- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Large Hadron Collider results hint at need for new physics model.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:06 pm to Bout_Dat_Lyfe
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:06 pm to Bout_Dat_Lyfe
quote:
Can anyone dumb this down?
We base models on theories which are built on scant or speculative evidence. We then spend all our efforts trying to prove what we made up. Sometimes it just ends up being bullshite.
3
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:07 pm to the_watcher
The Boson's discovery was this generation's Manhattan Project, but since it's such a heavy concept - and didn't come with a boom and a War victory, it didn't get near the attention it deserved outside of the Science community.
The LHC is a staggering piece of engineering, it's a trip how it all starts with a little tank of Hydrogen.
The LHC is a staggering piece of engineering, it's a trip how it all starts with a little tank of Hydrogen.
This post was edited on 3/10/16 at 1:10 pm
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:07 pm to Bout_Dat_Lyfe
You mean to tell me that real scientists don't just stop trying to understand very complex systems when there is a scientific consensus on how it works? Hmmm...
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:09 pm to the_watcher
quote:
I thought it was common knowledge they found it in 2012
They discovered the Higs Boson, not necessarily the "God particle". Much like dark matter, they believe it does a bunch of things. However, it's not proven yet. They are still trying to research what it does.
quote:
Discovering the Higgs boson was a huge achievement but now the race is on to understand it: a prospect that Daniela is particularly excited about.
What i find interesting is dark matter. Scientists say it makes up 80% of the universe, but they don't know what it is. So dark matter is an unknown variable in their formula, same as Higgs Boson.
ETA: Also, my misunderstanding of why it was called the God particle could lead to some confusion.
This post was edited on 3/10/16 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:09 pm to Tortious
quote:lmao no. Please stop talking about physics now.
We base models on theories which are built on scant or speculative evidence. We then spend all our efforts trying to prove what we made up. Sometimes it just ends up being bullshite.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:10 pm to Aux Arc
quote:There has no been consensus of physicists who thought that the Standard Model was finished and 100% right. Analogy fail
You mean to tell me that real scientists don't just stop trying to understand very complex systems when there is a scientific consensus on how it works? Hmmm...
It's always been regarded as incomplete
This post was edited on 3/10/16 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:11 pm to Tortious
quote:
We base models on theories which are built on scant or speculative evidence. We then spend all our efforts trying to prove what we made up. Sometimes it just ends up being bullshite
I understand how a fricking experiment works. I'm talking about the specific Physics information like:
quote:
According to the standard model, B mesons are made up of a light quark and a heavy beauty antiquark - and because of that quark-antiquark pairing, they decay rapidly, and should shoot their products off at specific angles.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:12 pm to Hog on the Hill
Maybe the Collider just overheated, had a 404 Error, or blew a fuse?
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:13 pm to bencoleman
quote:That's not what they're saying at all
So basically what they're saying is that faster than the speed of light travel is not just possible but could be accomplished fairly easily
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:13 pm to Bout_Dat_Lyfe
Don't ask me, I'm still worried about Schrodinger's Cat
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:15 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:
There has no been consensus of physicists who thought that the Standard Model was finished and 100% right. Analogy fail
It's always been regarded as incomplete
What other models are there than the standard? Is that like string theory and quantum mechanics? I'm interested in physics, but way too dumb to get the heavier stuff.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:21 pm to Bout_Dat_Lyfe
quote:Quarks are fundamental particles that have three properties: mass, charge, and spin (which refers to angular momentum). The weird names, like up, top, charm, down, bottom, and strange, are just nicknames to refer to specific types (AKA flavors) of quarks. They're weird names, but they're weird because physicists had to come up with arbitrary words for these fundamental particles, since language had no other words that fit.
I understand how a fricking experiment works. I'm talking about the specific Physics information like:
According to the standard model, B mesons are made up of a light quark and a heavy beauty antiquark - and because of that quark-antiquark pairing, they decay rapidly, and should shoot their products off at specific angles.
There's really no point in you trying to understand the weird names. It's only useful if you're a physicist studying particle physics or quantum mechanics.
This post was edited on 3/10/16 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:39 pm to BugAC
quote:The Higgs boson is the same thing as the "god particle". The term "god particle" was just assigned to it by some nerd and the media ran off with it. And physicists already know what it does.
They discovered the Higs Boson, not necessarily the "God particle". Much like dark matter, they believe it does a bunch of things. However, it's not proven yet. They are still trying to research what it does.
The Higgs boson AKA "god particle" is a particle that gives other particles mass when they interact with it.
This post was edited on 3/10/16 at 1:40 pm
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:40 pm to Bout_Dat_Lyfe
quote:
According to the standard model, B mesons are made up of a light quark and a heavy beauty antiquark - and because of that quark-antiquark pairing, they decay rapidly, and should shoot their products off at specific angles.
To help you out, a particular particle that scientists theorized should exist and behave in a particular way because it made the math work out wasn't seen where it was expected. Therefore, if this piece of the puzzle is missing, the whole puzzle is off (maybe not in it's entirety, but it has to be adjusted). That said, they're still trying to analyze the new puzzle pieces they've found to make the whole puzzle fit together.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 1:42 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:
The Higgs boson is the same thing as the "god particle". The term "god particle" was just assigned to it by some nerd and the media ran off with it. And physicists already know what it does.
Yeah, that's why i edited my comment.
quote:
The Higgs boson AKA "god particle" is a particle that gives other particles mass when they interact with it.
Yup, read up on that too.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 2:18 pm to BigEdLSU
Says the crack pot fundie who relies on an ancient debunked book for his answers.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 2:27 pm to Bout_Dat_Lyfe
Some of the more advanced theories in physics that the normal person doesn't even know about are based solely on mathematics. Soooo the mathematics predicted certain properties for certain particles. Up until now the particles that the math says should be there have been found to actually exist. The Higgs Boson being the most recent example.
What this article is saying is that now some weird results are coming out of the LHC that aren't predicted or are against the predictions of the mathematics that has worked so well with the Standard Model of particle physics so far.
So you either adapt and change or bury your head in the sand. Science is good at adapting.
What this article is saying is that now some weird results are coming out of the LHC that aren't predicted or are against the predictions of the mathematics that has worked so well with the Standard Model of particle physics so far.
So you either adapt and change or bury your head in the sand. Science is good at adapting.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 2:30 pm to Hog on the Hill
quote:
There has no been consensus of physicists who thought that the Standard Model was finished and 100% right.
A scientist believing a theory to be 100% right is probably not capable of objectively testing that theory anyway.
Posted on 3/10/16 at 2:33 pm to Tortious
quote:
We base models on theories which are built on scant or speculative evidence. We then spend all our efforts trying to prove what we made up. Sometimes it just ends up being bullshite.
I'm not this extreme. Newton's model works fine for most of the macro universe. Einstein's model did a good enough job for almost 100 years. But, as we delve deeper and deeper into the mysteries, we have to keep looking forward.
"Work in progress" probably a better description of physics.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News