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.

(Telegraph)   Scientists close to major announcement regarding the God Particle. With pic that will make you want to schedule an appointment with your proctologist   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 49
    More: Interesting, LHC, higgs particles, Tevatron, Manchester University, Venus transit, statistical significance, colliders, Peter Higgs  
•       •       •

6221 clicks; posted to Geek » on 29 Jun 2012 at 1:03 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



49 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-06-29 11:29:33 AM  
So does this mean I get to drink my Bose-Einstein Slurpie soon?
 
2012-06-29 12:32:48 PM  
From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "We have now got something that is substantially more powerful than last year, which means that whetever statement we can make should be stronger on its own terms than last year.

"When we put both sets of data together, they may be even stronger still or they may weaken each other."


He then added, "But why worry? Each one of us is carrying an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back. "
 
2012-06-29 01:05:22 PM  
FTA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern

Oh my god! What CAN'T this man do??
 
2012-06-29 01:14:58 PM  

Professor Science: From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "We have now got something that is substantially more powerful than last year, which means that whetever statement we can make should be stronger on its own terms than last year.

"When we put both sets of data together, they may be even stronger still or they may weaken each other."

He then added, "But why worry? Each one of us is carrying an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back. "




You beat me to the Ghostbuster reference. I was going to go with:

From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "Yes, it's true -- this man has no penis."
 
2012-06-29 01:15:19 PM  
Going to a Higgs party for the announcement at 2am on the 4th...

Should be a good time.

Fermilab will have the Tevatron results out on the 2nd at 9:00 CST. Results will be streamed live

CERN's results will also be streamed live at 9:00 Zurich time...
 
2012-06-29 01:22:51 PM  
For a discovery that will have almost no practical applications, this is pretty cool.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-06-29 01:27:48 PM  
The picture shows a spider trying to turn itself inside-out.
 
2012-06-29 01:35:55 PM  

tbartman68: Professor Science: From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "We have now got something that is substantially more powerful than last year, which means that whetever statement we can make should be stronger on its own terms than last year.

"When we put both sets of data together, they may be even stronger still or they may weaken each other."

He then added, "But why worry? Each one of us is carrying an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back. "



You beat me to the Ghostbuster reference. I was going to go with:

From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "Yes, it's true -- this man has no penis."


Mr. Murray also noted, "I regret only Garfield."
 
2012-06-29 01:37:12 PM  

Rent Party: For a discovery that will have almost no practical applications, this is pretty cool.


It's worth pointing out that Relativity didn't have any practical applications for 30-40 years.
 
2012-06-29 01:37:59 PM  
So what does this mean for religion? I would not be surprised if the Standard Model was rejected by most religious people too, and the "final piece in the puzzle" could have some significant effect. Not that this explains the ultimate origin of the universe, but it is quite groundbreaking.
 
2012-06-29 01:41:17 PM  

t3knomanser: Rent Party: For a discovery that will have almost no practical applications, this is pretty cool.

It's worth pointing out that Relativity didn't have any practical applications for 30-40 years.


Sure, but even when relativity was new, you could imagine the practical applications for it, even if the technology to implement it wasn't there. I'm kind of stuck on a thought experiment where there is a practical application for the Higgs.

I'm not denying that there are some, and I hope that there are, but to me this is "OK, we have validated the standard model. Now what..."
 
2012-06-29 01:54:42 PM  

Rent Party: Sure, but even when relativity was new, you could imagine the practical applications for it, even if the technology to implement it wasn't there


Not really, no. When Special Relativity was first published, we didn't even know about the atomic nucleus, so the whole "fission bomb" aspect wasn't even on the horizon. The fastest man-made vehicle was a train, which made talking about relativistic velocities exceedingly difficult. Even by the time General Relativity came around, there wasn't really a lot that we could see about it practically. It was so exotic that we had to finance expensive expeditions to equatorial countries just to see if stars showed up in the wrong places during an eclipse because that was the only practical test that could be performed.
 
2012-06-29 01:55:02 PM  
I would just like to offer a hearty "Fark you" to subby for invoking that shiatstain of a term "god particle" in the headline.

Fark you subby.
 
2012-06-29 01:56:13 PM  

Rent Party: t3knomanser: Rent Party: For a discovery that will have almost no practical applications, this is pretty cool.

It's worth pointing out that Relativity didn't have any practical applications for 30-40 years.

Sure, but even when relativity was new, you could imagine the practical applications for it, even if the technology to implement it wasn't there. I'm kind of stuck on a thought experiment where there is a practical application for the Higgs.

