GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

Faith? They are narrowing down areas where it could be, and if they find that it can't be in any energy gap, then the scientific world would be just as excited by that.

Let me put it another way. When you have a blank square in sudoku that you deduce is a 7, is it "faith" that its a 7? Faith is unwavering belief regardless of evidence. This is belief entirely contingent on evidence.

Also, awesome that they can get 2 sigma already. I read somewhere else that if they combine ATLAS and CMS data sets they can get 3.7-3.9 sigma.

Awesome stuff.

GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

It's not faith that shows it should exist. It's science and mathematics that show it should be there. If we don't find it where we expect, then we need to go back and revise our scientific theories somehow to account for it.

Either way, it's a big win for science.

Or, in other words, they just have one last place to look.

Desperately, i might add.

GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

Mass is just a theory.

GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

Let me guess: Evolution is just a "theory" and Global warming is just another religion..right?

GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

This shouldn't be a good troll, but it's getting bites, so I give it a 5/10

Corzine has the Higgs-Boson but he won't admit it.

J. Frank Parnell: Or, in other words, they just have one last place to look.

Desperately, i might add.

Why desperately? It's not like we have to call off Physics and start from scratch if they don't find it. Nor would it mean that the nice folks over at the Creationist Museum now get to write all Science text books.

There may be some drive to be the team that pins its existence (or lack thereof) down enough to publish the result, as that will get them some serious cred in the circles they move in.

DarnoKonrad: GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

Mass is just a theory.

Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter

When I was hiking in Yellowstone recently, I was surprised to find a team of scientists in the middle of the wilderness, assembling some sort of complicated electrical mechanism.

Before I knew what they were doing, they pointed their contraption at some deer in a meadow nearby, and powered it up with an enormous generator they had.

"What are you doing?" I asked.

"We're accelerating particles at all of the local wildlife, causing a series of high-energy collisions at the atomic scale," they replied.

I was baffled at these scientists' willy-nilly firing of charged particles at defenseless woodland creatures. "Why would you do such a thing?" I asked.

The scientists looked at me like I was some sort of imbecile. "Why, we're looking for the Higgs bison, of course" they said.

BurnShrike: If we don't find it where we expect, then we need to go back and revise our scientific theories somehow to account for it.

You really think they'll easily declare everything their degrees are based on is false?

That's what we're looking at here: Decades of entire text books and degrees, being wrong. This is only the final point in a long history of them refusing to let go of the standard model of the universe. After this, they can no longer deny it, and continue to dream up fantastical scenarios and anomalies to fit contradictory evidence into the current model.

If everything they believe is found to be wrong, they are suddenly no more knowledgeable about the universe than the common person on the street. A terrifying prospect for some.

GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

Wow, good job.

TommyDeuce: It's not like we have to call off Physics and start from scratch if they don't find it.

It does, actually. It's like finding out the foundation to a skyscraper doesn't exist.

highbrow45: GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

Wow, good job.

I know, right? You'd think that old tired troll would fall flat by now, but I guess there's new people on the Internets every day.

J. Frank Parnell: BurnShrike: If we don't find it where we expect, then we need to go back and revise our scientific theories somehow to account for it.

You really think they'll easily declare everything their degrees are based on is false?

That's what we're looking at here: Decades of entire text books and degrees, being wrong. This is only the final point in a long history of them refusing to let go of the standard model of the universe. After this, they can no longer deny it, and continue to dream up fantastical scenarios and anomalies to fit contradictory evidence into the current model.

If everything they believe is found to be wrong, they are suddenly no more knowledgeable about the universe than the common person on the street. A terrifying prospect for some.

You should take some form of course in one of the hard sciences. Your "if part of our model is wrong then everything we know of physics is wiped clean" theory is pretty strange.

Cagey B: I understand you're pretty funny as a dee-jay and, well, comedy is kind of a hobby of mine. Well, actually, it's a little more than just a hobby, Reader's Digest is considering publishing two of my jokes.

It has been my theory since I was about 14 that the "universe" is composed of infinitely larger and smaller pieces, once they have found this they will start searching for the next smallest bit. We will never have a satisfying answer because we will always be limited by the constraints of our own technology. Another way to say that is we can never know the unknowable as every answer will only create more questions. The big question of course will always be "then where did that come from?" which can never be answered because it is infinite.
This has always caused my head to hurt whenever I think about it so I try not to.

J. Frank Parnell: BurnShrike: If we don't find it where we expect, then we need to go back and revise our scientific theories somehow to account for it.

You really think they'll easily declare everything their degrees are based on is false?

That's what we're looking at here: Decades of entire text books and degrees, being wrong. This is only the final point in a long history of them refusing to let go of the standard model of the universe. After this, they can no longer deny it, and continue to dream up fantastical scenarios and anomalies to fit contradictory evidence into the current model.

If everything they believe is found to be wrong, they are suddenly no more knowledgeable about the universe than the common person on the street. A terrifying prospect for some.

I don't know why I'm trying, but here goes.

