I can give you the name of the elementary school where I wrote my first papers on proper scientific practices if you like? Everything else after that is just bells and whistles.


This god particle thing has been on my mind for a while, I just have not been bothering posting on my favorite Internet spaceships forum lately. Yesterday I just figured... why the hell not!


Also... Triumvirate (dot). What happened to Triumvirate 1.0?

So what makes you think elementary school level qualifications lets you rubbish the cutting edge science that the greatest minds of humanity is currently working on?

Went into hibernation. But we came back, much unlike your argumentative skills and scientific career.

And now I am sure that Tri 3.0 will some how become relevant again... Next... Hydra!! 4.0!

In other words... whatever it is that they think that they have found (that they cannot actually see) is ultimately behaving differently then what they were originally looking for... and what was originally predicted to be there.

So what qualifications has the OP got and what papers have you written?

It wasn't until three years ago that we've actually been able to "see" an electron, yet there was absolutely no contest over whether electrons do exist or not for a whole lot longer than that.
Also, it's still not clear whether this is "the" Higgs Boson or the lightest of several Higgs Bosons, and further testing could take quite a few extra years.

I guess OP just thinks it would be best to just stop all scientific research, as it's "worthless".

I guess the OP is a special kind of person who has never heard of "making mistakes and adjusting the theory" along the way.

[
This Anti-Science Movement is just plain-ol' Scary, tbh.

It wasn't until three years ago that we've actually been able to "see" an electron, yet there was absolutely no contest over whether electrons do exist or not for a whole lot longer than that.
Also, it's still not clear whether this is "the" Higgs Boson or the lightest of several Higgs Bosons, and further testing could take quite a few extra years.

I wouldn't exactly pride myself with that thread if I was in your position, but to each its own, I guess.
Side-note, this case we have here is more or less the reverse of that - in that truly massive amounts of data were scoured and certain events were repeatedly recorded, with inconclusive data repeatedly chopped off, leaving an ever-mounting mountain of, yes, circumstantial, yet fairly solid evidence to support the claims, whereas no clearly conflicting evidence could be found.

You seemed to have missed the irony. My jest and sarcasm is meant to point out how those scientists... grow up to forget the most basic methods of science in the pursuit of their own wealth, fame and agendas. The "cutting edge" science that you speak of is also a place of egos, profits and improper/incomplete scientific methods.

No where in this thread or any other have I ever said such a thing. How you could get that from my op can only be explained through some reading comprehension issues on your side. As for "making mistakes and adjusting a theory" you must first apply the actual scientific method first... else the mistakes you make are in fact your fault.



Far more so is your disturbing lack of reading comprehension





@ Cynter DeVries

Thx i am going to remember that link. It manages to explain that concept better then i ever have been able to.







Hello again Akita


That is a totally different story all together. Electricity and magnetism were a well documented and studied OBSERVABLE phenomena that could be seen and measured long before an actual electron could be "seen" visually. I'd say the best proof of their existence prior to seeing one was how cathode ray beams acted in an electric field and how they produced X-rays.

A "god particle" is a totally different thing that has no observable phenomena associated with it, whatsoever, outside of the imaginary role that Higgs intended it to play. A theory designed to plug the holes in their "theory of everything" AND they gave this man the Nobel Prize for it before it was even 100% confirmed. Remember, what they have found does not actually match what Higg's even predicted in the first place. It could just as well be something else all together.

I call that dirty science.

Given that they have run hundreds if not thousands of runs to compile the data using two teams on multiple detectors and one of the teams was hoping they would not detect the god partical I would say their methods are good.

Most people were hoping there would be no partical as it would mean our best theories were wrong.

goon attempts to fail troll a post he knows nothing about...

Goon does not realize that the particle that they found had 100 Trillion (yes trillion) times less energy then predicted Higgs particle.

...the particle that they found had 100 Trillion (yes trillion) times less energy then predicted Higgs particle.

Call it the goon particle then, the name is relevant how?
A new particle was discovered and it has unexpected properties, this is great (-er than discovering a perfect match for the predicted higgs particle)

All that means is that their theory wasn't 100% correct. Dirty little secret for you: They're never 100% accurate. Hell, 50% accurate is a stunning success. That's why science does this silly thing called 'experimentation.' Indeed, 'failed' experiments frequently teach more than 'successful' ones.

You clearly do not understand the implications...

What they found was not a "everything" particle at all. There is nothing about it to even suggest so.

So?

That observation is what makes me doubt you understand scientific method.

Part of the problem is that, as Kuhn pointed out in his Structure of Scientific Revolutions, evidence for a paradigm shift can be slight and attributable to instrument failure or just incommensurablility in methods.

But I kind of agree with the point that Big Science seems to be driven by the desire to obtain large financial grants (if that was a subtext of your post).

And your reply makes me doubt that you read my post all the way through.




Many new particles have been found in that particle masher. This particular one does not stand out in anyway shape or form. It does not exist at energy levels in which Higgs particles are reputed to reside. It has no strange or peculiar properties. It is a particle with a positive charge that may or may not have a spin, and is only observable one out of every billion billion tries.


Now imagine taking this discovery and calling it god. Saying that everything in the universe now makes sense, that this particle is the glue that holds it all together and then awarding someone the Noble Prize for the discovery.



This is not the scientific method...this is scientific politics.

ITT: theists butthurt about science brandishing agitated nonsense. News at 11.

Start by learning about the real reason why the Higgs Boson was dubbed "the god particle", no need to have a degree on particle physics to understand that particular issue.

The hubris of ignorance...

You seemed to have missed the irony. My jest and sarcasm is meant to point out how those scientists... grow up to forget the most basic methods of science in the pursuit of their own wealth, fame and agendas. The "cutting edge" science that you speak of is also a place of egos, profits and improper/incomplete scientific methods.

No where in this thread or any other have I ever said such a thing. How you could get that from my op can only be explained through some reading comprehension issues on your side. As for "making mistakes and adjusting a theory" you must first apply the actual scientific method first... else the mistakes you make are in fact your fault.



Far more so is your disturbing lack of reading comprehension





@ Cynter DeVries

Thx i am going to remember that link. It manages to explain that concept better then i ever have been able to.







Hello again Akita


That is a totally different story all together. Electricity and magnetism were a well documented and studied OBSERVABLE phenomena that could be seen and measured long before an actual electron could be "seen" visually. I'd say the best proof of their existence prior to seeing one was how cathode ray beams acted in an electric field and how they produced X-rays.

A "god particle" is a totally different thing that has no observable phenomena associated with it, whatsoever, outside of the imaginary role that Higgs intended it to play. A theory designed to plug the holes in their "theory of everything" AND they gave this man the Nobel Prize for it before it was even 100% confirmed. Remember, what they have found does not actually match what Higg's even predicted in the first place. It could just as well be something else all together.

I call that dirty science.