Skip to content
 
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.

(Forbes)   Has the Large Hadron Collider accidentally thrown away evidence for new physics?   ( forbes.com) divider line
    More: Awkward, Large Hadron Collider, new particles, Particle physics, Higgs boson, Standard Model, LHC, new physics, data  
•       •       •

1806 clicks; posted to Geek » on 13 Sep 2018 at 9:39 PM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



39 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2018-09-13 07:44:08 PM  
Don't worry, Smitty. The large hard-on collider in Reno is still discovering goo physics.
 
2018-09-13 09:46:33 PM  
The message about the 5pm fridge cleaning was up for a week.  People had plenty of time to get their stuff out and store it properly if they wanted it.
 
2018-09-13 09:52:23 PM  
I don't know, but if they've posted it to Forbes, they might as well have.
 
2018-09-13 10:03:40 PM  
Maybe someone could start a Kickstarter for Drew so he doesn't have to keep shilling for Forbes.
 
2018-09-13 10:06:14 PM  
Have Forbes submissions intentionally thrown away real science sources?
 
2018-09-13 10:10:17 PM  
Worse -- it has shifted us into a reality where Trump is President.
 
2018-09-13 10:34:08 PM  

Keyser_Soze_Death: Maybe someone could start a Kickstarter for Drew so he doesn't have to keep shilling for Forbes.


Booze can be an expensive habit.
 
2018-09-13 10:36:25 PM  
Not this Large Hadron Collider, but the other inifinite number of them in parallel dimensions did.
 
2018-09-13 10:36:49 PM  

doglover: Don't worry, Smitty. The large hard-on collider in Reno is still discovering goo physics.


And just like in particle physics, most people are weak left-handers.
 
2018-09-13 10:40:37 PM  

Ishkur: Worse -- it has shifted us into a reality where Trump is President.


Trump? The actor?
 
2018-09-13 10:54:36 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-09-13 11:00:17 PM  

WelldeadLink: Ishkur: Worse -- it has shifted us into a reality where Trump is President.

Trump? The actor?


Actor?
 
2018-09-13 11:29:37 PM  
Wait, what? It took us this long to find the Higgs Boson and somebody just threw it out?
 
2018-09-13 11:51:45 PM  

WelldeadLink: Ishkur: Worse -- it has shifted us into a reality where Trump is President.

Trump? The actor?


I remember when Trump was just the self-proclaimed billionaire version of this guy:
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-09-13 11:54:40 PM  
Many years ago in grad school I got a behind the scenes tour of the Stanford Linear Collider.  Like the LHC it had to throw away most of the data because it simply generated so much, so fast.  Part of the system that did the winnowing was an absolutely enormous plugboard with hundreds of wires hanging off of it near one of the detectors.  It was basically a simple processor: if chunk A of the detector triggered at the same time as H but not X save the data...

It was a serious struggle to not reach out and swap two cables, so I asked what would happen if someone did that. The only answer I got was "Don't"
 
2018-09-14 12:00:21 AM  
You know... for all the kavetching about Forbes links, I though TFA was actually very good and informative.
 
2018-09-14 12:01:43 AM  

Glockenspiel Hero: Many years ago in grad school I got a behind the scenes tour of the Stanford Linear Collider.  Like the LHC it had to throw away most of the data because it simply generated so much, so fast.  Part of the system that did the winnowing was an absolutely enormous plugboard with hundreds of wires hanging off of it near one of the detectors.  It was basically a simple processor: if chunk A of the detector triggered at the same time as H but not X save the data...

It was a serious struggle to not reach out and swap two cables, so I asked what would happen if someone did that. The only answer I got was "Don't"


I got to tour Fermilab before they shut the Tevatron down. One of the physicists was wandering around the cafeteria looking at the ceiling, like he'd had too much LDS.
 
2018-09-14 12:04:06 AM  

UsikFark: Glockenspiel Hero: Many years ago in grad school I got a behind the scenes tour of the Stanford Linear Collider.  Like the LHC it had to throw away most of the data because it simply generated so much, so fast.  Part of the system that did the winnowing was an absolutely enormous plugboard with hundreds of wires hanging off of it near one of the detectors.  It was basically a simple processor: if chunk A of the detector triggered at the same time as H but not X save the data...

It was a serious struggle to not reach out and swap two cables, so I asked what would happen if someone did that. The only answer I got was "Don't"

I got to tour Fermilab before they shut the Tevatron down. One of the physicists was wandering around the cafeteria looking at the ceiling, like he'd had too much LDS.