You're dead wrong. Do you know why? Well let's assume you're right. Then Newton's theory of gravity should be considered absolutely wrong because relativity showed it to be incorrect at large scales.

However, we absolutely don't consider Newton's theory "wrong". We just consider it to be accurate in it's domain of object sizes -- which is more or less the size of every day objects. It is a correct theory, but only if you're using it correctly. An analogy is that trying to use Newtonian physics to calculate velocities on cosmological scales is like trying to use a Phillips screwdriver in a screw made for a flat head screwdriver.

Stop Right There, subby.

J. Frank Parnell: BurnShrike: If we don't find it where we expect, then we need to go back and revise our scientific theories somehow to account for it.

You really think they'll easily declare everything their degrees are based on is false?

That's what we're looking at here: Decades of entire text books and degrees, being wrong. This is only the final point in a long history of them refusing to let go of the standard model of the universe. After this, they can no longer deny it, and continue to dream up fantastical scenarios and anomalies to fit contradictory evidence into the current model.

If everything they believe is found to be wrong, they are suddenly no more knowledgeable about the universe than the common person on the street. A terrifying prospect for some.

Now this is how one trolls. Speaking of, have the scientistas found phlogisten yet?

fritton: You should take some form of course in one of the hard sciences. Your "if part of our model is wrong then everything we know of physics is wiped clean" theory is pretty strange.

If you think it just represents a branch of physics and doesn't affect nearly everything, then you have no idea what you're talking about.

I'd recommend googling "Higgs boson" for starters. There are Higgsless standard models now, but they're exercises in doing anything possible to keep the current standard model afloat, because like i mentioned before, they are unwilling to let go of it. When it is not found, you can expect one of the Higgsless Models to be popularized, instead of them going back and rethinking everything, which you naively think they're so willing to do.

J. Frank Parnell: fritton: You should take some form of course in one of the hard sciences. Your "if part of our model is wrong then everything we know of physics is wiped clean" theory is pretty strange.

If you think it just represents a branch of physics and doesn't affect nearly everything, then you have no idea what you're talking about.

I'd recommend googling "Higgs boson" for starters. There are Higgsless standard models now, but they're exercises in doing anything possible to keep the current standard model afloat, because like i mentioned before, they are unwilling to let go of it. When it is not found, you can expect one of the Higgsless Models to be popularized, instead of them going back and rethinking everything, which you naively think they're so willing to do.

I know you're just trolling, but yes, I understand the concept of the Higgs Boson and if it was proven to be nonexistent then the alterations required to the fundamentals of the standard model still does not invalidate everything we know of physics (even theoretical physics and string theory) to the point where "they are no more knowledgeable than the common person on the street"

If you are seriously trying to pass that off then you have absolutely no idea how the scientific method and process works. You are quite seriously "no more knowledgeable than the common person on the street" and shouldn't be making any sort of claims on the implications of higher complexity physics.

Nurglitch: Now this is how one trolls. Speaking of, have the scientistas found phlogisten yet?

Science is a series of corrected mistakes. If someone tells you we have everything figured out and aren't wrong about anything, they are lying.

All the advances in this field of physics for the last few decades have been based on the assumption the Higgs Boson exists. It's so important in fact, that it was the main reason the massive CERN project was started. If we can find it, it means we can all breathe a collective sigh of relief. If we don't find it, well it's time to either eat some humble pie and admit we are wrong, or try and dream up some bizarre way to make the standard model stand up without it. The latter is what you should expect.

J. Frank Parnell: Nurglitch: Now this is how one trolls. Speaking of, have the scientistas found phlogisten yet?

Science is a series of corrected mistakes. If someone tells you we have everything figured out and aren't wrong about anything, they are lying.

All the advances in this field of physics for the last few decades have been based on the assumption the Higgs Boson exists. It's so important in fact, that it was the main reason the massive CERN project was started. If we can find it, it means we can all breathe a collective sigh of relief. If we don't find it, well it's time to either eat some humble pie and admit we are wrong, or try and dream up some bizarre way to make the standard model stand up without it. The latter is what you should expect.

Do you enjoy sounding more and more like a tard, J.Frank Parnell?

J. Frank Parnell: Nurglitch: Now this is how one trolls. Speaking of, have the scientistas found phlogisten yet?

Science is a series of corrected mistakes. If someone tells you we have everything figured out and aren't wrong about anything, they are lying.

All the advances in this field of physics for the last few decades have been based on the assumption the Higgs Boson exists. It's so important in fact, that it was the main reason the massive CERN project was started. If we can find it, it means we can all breathe a collective sigh of relief. If we don't find it, well it's time to either eat some humble pie and admit we are wrong, or try and dream up some bizarre way to make the standard model stand up without it. The latter is what you should expect.

The Standard Model isn't wrong. It makes known predictions for all particles except the Higgs boson to extreme accuracy, maybe better accuracy than any physics theory ever made. It's one of the crowning achievements.

The issue is that that scientists have made an extension to the Standard Model for the Higgs boson, but they do not know if the actual Higgs boson fits within the domain of the Standard Model.