I'm not denying that there are some, and I hope that there are, but to me this is "OK, we have validated the standard model. Now what..."


Duh, hookers and blow.
 
2012-06-29 02:13:05 PM  
I think physics would be much more interesting if these guys disproved the Higgs than if they proved its existence. They'd have to figure out a Standard Model that doesn't include the Higgs, and that would open up new theoretical possibilities.

Not that I know what those possibilities could be. I mean, anything they came up with would have to explain the same things that the Standard Model explains today plus the observations at Cern and Fermilab. I think I just relish the notion of a tumult in academia, the dethroning of institutional giants by a new generation of theorists who push the boundaries of the possible beyond the vision of those restricted by the old order. I don't work in academia and I'm certainly not a scientist, but those that I know (including my father, a research chemist) tell me that those are the times that scientists yearn for.
 
2012-06-29 02:15:36 PM  

BolloxReader: I think physics would be much more interesting if these guys disproved the Higgs than if they proved its existence.


Well, arguably, physics would be more interesting if we disproved Newtonian mechanics and discovered all forces are actually mediated by elves. It was never terribly likely that the Higgs would be disproved.
 
2012-06-29 02:24:15 PM  
Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "We have now got something that is substantially more powerful than last year, which means that whetever statement we can make should be stronger on its own terms than last year.

Ha ha ha. You are so not Bill Murray.
 
2012-06-29 02:27:12 PM  
farm1.staticflickr.com
 
2012-06-29 02:34:01 PM  

SJKebab: I would just like to offer a hearty "Fark you" to subby for invoking that shiatstain of a term "god particle" in the headline.

Fark you subby.


Higgs boson, when someone asks if you are the god particle, you say "yes!"
 
2012-06-29 02:38:15 PM  
"Cern" is a word now?

How about CERN, smarty-pants "journalist?"
 
2012-06-29 02:42:57 PM  

SJKebab: I would just like to offer a hearty "Fark you" to subby for invoking that shiatstain of a term "god particle" in the headline.

Fark you subby.


Leon Lederman and his Nobel Prize would like a word...

photo.goodreads.com
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2012-06-29 02:44:24 PM  

Celerian: tbartman68: Professor Science: From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "We have now got something that is substantially more powerful than last year, which means that whetever statement we can make should be stronger on its own terms than last year.

"When we put both sets of data together, they may be even stronger still or they may weaken each other."

He then added, "But why worry? Each one of us is carrying an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back. "



You beat me to the Ghostbuster reference. I was going to go with:

From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "Yes, it's true -- this man has no penis."

Mr. Murray also noted, "I regret only Garfield."


He later added "I smell Higgs boson. And the only good Higgs boson is dead Higgs boson, I think."
 
2012-06-29 03:30:51 PM  

JorgiX: So what does this mean for religion? I would not be surprised if the Standard Model was rejected by most religious people too, and the "final piece in the puzzle" could have some significant effect. Not that this explains the ultimate origin of the universe, but it is quite groundbreaking.


Anyone who claims that a discovery is the "final" piece in the puzzle (of understanding the universe) is an idiot. The discovery will give rise to new and better questions, and THOSE answers will only unlock MORE questions, and so on.

For example: learning that the stars were independent bodies light-years away (and not god-farts or the sun's children) only made us want to learn how far away, what they're made of, how it moves within its system (is it a binary star?), whether there are planets orbiting them...
 
2012-06-29 04:27:19 PM  
Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "Back off man, I'm a scientist"
is what I was thinking.
 
2012-06-29 05:01:17 PM  
Expecting them to pull a NASA and explain that they didn't find it, and it's the media's fault for telling us they did, then going on to share some mundane things not worthy of a press conference.
 
2012-06-29 05:10:04 PM  
www.nightmarepark.com
 
2012-06-29 07:02:13 PM  

tbartman68: Professor Science: From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "We have now got something that is substantially more powerful than last year, which means that whetever statement we can make should be stronger on its own terms than last year.

"When we put both sets of data together, they may be even stronger still or they may weaken each other."

He then added, "But why worry? Each one of us is carrying an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back. "



You beat me to the Ghostbuster reference. I was going to go with:

From TFA: Bill Murray, deputy physics co-ordinator at Cern, added: "Yes, it's true -- this man has no penis."


Too bad those other comic geniuses got in before you. Now we'll have to be staggered by their brilliant wit instead of yours.

/ha ha.
 
2012-06-29 07:09:18 PM  

Larva Lump: "Cern" is a word now?

How about CERN, smarty-pants "journalist?"


