-22 11:44:21 AM  

Electric_Banana: silvervial: PC LOAD LETTER: So it definitely exists?

Yeah, jeeze. I came in here to say this. I'm a female and I have orgasms all the time. I guess subby should get out of the basement a bit more often.

You came in here? Watch your step, that stuff is slippery.


I'm not a squirter.
 
2011-08-22 11:47:15 AM  
Higgs boson?

fc01.deviantart.net
 
2011-08-22 11:49:15 AM  
This isn't bad. If the Higgs Boson exists, it enhances our knowledge of physics. If the Higgs Boson doesn't exist, it enhances our knowledge of physics. shiat, if it doesn't exist, that'd probably give researchers more information than if it did. The only "sad" thing would be if we were unable to find out any more information about the particle's existence.

Oh, and if Subby has never given a woman a female orgasm, Subby's doing it wrong.
/is a woman
 
2011-08-22 11:52:19 AM  

silvervial: I'm not a squirter.


Challenge accepted.

/ riiight
 
2011-08-22 11:53:26 AM  
So they have been dimming the lights across Europe to prove something doesn't exist?
 
2011-08-22 11:55:25 AM  

Need_MindBleach: Oh, and if Subby has never given a woman a female orgasm, Subby's doing it wrong.
/is a woman


It would be a neater trick to give a woman a male orgasm...

/just funnin' wit'cha
 
2011-08-22 12:07:38 PM  

JNowe: But, but, but, science can't be wrong. It's made of science.


The stupid. It burns.
 
2011-08-22 12:12:02 PM  
To me, Higgs Boson is similar to the "Aether" model considered in the late 19th century.
It's an attempted explanation for a Universal aspect...one that has difficulties and is unlikely to occur.

There is another reason for mass than some particle.
And smashing things apart won't likely show it...it will find other things...but not that.

My notion is that it is directly related as to why Mass warps the dimensional structure.
If you can figure why mass warps it creating the gravitational effect, then you'll likely find what is enabling mass.
 
2011-08-22 12:14:10 PM  
BNCW 1, LHC Scientists 0
I predicted this!

/My horn, I'm tooting it.
 
2011-08-22 12:16:39 PM  
rogue49

Get out of my mind! Your reasoning is exactly what I was thinking.
 
2011-08-22 12:29:07 PM  
Is Higgs Boson, DB Cooper's partner?
 
2011-08-22 12:33:38 PM  
Uh, I thought the female orgasm thing was a joke? Aren't most headlines tongue-in-cheek here, anyway?
 
2011-08-22 12:34:07 PM  

chard: I don't know why the absence of the higgs could be considered sad, from a physics perspective. it means that there's more to physics than the standard model + GR, however you combine them. i think the saddest thing would be if the LHC found 1 higgs (some theories predict a few flavors -- not flavor in the physics context -- of higgs) right in the precise mass range where people expect it, and that's it.


Waiting for the formulation of the Sarumpaet Rules.

/ obscure?
 
2011-08-22 12:37:54 PM  

silvervial: Electric_Banana: silvervial: PC LOAD LETTER: So it definitely exists?

Yeah, jeeze. I came in here to say this. I'm a female and I have orgasms all the time. I guess subby should get out of the basement a bit more often.

You came in here? Watch your step, that stuff is slippery.

I'm not a squirter.


Pics or it isn't true!

/on either statement you made
 
2011-08-22 12:38:06 PM  

Nintenfreak: Uh, I thought the female orgasm thing was a joke? Aren't most headlines tongue-in-cheek here, anyway?


You could be doing it very wrong, or very right, if that's you're thing.
 
2011-08-22 01:05:28 PM  
Beautiful picture.
 
2011-08-22 01:11:06 PM  

JNowe: But, but, but, science can't be wrong. It's made of science.


Don't know if sarcastic or just stupid.
 
2011-08-22 01:32:09 PM  

meat0918: Nintenfreak: Uh, I thought the female orgasm thing was a joke? Aren't most headlines tongue-in-cheek here, anyway?

You could be doing it very wrong, or very right, if that's you're thing.


Not exactly what I meant, but your post is brilliant.
 
2011-08-22 01:36:58 PM  

rogue49: My notion is that it is directly related as to why Mass warps the dimensional structure.


Mass doesn't warp "the dimensional structure"- there is no such thing. Mass alters the relationships between events. Huge difference.
 
2011-08-22 01:54:13 PM  

t3knomanser: rogue49: My notion is that it is directly related as to why Mass warps the dimensional structure.

Mass doesn't warp "the dimensional structure"- there is no such thing. Mass alters the relationships between events. Huge difference.


Uh, sir.
As conceptualized by Einstein in his General Theory of Relativity
and most recently proven to 10,000x more accurately than before.
Mass warps SpaceTime (or as I call it, the dimensional structure, because I believe there is more to it)
This warping of SpaceTime pushes objects away from the warps wave, and likely into a "well"
This effect is what we call Gravity. (a sensation we humans detect more in a spatial context than time)

BTW, it ALSO alters relationships between events, which can be considered as Time (the measurement of action)

/look it up sometime...you might get a hoot out of it.
 
2011-08-22 02:06:03 PM  

rogue49: To me, Higgs Boson is similar to the "Aether" model considered in the late 19th century.
It's an attempted explanation for a Universal aspect...one that has difficulties and is unlikely to occur.

There is another reason for mass than some particle.
And smashing things apart won't likely show it...it will find other things...but not that.