Yeah, those Mormans can be filling
 
2018-09-14 12:13:42 AM  

mongbiohazard: You know... for all the kavetching about Forbes links, I though TFA was actually very good and informative.


Agreed. I try to read Siegel as much as possible, and "things astrophysics" seems a little clearer each time. If he doesn't watch out he will be as successful a popularizer as Sagan or NDT.
 
2018-09-14 12:23:48 AM  

mongbiohazard: You know... for all the kavetching about Forbes links, I though TFA was actually very good and informative.


Yeah. About as informative as saying telescopes throw away data because at any time they're only looking at a small section of any.

Serves me right for RTFA. Back to kvetching about Forbes science links.
 
2018-09-14 12:25:37 AM  
"1/40th of a second might not seem like much, but it's approximately 25,000,000 nanoseconds: enough time for about a million bunches to collide."

Approximately?
 
2018-09-14 12:35:51 AM  

mcmnky: mongbiohazard:
Yeah. About as informative as saying telescopes throw away data because at any time they're only looking at a small section of any.


^This^

I just love when reporters come in with their brilliant observations about work that people have spent a lifetime working on. I mean, sometimes they ask the seemingly obvious and a light bulb goes off. But 9/10 the propers answer requires a degree and a few decades of experience to grok.
 
2018-09-14 12:40:35 AM  

mongbiohazard: You know... for all the kavetching about Forbes links, I though TFA was actually very good and informative.


Then you can be the only one who clicks the link.

I prefer websites I can open thanks.
 
2018-09-14 12:53:10 AM  
No.
 
2018-09-14 01:25:11 AM  
This is crazy, how all this is happening while Lauren's gone
 
2018-09-14 02:34:27 AM  

mcmnky: mongbiohazard: You know... for all the kavetching about Forbes links, I though TFA was actually very good and informative.

Yeah. About as informative as saying telescopes throw away data because at any time they're only looking at a small section of any.

Serves me right for RTFA. Back to kvetching about Forbes science links.


This is true, it's only data if you can actually collect it, so the thesis of TfA seems flawed.
 
2018-09-14 03:51:28 AM  
Large Hardon Collider sounds like a lot more fun until you realize I intentionally made a typo.
 
2018-09-14 04:35:16 AM  

Evil Twin Skippy: mcmnky: mongbiohazard:
Yeah. About as informative as saying telescopes throw away data because at any time they're only looking at a small section of any.

^This^

I just love when reporters come in with their brilliant observations about work that people have spent a lifetime working on. I mean, sometimes they ask the seemingly obvious and a light bulb goes off. But 9/10 the propers answer requires a degree and a few decades of experience to grok.


OK you two, go back to work on FTL drive
 
2018-09-14 07:28:39 AM  

LewDux: Evil Twin Skippy: mcmnky: mongbiohazard:
Yeah. About as informative as saying telescopes throw away data because at any time they're only looking at a small section of any.

^This^

I just love when reporters come in with their brilliant observations about work that people have spent a lifetime working on. I mean, sometimes they ask the seemingly obvious and a light bulb goes off. But 9/10 the propers answer requires a degree and a few decades of experience to grok.

OK you two, go back to work on FTL drive


FTL drive is a waste of time. Literally. You have to heave mass into orbit, then blunder blind through space and hope you don't hit something. (You a traveling faster than light and while planets and stars a big enough to bend space enough to detect in time to maneuver, rocks even up to the size of your spacecraft are not.)

If I had to sit down and invent a fundamental new form of travel it would be a dimension door. A means to connect two point in space (and most likely time) together across a finite two dimensional construct. While not cheap, energy wise, a hell of a lot cheaper that heaving thousands of tons of starship to super-luminal speeds.

And don't get me started about deflector screens, inertial dampers, and replicators...
 
2018-09-14 07:51:33 AM  

UsikFark: Glockenspiel Hero: Many years ago in grad school I got a behind the scenes tour of the Stanford Linear Collider.  Like the LHC it had to throw away most of the data because it simply generated so much, so fast.  Part of the system that did the winnowing was an absolutely enormous plugboard with hundreds of wires hanging off of it near one of the detectors.  It was basically a simple processor: if chunk A of the detector triggered at the same time as H but not X save the data...