It's a UK journalistic convention. I'd think anyone who pretends to talk to journalists might know that.
 
2012-06-29 07:15:10 PM  
Hey, has anyone noticed that the guy in TFA has the same fairly common name as a famous comedian and actor? I think that fact might provide material for some extremely funny jokes.
 
2012-06-29 07:24:26 PM  
riiiight...

oh...you mean like when they announced that "faster than light" finding???


Wake me up when they prove it...and then some.
Hell, took Einstein 20 years to get the first proof...and to this day they are still proving it...10,000 times more accurately
...and calling it a "theory"
 
2012-06-29 07:27:56 PM  
sorry...hit the wrong key. (10+)
 
2012-06-29 07:43:27 PM  
Number one lesson learned today:

Do not GIS for hot proctologist with google safesearch off.
 
2012-06-29 08:38:12 PM  

t3knomanser: ... It was so exotic that we had to finance expensive expeditions to equatorial countries just to see if stars showed up in the wrong places during an eclipse because that was the only practical test that could be performed.


Only because they farked up the first eclipse measurements in far less exotic Washington state in 1918.
 
2012-06-29 08:47:57 PM  

Rent Party: For a discovery that will have almost no practical applications, this is pretty cool.


You have a very limited imagination. This particle theoretically gives everything mass - and we could theoretically manipulate it to add or remove mass. Anti-gravity? Warp drives? Structural integrity fields? Star Trek, man!
 
2012-06-29 09:14:00 PM  

Counter_Intelligent: Oh my god! What CAN'T this man do??


i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-29 09:34:35 PM  

JorgiX: So what does this mean for religion? I would not be surprised if the Standard Model was rejected by most religious people too, and the "final piece in the puzzle" could have some significant effect. Not that this explains the ultimate origin of the universe, but it is quite groundbreaking.


You say "religious people" but what you mean is anti-technologists. You are surrounded daily by religious people who love science and technology but are unknown to you because they're not obnoxious religious Luddites. Maybe you should stop insulting them by making the retarded assumption that the loud ignorant and proud sects of religious people reflect the whole of the religious community. It's kind of like assuming that all Asians are good at math, or bad at driving. It's pure bigotry.
 
2012-06-29 10:17:13 PM  

Nightmaretony:


You are a sick, sick person.
+1
 
2012-06-29 11:03:04 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: JorgiX: So what does this mean for religion? I would not be surprised if the Standard Model was rejected by most religious people too, and the "final piece in the puzzle" could have some significant effect. Not that this explains the ultimate origin of the universe, but it is quite groundbreaking.

You say "religious people" but what you mean is anti-technologists. You are surrounded daily by religious people who love science and technology but are unknown to you because they're not obnoxious religious Luddites. Maybe you should stop insulting them by making the retarded assumption that the loud ignorant and proud sects of religious people reflect the whole of the religious community. It's kind of like assuming that all Asians are good at math, or bad at driving. It's pure bigotry.


Just the female asians. At least the driving part

/sorta kidding...
 
2012-06-29 11:13:12 PM  

Rent Party:

I'm not denying that there are some, and I hope that there are, but to me this is "OK, we have validated the standard model. Now what..."


"Validated" is a little optimistic of a word....
 
2012-06-29 11:14:00 PM  

Dr Dreidel: JorgiX: So what does this mean for religion? I would not be surprised if the Standard Model was rejected by most religious people too, and the "final piece in the puzzle" could have some significant effect. Not that this explains the ultimate origin of the universe, but it is quite groundbreaking.

Anyone who claims that a discovery is the "final" piece in the puzzle (of understanding the universe) is an idiot. The discovery will give rise to new and better questions, and THOSE answers will only unlock MORE questions, and so on.

For example: learning that the stars were independent bodies light-years away (and not god-farts or the sun's children) only made us want to learn how far away, what they're made of, how it moves within its system (is it a binary star?), whether there are planets orbiting them...


Please notice the quotations, I did not refer to it as the final piece of the puzzle but I recall someone in TFA referring to it along those lines. Like I said, it does not explain the origin of the universe, and you're absolutely correct in saying it only raises more questions in a world that changes and will continue to do so giving us more things to study.

BraveNewCheneyWorld: JorgiX: So what does this mean for religion? I would not be surprised if the Standard Model was rejected by most religious people too, and the "final piece in the puzzle" could have some significant effect. Not that this explains the ultimate origin of the universe, but it is quite groundbreaking.