If the Higgs boson is found to not exist, the Standard Model will still be used as a tool for probably centuries to come. It just won't be used to explain why particles have mass.

Is your feeble tard brain able to comprehend what I'm saying?

meat0918: Is anyone else depressed that this physics stuff is so far beyond the ken of normal men and women that you feel that they won't ever really understand it?

If you stick with the concepts it's all fairly straight forward, particularly standard model physics. String theory takes a little more work, but even that can be explained fairly simply.

J. Frank Parnell: When it is not found,

One of the results today is at 3.5 sigma, that means they're over 99% sure they found it. The mass is a bit surprising, but that's just more for theoreticians to sink their teeth into.

J. Frank Parnell: Nurglitch: Now this is how one trolls. Speaking of, have the scientistas found phlogisten yet?

Science is a series of corrected mistakes. If someone tells you we have everything figured out and aren't wrong about anything, they are lying.

All the advances in this field of physics for the last few decades have been based on the assumption the Higgs Boson exists. It's so important in fact, that it was the main reason the massive CERN project was started. If we can find it, it means we can all breathe a collective sigh of relief. If we don't find it, well it's time to either eat some humble pie and admit we are wrong, or try and dream up some bizarre way to make the standard model stand up without it. The latter is what you should expect.

Um, no, science is not a series of corrected mistakes. Popper and lakatos were wrong about falsificationism, in part because the implication that if a mistake has been identified, it is because we know the correct answer. The assumption of such meta-knowledge, that we know when we don't know, is contradictory to the point of testable hypotheses, that we don't know whether we know or not.

Kuhn, by contrast, noticed that paradigm shifts are the exception, and that findings are frequently cut-to-fit the existing paradigm because while we may not know whether we know or not, we know the existing paradigm. And, of course, if the paradigm changes, it's hardly a mistake that has been corrected since the issue will be the scope of the paradigm rather than the truth-value of any results obtained under it.

Which isn't to say a paradigm shift isn't occasionally infinitessimal, since the higg-boson is a theoretical entity rather than an everyday phenomenon that needs explanation, or an entity already known that simply defies explanation by existing theories. Lack of a higgs-boson will no more torpedo the Standard Model than a lack of Vulcan torpedoed the helio-centric solar system.

WhyteRaven74: One of the results today is at 3.5 sigma, that means they're over 99% sure they found it. The mass is a bit surprising, but that's just more for theoreticians to sink their teeth into.

They're 99% sure something is there. Whether or not it's the Higgs remains to be seen.

No one would be happier if it was found than me, but i seem to often be alone in considering the possibility we're wrong, and it doesn't exist, then mentioning all the implications of that. People even frequently go mental on me for it, even though we've been wrong about everything numerous times throughout history, and it's all part of the science process.

torusXL: Is your feeble tard brain able to comprehend what I'm saying?

I can comprehend that you have very little understanding of the topic, and are reacting emotionally for some unrelated reason. You also think playground insults are part of a science discussion, so i hope you'll understand if i don't waste my time with people like you.

But because i'm feeling charitable today, or maybe it's pity, i will inform you that the accuracy you mention with all the other particles in the standard model relies on the Higgs Boson giving them their mass.

J. Frank Parnell: Whether or not it's the Higgs remains to be seen.

They're basing it on decay products which are like fingerprints. The type, energy and quantity of the decay products tells you what decayed, and since this particular combination is something new and it fits in with predictions for Higgs, well it's just a matter of accumulating enough data and sorting through it to get from 3.5 sigma to 5 sigma.

J. Frank Parnell: torusXL: Is your feeble tard brain able to comprehend what I'm saying?

I can comprehend that you have very little understanding of the topic, and are reacting emotionally for some unrelated reason. You also think playground insults are part of a science discussion, so i hope you'll understand if i don't waste my time with people like you.

But because i'm feeling charitable today, or maybe it's pity, i will inform you that the accuracy you mention with all the other particles in the standard model relies on the Higgs Boson giving them their mass.

Again, J. Frank Parnell shows a massive (pun intended) level of 'tardness.

Just because the Standard Model predicts the Higgs boson does not mean the Higgs boson has to exist. Even if the Higgs boson doesn't exist, the Standard Model can and will always be able to make super accurate predictions for anything else under the SM, such as the mass of electrons.

The SM relies on the theory of the Higgs boson, it does not rely on it's existence. If you can't understand this, then there is no hope. Please proceed with your self-righteous arrogance.

dedekind_cut: GooberMcFly: I admire those scientists' faith that the particle exists.

Faith? They are narrowing down areas where it could be, and if they find that it can't be in any energy gap, then the scientific world would be just as excited by that.

Let me put it another way. When you have a blank square in sudoku that you deduce is a 7, is it "faith" that its a 7? Faith is unwavering belief regardless of evidence. This is belief entirely contingent on evidence.

Also, awesome that they can get 2 sigma already. I read somewhere else that if they combine ATLAS and CMS data sets they can get 3.7-3.9 sigma.

Awesome stuff.

Psh. I've been 6 sigma certified for years.

/Not impressed.