It was a serious struggle to not reach out and swap two cables, so I asked what would happen if someone did that. The only answer I got was "Don't"

I got to tour Fermilab before they shut the Tevatron down. One of the physicists was wandering around the cafeteria looking at the ceiling, like he'd had too much LDS.for


I worked at Fermilab for 35 yrs. and learned early on that physicists are uniquely interesting, entertaining and downright strange
 
2018-09-14 08:32:32 AM  

Evil Twin Skippy: LewDux: Evil Twin Skippy: mcmnky: mongbiohazard:
Yeah. About as informative as saying telescopes throw away data because at any time they're only looking at a small section of any.

^This^

I just love when reporters come in with their brilliant observations about work that people have spent a lifetime working on. I mean, sometimes they ask the seemingly obvious and a light bulb goes off. But 9/10 the propers answer requires a degree and a few decades of experience to grok.

OK you two, go back to work on FTL drive

FTL drive is a waste of time. Literally. You have to heave mass into orbit, then blunder blind through space and hope you don't hit something. (You a traveling faster than light and while planets and stars a big enough to bend space enough to detect in time to maneuver, rocks even up to the size of your spacecraft are not.)

If I had to sit down and invent a fundamental new form of travel it would be a dimension door. A means to connect two point in space (and most likely time) together across a finite two dimensional construct. While not cheap, energy wise, a hell of a lot cheaper that heaving thousands of tons of starship to super-luminal speeds.

And don't get me started about deflector screens, inertial dampers, and replicators...


Not with attitude like that
 
2018-09-14 08:48:11 AM  
Large hardon collider would be a cool porn movie name featuring gay phisicists
 
2018-09-14 08:54:14 AM  

LewDux: Evil Twin Skippy: LewDux: Evil Twin Skippy: mcmnky: mongbiohazard:
Yeah. About as informative as saying telescopes throw away data because at any time they're only looking at a small section of any.

^This^

I just love when reporters come in with their brilliant observations about work that people have spent a lifetime working on. I mean, sometimes they ask the seemingly obvious and a light bulb goes off. But 9/10 the propers answer requires a degree and a few decades of experience to grok.

OK you two, go back to work on FTL drive

FTL drive is a waste of time. Literally. You have to heave mass into orbit, then blunder blind through space and hope you don't hit something. (You a traveling faster than light and while planets and stars a big enough to bend space enough to detect in time to maneuver, rocks even up to the size of your spacecraft are not.)

If I had to sit down and invent a fundamental new form of travel it would be a dimension door. A means to connect two point in space (and most likely time) together across a finite two dimensional construct. While not cheap, energy wise, a hell of a lot cheaper that heaving thousands of tons of starship to super-luminal speeds.

And don't get me started about deflector screens, inertial dampers, and replicators...

Not with attitude like that


To get FTL you need both artificial and anti-gravity. That same breakthrough would give you wormholes on demand. Both involve altering the local shape of timespace, and basically utilize the same parts of the General Relativity equations.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to give by younger self some winning lotto numbers.
 
2018-09-14 09:00:20 AM  
There was some dude who I swear looked like my father dressed in really weird clothes who was spouting out numbers before he disappeared in front of me. What a really strange day.
 
2018-09-14 09:54:45 AM  

I am Tom Joad's Complete Lack of Surprise: Have Forbes submissions intentionally thrown away real science sources?


The article is written by a real physicist.   Maybe Forbes paid for a few of Drew's drinks and maybe not.  Either way the article is a legit source for good popular science.  And more often then not, Fark does not link to Physical Review Letters.
 
2018-09-14 11:46:19 AM  

mcmnky: mongbiohazard: You know... for all the kavetching about Forbes links, I though TFA was actually very good and informative.

Yeah. About as informative as saying telescopes throw away data because at any time they're only looking at a small section of any.

Serves me right for RTFA. Back to kvetching about Forbes science links.


OK, Kip Thorne. I'm glad you know that, but some of the rest of us may never have really thought about just how much data would just not be recorded by particle accelerators and why. Not everything is written specifically for YOU, personally. Lots of othet people are reading these links too, you know.

And your analogy would work better if the telescope was actually not saving most of the images it takes of the parts of the sky it IS pointed at.
 
2018-09-14 11:58:20 AM  
Big deal.  Just keep colliding particles.  Eventually you'll record something interesting.
 
2018-09-14 01:59:45 PM  
Their data can be measured in Internets.  Like much of the internet, 99% of it can be discarded without loss.
 
2018-09-15 12:11:55 AM  

WelldeadLink: Ishkur: Worse -- it has shifted us into a reality where Trump is President.

Trump? The actor?


I just got home from seeing BttF in the theater, so I'm really getting a kick...
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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