You say "religious people" but what you mean is anti-technologists. You are surrounded daily by religious people who love science and technology but are unknown to you because they're not obnoxious religious Luddites. Maybe you should stop insulting them by making the retarded assumption that the loud ignorant and proud sects of religious people reflect the whole of the religious community. It's kind of like assuming that all Asians are good at math, or bad at driving. It's pure bigotry.


While you raise a good point, and maybe I did not explain myself all that correctly, in saying that there is a lot of religious people that love science there are still many aspects of some religions that contradict or challenge scientific findings or applications for different reasons and I'm not only talking about the extreme anti-evolution crowd. About half of Americans think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, many of them based on religious beliefs which is not in harmony with scientific findings.

It is not bigotry like the frankly idiotic false analogy you chose to use. Being Asian is not a controllable factor or a choice you make, while for example being a Republican is an ideological choice that can tell you a person's inclination for a laissez-faire economic approach or some other part of that particular party's platform. Being religious is an ideological choice you make and often leads people to suspend their disbelief toward certain things including science sometimes.
 
2012-06-30 12:32:31 AM  

JorgiX: While you raise a good point, and maybe I did not explain myself all that correctly, in saying that there is a lot of religious people that love science there are still many aspects of some religions that contradict or challenge scientific findings or applications for different reasons and I'm not only talking about the extreme anti-evolution crowd. About half of Americans think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, many of them based on religious beliefs which is not in harmony with scientific findings.


Well, I thank you for being somewhat conciliatory in the matter. I personally don't know for a fact that half of Americans think the earth is less than 10,000 years old, though I don't heavily doubt it offhand, I can say that I've only met a only very small group, less than a handful, who believe such a thing. Honestly, every chance I get to speak with these people, I make a significant effort to inform them of scientific fact. Admittedly, they routinely disregard any evidence I provide, but I never give up. I personally find it sad and sickening that they're so obviously intent on disregarding verifiable fact. I think their interpretation of the bible is quite far from its original intent.

JorgiX: It is not bigotry like the frankly idiotic false analogy you chose to use. Being Asian is not a controllable factor or a choice you make, while for example being a Republican is an ideological choice that can tell you a person's inclination for a laissez-faire economic approach or some other part of that particular party's platform. Being religious is an ideological choice you make and often leads people to suspend their disbelief toward certain things including science sometimes.


Actually, I believe there are grounds for disagreement here. I do not separate phenotypes from genotypes, as most people (and you) seem to. I mean no offense. However the way I see things, belief systems are not simply a matter of choice and upbringing, but they are inherent in genetic expression to a degree. In my view there are those who are prone to accept only that which has been shown externally, generally representing atheists (which can be manipulated and distorted by outside forces) and those who are more sensitive to internal experience, theists (which are also subject to manipulation and distortion by outside forces). In my opinion, both groups are equally capable of seeing reality, but tend towards one end of a spectrum from exposure to our heavily distorted society. I'm not sure if that's a great explanation of my view, I admit I'm really tired at the time of this writing, but you seem sane and reasonable, so if you heavily disagree or want clarification, I'll check back later to continue a dialogue.
 
2012-06-30 01:39:06 AM  
It looks like a MechaGodzilla goatse
 
2012-06-30 02:31:33 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld:
Well, I thank you for being somewhat conciliatory in the matter. I personally don't know for a fact that half of Americans think the earth is less than 10,000 years old, though I don't heavily doubt it offhand, I can say that I've only met a only very small group, less than a handful, who believe such a thing. Honestly, every chance I get to speak with these people, I make a significant effort to inform them of scientific fact. Admittedly, they routinely disregard any evidence I provide, but I never give up. I personally find it sad and sickening that they're so obviously intent on disregarding verifiable fact. I think their interpretation of the bible is quite far from its original intent.


You know, I am the same way. I tried to just let it go, but something just does not allow me for some reason, I am not militant or anything but when I hear BS I try to correct it not belief but with fact. For example, if someone talks about God I simply keep my beliefs to myself, but if someone talks about evolution not being real or something then I would provide evidence. I just hate how science is often nitpicked to advance a certain agenda. I think you're doing the right thing.

BraveNewCheneyWorld:
Actually, I believe there are grounds for disagreement here. I do not separate phenotypes from genotypes, as most people (and you) seem to. I mean no offense. However the way I see things, belief systems are not simply a matter of choice and upbringing, but they are inheren ...


