Saint AAI

http://webcast.web.cern.ch/webcast/play_higgs.html

Looks like they may have found the Higgs boson


4.9 Sigma, good enough for me

Ant

I went here for the weekend whilst I was doing a level physics the place is incredible!

Saint AAI

I didn't go anywhere when I did A level physics

jonc

well we're still here and didn't get sucked into a black hole!

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Speak for yourself.......

Hammer man

iTrader: (25)

I can`t even spell fizziks, let alone learn it....

Dedrater

Quite a good day to be alive.

Some scientists are comparing these results to the Apollo program and landing on the moon, to put things in to perspective.

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Thread Subscribed: cuz it meks me look cleva.

Ant

That makes you more intelligent than f1

hodgy0_2

who has funded the investment in CERN?

tony de wonderful

They would say that as they want to keep the money coming in.

tony de wonderful

Not all scientists would agree that theoretical entities are actually real, ergo they are never actually 'found'.

Bristol98

Personally, I'm hoping its not the "standard model" higgs, would open up a whole new can of worms......

Neanderthal

iTrader: (6)

I would rather have seen them go to the moon again....

Dedrater

No, they are saying it because on a scientific and engineering level, they are comparable, it is astonishing what they do at CERN and today, they have announced one of human kinds greatest achievements, a new state at 125 GeV, completely new Physics!

You are talking about entity realism, a philosophical position, but is doesn't make any sense in regard this thread.

What they have found is an extremely rare particle that essentially causes matter to exist in the form we see in our universe and confirming the standard model of particle physics, the periodic table for the fundamental particles of the universe if you like, the possibilities for new technology, engineering etc by understanding how matter works, is endless.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18708281

Dedrater

We know how to get there and it won't help science in doing so a 7th time, the results from today will lead mankind into different parts of the universe. In our lifetime Mars.

Dedrater

Obviously the LHC has a much higher degree of engineering, which dwarfs the Space Shuttle in direct comparison, i meant in regards when they were both, at one time or another, at the very peak of scientific knowledge.

tony de wonderful

It's my understanding this isn't a new type of physics because the particle in question is a theoretical articulation of the current paradigm. There is nothing unexpected 'found' here rather something theoretical has been 'validated'.

Anyway the point is one is native to think that these scientists are only interested in the science or 'the good of humanity' or other such pretention. They have their toys and they want to keep using them! I'm not saying it is wrong or course but it is what it is.

They have spend decades trying to 'find' this particle and every failure would seem to falsify it's existence, yet now we have an instance of 'success' it is declared a reality. I'm not saying its wrong but if an experiment could be infused with confirmation bias this is it.

It makes every sense. Physics here isn't all that distinguishable from metaphysics. What they have or haven't done only has context within a philosophical postion.

Still sounds like metaphysics ultimately to me, or maybe it's the dumbed down way it's presented to the masses. How can a particle 'cause' mass to exist? What actually is a particle anyway? It can't be described ultimately.

Dedrater

They have defiantly found a new boson, who knows if this is the Higgs. You can of course calculate the errors of experiments and therefore the uncertainty of your results, they are saying this result they are publishing are wrong one of a million times. Sigma is a just measure of deviation due to chance, inferential boundaries are set with it. To better explain 5σ

• 1 sigma certainty is equivalent to 68% confidence that the value falls within the given range,
• 2 sigma = 95% confidence
• 3 sigma = 99.7% confidence
• 4 sigma = 99.994% confidence
• 5 sigma = 99.99994% confidence

This is the last slide from CERN.




But you are quite happy to use the internet in it's current form, the proposal which came from CERN.

Really? I am speechless, i have no reply for that really, it is so wrong, on so many levels.

tony de wonderful

I'm not trying to denigrate anything just putting it in a social context. You have scientists trying to validate something for 40 odd years and then they finally do, and we sound surprised?

Dedrater

Anyway, i am off out for a few drinks with a friend tonight who is a Physicist, he told me today he was nearly is tears when watching the presentation, that sort of emotion only comes about when one truly understands the magnitude of the situation, i was merely chuffed at the news.

To anyone not giving a s*** about the news, spend an hour reading about it and you will start to realise the hype around it all

Dedrater

What if this is not the Higgs though, what if it something much more exotic?

tony de wonderful

It would be better if it isn't right? Then we'd have to innovate new theories. All that is left now is to flesh out the current paradigm right? (until it reaches a crisis anyway?).

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Tony

Suppose you believe you've lost your car keys somewhere down the back of the sofa. You spend ages looking for them, and eventually, after a thorough search, you actually find them. You'd agree that would constitute a successful search, right?

The fact that you had to move all the cushions, disturb the cat, and maybe even found a few coins or biscuit crumbs along the way doesn't in any way change the outcome. You believed your keys were lost somewhere down the back of the sofa, and you found them. Success, no question. You can stop looking now, your theory has been validated.

Finding the Higgs is a tremendous validation of the scientific method, and I'm delighted to see that they appear to have succeeded.

pimmo2000

iTrader: (6)

Fantastic post.

tony de wonderful

You can see a key though it's not a theoretical entity articulated by a paradigm you are operating within.

Imagine looking for a key if you didn't know what a key is....how would you find it?

jonc

...then finds out later that they're not his car keys at all after trying to get into his car, but someone else from the previous nights swingers party where someone didn't want to sleep with a munter.

So it's quite possible that they found something else.

Leslie

I prefer to wait until they know for certain what they have observed rather than accept assumptions.

Les

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

I beleive Chuck Norris has split the Higgs Boson already, with his bare hands.

And this cat you disturb, is it Schrodingers ?

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

You might reasonably examine the car that you already know exists, and work out that a tool of some kind might be required to make it work. Even without having seen it, you could make a reasonable prediction about how big that tool might be, what form it could take, and then go looking for things that might fit that description. Then, having found something that fits that description, you try it in the lock and see if it does what you expected.

Bear in mind that the only way you can "see" a key is by bouncing electromagnetic radiation off it and by comparing what comes back against a set of known patterns and experiences. That's not so far removed from analysing the result of a particle collision...

Hence the 4.9 sigma qualification - the statement of just how possible it is that what they've found is something else, or nothing at all.

That's what the next phase of research will be: to increase that confidence level, and to find out how closely the properties of what they've found match theoretical predictions. In other words, they've found something that sure as heck looks like a car key - now they just need to see if it can start the engine.