My notion is that it is directly related as to why Mass warps the dimensional structure.
If you can figure why mass warps it creating the gravitational effect, then you'll likely find what is enabling mass.


The Higgs boson is backed by lots of experimentally validated mathematical theory. The aether was just a bunch of people making intuitive guesses (sounds like someone, doesn't it...).
 
2011-08-22 02:06:51 PM  

rogue49: Mass warps SpaceTime (or as I call it, the dimensional structure, because I believe there is more to it)


Space-time is a statement about the relationship between events. It's not an actual thing. You can't pick up a cup of space-time and move it around*. We model space-time as a fabric because it's a useful metaphor and works in most cases. But it gets very confusing when you actually try to apply it to problem solving if you don't think of it as a relational statement between events. I admit, that's more a quantum mechanical view of space-time than a relativistic one. Last I heard, people were working very hard on reconciling these things. You might want to look it up sometime, I think you'd get a hoot out of it.
 
2011-08-22 02:09:24 PM  

torusXL: The aether was just a bunch of people making intuitive guesses (sounds like someone, doesn't it...)


I'll do you one better: aether was a good idea. It fit with the facts that were known at the time, and it was testable, much like the Higgs Boson. "Light is a wave. Waves must have a medium. Therefore, light must have a medium it is waving." It makes sense, and it fits with everything we knew about waves up until that point. Relativity helped explain some of the observations that torpedoed the theory, and QM explained what light was actually doing.
 
2011-08-22 02:09:32 PM  
So sorry for you Subby.
 
2011-08-22 02:18:40 PM  
"Higgs Boson" makes me think of "Boss Hogg".
 
2011-08-22 02:23:52 PM  
Subby - it's called the "clitoris." Look it up!
 
2011-08-22 02:24:47 PM  

t3knomanser: torusXL: The aether was just a bunch of people making intuitive guesses (sounds like someone, doesn't it...)

I'll do you one better: aether was a good idea. It fit with the facts that were known at the time, and it was testable, much like the Higgs Boson. "Light is a wave. Waves must have a medium. Therefore, light must have a medium it is waving." It makes sense, and it fits with everything we knew about waves up until that point. Relativity helped explain some of the observations that torpedoed the theory, and QM explained what light was actually doing.


It's the other way around for the Higgs boson. It wasn't invented to fit what was observed, and it's not assumed to exist the way the aether was. It is hypothesized to exist based on the theory. It was a particle that appeared out of the framework which was already verified down to high accuracy, so now they're trying to empirically verify it's existence.
 
2011-08-22 02:40:48 PM  

torusXL: rogue49:
The Higgs boson is backed by lots of experimentally validated mathematical theory. The aether was just a bunch of people making intuitive guesses (sounds like someone, doesn't it...).


Math is a good tool to work with physics, but it often doesn't accurately describe reality.
Many good scientists have used math to attempt to theorize many ideas, but often end up punting.
Dimensions that "fade" away in the past, or move faster than the speed of light to try to make string theory work, is one example.
Reality is reality, it is up to us to model it correctly, and represent it symbolically, sometimes that is wrong.


t3knomanser: rogue49: Mass warps SpaceTime (or as I call it, the dimensional structure, because I believe there is more to it)

Space-time is a statement about the relationship between events. It's not an actual thing. You can't pick up a cup of space-time and move it around*. We model space-time as a fabric because it's a useful metaphor and works in most cases. But it gets very confusing when you actually try to apply it to problem solving if you don't think of it as a relational statement between events. I admit, that's more a quantum mechanical view of space-time than a relativistic one. Last I heard, people were working very hard on reconciling these things. You might want to look it up sometime, I think you'd get a hoot out of it.


No, it is an ACTUAL thing.
And they can measure it...the easiest away is how differing masses makes it different in various areas.
The sun has MORE mass, and more gravity and more warp than the Earth.
Actually, The Iberian Peninsula of Spain/Portugal has more density, thus mass, thus Gravity than North America
(and yes, their lives are a fraction of a second longer than those who live in the US)
Even one step up in altitude, decreases your gravity and your current timeflow.
This has been proven.

Dimensions are what encompasses EVERYTHING.
From Quantum scale and a singularity, to Universal. Here, Now.
You're confusing the nice maps, topography and/or animation for visualizing the model with what is actual reality.
Reality is reality, models only symbolize and represent reality. But they still aren't the full truth.
No, you can't pick up a cup of it, it is the cup, your hand, the air, and everything up, down and around it.
But your cup, your hand, the air, or even the sum of it warps SpaceTime around it.
It is just the effect is SO SMALL that you don't realize it in comparison to the frictional and other factors surrounding you.
Even now, Earth which is big in comparison to you, is making you fall into the SpaceTime well.
But Earth is also holding you up on its surface, but it is falling into you.
But it doesn't notice, no matter how big your head is... It's a bit bigger.
A better visualization is the tides on Earth, or the Moon and Earth revolving around each other.

And yes, they are attempting to unify Quantum and Relativity...String Theory is one, there are others.
And I make you a bet I've considered it more than you.

/T - stop being so formalist and condescending...this is Fark, meaning fun...not stick up their ass clubs.
 
2011-08-22 02:48:45 PM  

natazha: JNowe: But, but, but, science can't be wrong. It's made of science.

Don't know if sarcastic or just stupid.


Then perhaps you shouldn't get too comfortable with calling other people stupid.
 
2011-08-22 03:17:36 PM  
Is this the thread where people that aren't trained in science argue about how their "theories" are just as valid as ones made by real scientists?
 
Displayed 50 of 74 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report