I guess I see what you mean but that we will never agree on. I can see your reasoning, and you can see mine but the truth of the matter is the issue is very subjective. Here is the way I see it, it depends very largely on one's life experiences. And I really believe that atheists (which I am not btw even if I am coming off as one) are not as subject to manipulation, many grow in deeply religious households in a society that is largely influences people to follow a certain path (Christianity in America for example) yet they look at evidence objectively and choose to not believe what they are being told on pretty arbitrary grounds. In my personal opinion, that alone reflects a certain independence of mind. That "won't believe it until I see it" mindset you mention does not make you immune to internal experience and reflection, it is only that it is interpreted differently, not as a product of a greater being but as a product of one's own consciousness. Religious people are not as simple to assess since even if they share some clear mindset they are a very mixed bag, from completely deluded individuals to reasonable people capable of assessing facts like I presume you are. Some clarification on some points would be greatly appreciated though :P
 
2012-06-30 02:22:58 PM  
Sylvia_Bandersnatch

re: Cern vs. CERN

It's a UK journalistic convention.

Huh. How odd. Not consistently applied, it would seem, or do they only "wordify" an acronym that is pronounceable? Strange.
 
2012-06-30 06:03:39 PM  

Larva Lump: Sylvia_Bandersnatch

re: Cern vs. CERN

It's a UK journalistic convention.

Huh. How odd. Not consistently applied, it would seem, or do they only "wordify" an acronym that is pronounceable? Strange.


Yeah, I think it might only be the pronounceable ones. I haven't looked into it because I hate it so much. I can get used to all kinds of different things, but I abhor any writing practice that might confuse readers, and this is ripe for it. The first time I read about a man and "his Asbo," I thought it might be some breed of dog I'd never heard of. "ASBO" obviously would not have created that confusion. I have to assume that British readers know that "Nasa" is our space agency, and not some guy who plays with rockets.
 
2012-06-30 06:25:46 PM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: JorgiX: So what does this mean for religion? I would not be surprised if the Standard Model was rejected by most religious people too, and the "final piece in the puzzle" could have some significant effect. Not that this explains the ultimate origin of the universe, but it is quite groundbreaking.

You say "religious people" but what you mean is anti-technologists. You are surrounded daily by religious people who love science and technology but are unknown to you because they're not obnoxious religious Luddites. Maybe you should stop insulting them by making the retarded assumption that the loud ignorant and proud sects of religious people reflect the whole of the religious community. It's kind of like assuming that all Asians are good at math, or bad at driving. It's pure bigotry.


This would have been a much more compelling remark if you could have only refrained from using the childish epithet "retarded". I agree with what you're saying, but chastisting people for ill behaviour while indulging it it yourself takes a lot of wind out of your sails. Your voice will carry much further from higher ground.
 
2012-07-01 08:53:54 AM  

Sylvia_Bandersnatch: This would have been a much more compelling remark if you could have only refrained from using the childish epithet "retarded". I agree with what you're saying, but chastisting people for ill behaviour while indulging it it yourself takes a lot of wind out of your sails. Your voice will carry much further from higher ground.


Some words are meant to be offensive. When people get upset that they're used as you have, soon crusades to rid them from our language take place, the words are soon replaced by other words which will eventually also be designated as too offensive to use. It's a futile effort at best. Get over it.
 
2012-07-01 11:27:50 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Sylvia_Bandersnatch: This would have been a much more compelling remark if you could have only refrained from using the childish epithet "retarded". I agree with what you're saying, but chastisting people for ill behaviour while indulging it it yourself takes a lot of wind out of your sails. Your voice will carry much further from higher ground.

Some words are meant to be offensive. When people get upset that they're used as you have, soon crusades to rid them from our language take place, the words are soon replaced by other words which will eventually also be designated as too offensive to use. It's a futile effort at best. Get over it.


Know how I know you're young?
 
2012-07-01 02:31:41 PM  

Sylvia_Bandersnatch: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Sylvia_Bandersnatch: This would have been a much more compelling remark if you could have only refrained from using the childish epithet "retarded". I agree with what you're saying, but chastisting people for ill behaviour while indulging it it yourself takes a lot of wind out of your sails. Your voice will carry much further from higher ground.

Some words are meant to be offensive. When people get upset that they're used as you have, soon crusades to rid them from our language take place, the words are soon replaced by other words which will eventually also be designated as too offensive to use. It's a futile effort at best. Get over it.

Know how I know you're young?


Know how I know you're wasting your life? One of the fundamental problems with the world is the inability of most people to tolerate perceived insult/disrespect etc, it's one of the main pillars of misery. Attempting to bubble wrap the entire world to keep those with thin skin from emotional harm is exactly the wrong way of doing things. You should encourage people go get thicker skin, as people only have control over themselves, and none over the world. It's one of the few concepts that's widely accepted among great philosophers and religions.
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


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