You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
At last there is proof of god, he sure is small.
But is this the "holy grail" of physics? Will every discovery from this day forward be hoo-hum or will it build on what has come before it. Will it lead to the harnessing of matter or prove the existence of antimatter?
This is the single biggest breakthrough in Physics since relativity theory was postulated. One huge piece of the puzzle is now in place.
another brick in the Tower of Babel...
Also, stop calling it a god particle! Scientists detest that term. It is the Higgs Boson
I heard that there is actually a little disappointment on the part of the scientists. The data conformed to what was predicted, the enormous experiment worked, the theory was confirmed. But there was no "That's funny" moment where an unexplained data set opens a new avenue of exploration.
..." which cost some $10 billion to build and run..." wow what a waste
There's a lady over on East Minehaha in St. Paul that had six of these (all different colors) available at her yard sale last spring, I wonder if the scientists just cheated and bought one second-hand?
"how the Big Bang created something out of nothing."… No, that's inaccurate in lay terms. It is not "something" out of "nothing." It is "nothing" as physicists use the word "nothing" in their jargon. The lay definition of "nothing" is a metaphysical concept. Physicists aren't referring to literally NOTHING/NO THING just as when they use the word "universe" they are not referring to EVERYTHING. Otherwise there could not be "multiverses." This is a very complicated linguistics, physics, and metaphysics issue, and unfortunately physicists/scientists use some common words in specialized connotations with each other than how lay people use the term. Reporters typically repeat the use of these terms to mean what the physics-connotation means without explaining that to the rest of us, because few of them recognize the distinction. Suffice it to say, "something from nothing" does not mean "NO THING(s)," it actually presupposes the existence of multiple THINGS. I'll leave it at that because that's a very involved conversation. Hawking, as the example par excellence in this matter, needs to recognize the limits of the extent of his claims, logic, and ostensible evidence in this matter (no pun intended). Metaphysicists don't usually do well in trying to discuss physics, and physicists seem to fare no better when addressing metaphysics, in my experience. This is one of those situations. Read how Hawking and others (in multiple different ways) qualify their use of the label “nothing” and what they presuppose as existing in this putative prior-to-“something”-state-of-“nothingness.”
Higgs Bosons are evidence of the existence of the Higgs Field, which theoretically (and now it seems pretty likely)encompasses all of physical space. The Bosons don't change energy into mass; the Field does that under certain conditions and the Bosons are a byproduct of an asymmetric change in the energy state within the field.
The fact that we have succeeded in detecting one of these particles is amazing. It means that we have witnessed indirectly the conversion of energy into matter. Imagine pressing the "turkey" button on your home replicator and pulling a freshly roasted turkey from the previously empty space after a few moments. This is the beginning of the road that an invention like that might lie on.
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks