The Higgs boson might have been found!

[jase]

While this sounds somewhat unremarkable, it's actually the complete opposite.

There will be a press conference in a few hours detailing the results of ongoing experiments at the large hadron collider(LHC), with regards to finding and authenticating the absolute building blocks for the universe, the higgs boson particle.

Just remember, there is a HUGE difference between a scientific theory, and the usage of the word theory in laymens terms.

http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?pageType=scitech&url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57466104/higgs-boson-video-leaks-to-cern-website/&catid=57466104

[rtw88]

I was reading about this earlier. Pretty awesome news. I've gotten pretty big into popular physics in the last couple years, and read whatever I can get my hands on that isn't too tedious for me. From what I've read, it seems that the announcement is going to be that they are something like 99.996% that they found the actual higgs particle instead of just background noise, which more or less validates it's existence, but they need to be within 99.99996 or something to have to be accepted as definitive fact in physics. It must be a big relief to the people that have invested so much time and money into this to have found what they were looking for.

[uglyorganist]

Live now on the CERN site

[BuzzersonKillwell]

Tweeted this earlier and just being lazy and posting it verbatim here.

If you're like me and don't understand particle physics here is a short video explaining the Higgs Boson in lay terms: vimeo.com/41038445

Very cool.

[xadamhudsonx]

I know all about The God Particle. I saw Angels & Demons with Tom Hanks. I think I'm up to speed.

[Guest]

...but if you design an experiment with the intent to "find something", doesn't that create a sort of bias?

Regardless of the above question, this is FANTASTIC news. Science trumps all! I wish more people would stop giving a shit about tv and pop culture and put their mental energy toward this kind of stuff, but at the same time I don't care because stupid people provide me with job security.

[BuzzersonKillwell]

Since they found the particle that creates mass, how long until they can manipulate mass? If you could remove or manipulate the mass from something, could you theoretically travel at the speed of light, or at least real fast? I want answers!

[almightyseancore]

Since they found the particle that creates mass, how long until they can manipulate mass? If you could remove or manipulate the mass from something, could you theoretically travel at the speed of light, or at least real fast? I want answers!

this was the first thing i thought too.

if you construct some kind of vehicle that can effect the density of the mass around it, it would be amazing the things that could be achieved.

also weaponry, if you could invent some kind of radiation or something that kills just this particle, would buildings, people, etc. would just cease to exist?

[catalinacaper]

Those are pretty abstract thoughts Sean, aha. I don't think density is the right word (the concept of the Higgs boson theorizes that mass isn't actually a physical property of matter but the result of an outside energy force, think gravity) but Jefferson's idea is much more feasible in the future, if you can manipulate the Higgs field to temporarily alter the mass of an object (and therefore rate of travel through the universe) then warp speed is not far off.

[thebiglebowski]

Imagine how heavy you could make something as well if it was nothing but a cluster of higgs particles. It would be like a boat anchor the size of a pinhead (or something like that).

Unless you are talking about creating an antiparticle for the boson. Given that it was so hard to find the original particle, who knows if you could ever find an antiparticle for it.

My guess -- nothing practical ever comes out of this. It is just too small to be manipulated in a useful way. Just knowledge for a textbook. I'm sure someone said that about studying the atom at one point in time, though, as well.

[catalinacaper]

...but if you design an experiment with the intent to "find something", doesn't that create a sort of bias?

Damn right it does! But who really does blind science anymore..

[BuzzersonKillwell]

Those are pretty abstract thoughts Sean, aha. I don't think density is the right word (the concept of the Higgs boson theorizes that mass isn't actually a physical property of matter but the result of an outside energy force, think gravity) but Jefferson's idea is much more feasible in the future, if you can manipulate the Higgs field to temporarily alter the mass of an object (and therefore rate of travel through the universe) then warp speed is not far off.

Clearly I'm 39% more scientist than you Sean. Perhaps you're just a bit.......

dense.

[catalinacaper]

Hahaha, I didn't mean to come off pretentious when I said that, but going to a tech school we talk about this subject all the time.

[rtw88]

Imagine how heavy you could make something as well if it was nothing but a cluster of higgs particles. It would be like a boat anchor the size of a pinhead (or something like that).

Unless you are talking about creating an antiparticle for the boson. Given that it was so hard to find the original particle, who knows if you could ever find an antiparticle for it.

My guess -- nothing practical ever comes out of this. It is just too small to be manipulated in a useful way. Just knowledge for a textbook. I'm sure someone said that about studying the atom at one point in time, though, as well.

Nothing practical!? You are such a nutso and a cynical person! We've just hit the tip of the iceberg.

[thebiglebowski]

Nothing practical!? You are such a nutso and a cynical person! We've just hit the tip of the iceberg.

Yeah. Just like how we study galaxies we will never go to. Some things are just too small or too big for human beings to control. We can study them and put them in a textbook (or sci-fi lit), but that is all. Has anything practical come out of partical physics since we split the atom? I don't know for sure, but if so, please give an example.

Slightly off topic -- but what really bugs me is when people are on the Discovery channel doing things like putting tracking tags on fish and selling it that "we are going to get so much data about where these fish are migrating that will help us to protect them". It's just a way to justify spending research money. The only thing that matters is estimates of population size for purposes of controlling harvest sizes. Otherwise, it doesn't do anything to change people's behavior. They would be better off just leaving the animals be.

Edit: and not pumping carbon into the atmosphere with their gasoline engines.

[catalinacaper]

Yeah. Just like how we study galaxies we will never go to. Some things are just too small or too big for human beings to control. We can study them and put them in a textbook (or sci-fi lit), but that is all. Has anything practical come out of partical physics since we split the atom? I don't know for sure, but if so, please give an example.

Slightly off topic -- but what really bugs me is when people are on the Discovery channel doing things like putting tracking tags on fish and selling it that "we are going to get so much data about where these fish are migrating that will help us to protect them". It's just a way to justify spending research money. The only thing that matters is estimates of population size for purposes of controlling harvest sizes. Otherwise, it doesn't do anything to change people's behavior. They would be better off just leaving the animals be.

Edit: and not pumping carbon into the atmosphere with their gasoline engines.

My advice to you is to lookup the heisenberg uncertainty principle and to answer your question there are a ton of practical things that nanophysics has uncovered. Quantum tunneling, massive increases in microscopy and the understanding of how matter behaves completely differently on a subatomic level. Were only at the tip of the iceberg in terms of understanding molecular self assembly which could open up whole new worlds in medicine, engineering, construction, you name it. Right now I work in a lab that (among many other things) maps the atomic surfaces of materials using Scanning Tunneling Microscopy and Atomic Force Microscopy. The idea being that you can use the tunneling effect of electrons from an atomically sharp tip (think the most amazing record needle ever) to a surface to visually map the atomic structure of practically any material.

[catalinacaper]

The real goal is to perfect the art of "bottom up" manufacturing of materials. Once you understand how to manipulate matter on a subatomic level, you can actually get materials to self-assemble with more accuracy than any "top down" process could ever imagine.

[thebiglebowski]

I understand the uncertainty principle and what you do is VERY cool from a theoretical standpoint, but you failed to answer my question -- What has particle physics done that is practical since splitting the atom? How has anything you have done with your electron microscope changed how I live my life?

And specifically, I wasn't saying that there isn't value in studying how atoms come together and form. Nanotech and nanopolymers and stuff like that does have potential. A drug that was created from a "bottom-up" approach is practical, if that's how it is done these days. I am more pointing my statements at studying quarks, strings, etc (ie, smaller than an atom). I don't think that research will ever change how we live our lives. It's just too small for us to do anything with it. It's hard enough to even show they exist.

[catalinacaper]

I'm at work right now, so I don't have time to write out a proper response until later but, how many times do you think they told Newton his laws of motion were useless when he first theorized them? Science is always building on itself.

[thebiglebowski]

I'm at work right now, so I don't have time to write out a proper response until later but, how many times do you think they told Newton his laws of motion were useless when he first theorized them? Science is always building on itself.

None? Outside of maybe some religious "the earth is the center of the universe" type stuff from the uneducated majority? I'm just guessing.

Those laws act on objects in the scale we live in. You can observe and use them to manipulate the physical world. I am talking about the study of the SUBATOMIC. I don't deny that science is always building on itself. That's not incongruent with any of my statements. My statement is that the last 70 years of particle physics has produced nothing but academic knowledge.

Can I say with absolute certainty that just because nothing practical has come in the last 70 years that we won't be traveling at the speed of light next year? No. My gut is that human beings will go extinct before they ever do it, though.

[BuzzersonKillwell]

PARTICLE PHYSICS FIGHT!!!!!!!!

[BuzzersonKillwell]

Fuck. Really? That's the page break.

[catalinacaper]

Haha I would hardly call this a fight or even an argument, and honestly I love being able to talk about this stuff with someone on here, it's what I love and when I graduate I'll be receiving the 2nd nanotech minor certificate ever awarded.. I've been blessed with an awesome mentor/professor who has started the first nanotech undergrad minor program in the US.

But back to the point, I can't deny that 90% of particle physics study probably won't have a practical impact for a long time, if ever. I mean hell, when they first fired up the CERN particle collider.. I remember the hysteria about some sort of doomsday black hole being formed and swallowing the earth from the inside. The general public is not capable for the most part of understanding or embracing the significance of most of the discoveries of the last 70 years, unless they use it in their everyday life. The media has called the Higgs Boson the "god" particle for heaven's sake, which is ridiculous. The real answer is that people are desperate to know the answer to the great question. Which is silly because we all know the answer is 42.

[jerseydave77]

The term the "God Particle" was coined by a respected Physicist ( Leon Lederman). It is obviously ridiculous but please don't blame the media for creating this misunderstanding. Most people only understand that something important was discovered and are seeking answers. Falling back on a convenient term created from within trusted circles is not a stretch at all.

[catalinacaper]

The term the "God Particle" was coined by a respected Physicist ( Leon Lederman). It is obviously ridiculous but please don't blame the media for creating this misunderstanding. Most people only understand that something important was discovered and are seeking answers. Falling back on a convenient term created from within trusted circles is not a stretch at all.

I don't blame the media for the term, I only wish that there was a way that the media could discuss things like this without sensationalizing them. Instead it is reduced to a ten second blurb with a catchy headline. If we spent more time discussing stuff like this and less time arguing over what political figure said what today our society might actually get something done.

Ps - did you get that record you bought from me yet?