• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The "God" Particle: it was just a burp, folks.

T

tosca1

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
35,306
Reaction score
5,723
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Remember the big event announced by mainstream media when science discovered a new particle called, the God Particle?


https://www.gotquestions.org/God-particle.html



Well, mainstream media seemed to have failed to give a heads up on what happened next.


https://www.telegram.com/news/20160806/disappointing-physics-news-god-particle-discovery-was-mistake


I didn't know it was a disappointment, until today.



https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/23/opinion/particle-physics-large-hadron-collider.html
 
Ten years in, the Large Hadron Collider has failed to deliver the exciting discoveries that scientists promised.
Click to expand...

Never mind!
Click to expand...

Guys like me who have been talking for a very long time on the subject of the corruption of science are shocked, naturally....
 

um from what you posted the higgs was discovered and something else was a fluke
 
Last edited:
It is very suspect when all of a sudden religion embraces science, just long enough to claim something else it does not understand. Then worse, claim science is hiding something.
 

CERN, where Scientist spend their down time performing mock human sacrifices in front of a statue of the Hindu Good of Shiva

Lol.....WTF ?
 

No, you have radically confused three distinct things. You're (and the Telegram) are confusing three separate things: a.) The discovery of the Higgs particle. b.) The hope that their might be a new particle discovered back in 2016 due to diphoton bumps, which turned out to be a statistical fluke. c.) The lack of a discovery of physics beyond the Higgs at the LHC.

To address each article individually:

1. Your first article was published before the Higgs was discovered, which is why it still refers to the search as being "under way." Specifically, it was published in "2008-06-02" according to the page source code. (Right click -> "view page source".)


2. The second article is a wonderful illustration of how bad scientific journalism is. I cannot believe there isn't a retraction to this article. This article is 100% fake news, and it's likely because the author doesn't understand what they're writing about.

Compare this to The Indepedent's reporting on the same event, only in this case it was reported correctly:


3. Sabbine's article: Now you're confusing the lack of a discovery of Supersymmetry and beyond-the-Standard-Model with the Higgs. The Higgs was discovered. Physics/particles beyond the Higgs was not discovered. Sabbine literally confirms the Higgs existence in the article that you cited:


I mean she states her case about as well as she usually does (in other words, not very well --there's a lot that's wrong with her article), but what she said there about the Higgs is 100% accurate.
 
Last edited:

I was showing the excitement over it at the time!




Except for the difference in style of writing - can you show exactly what's different between the Telegram.com and Independent.com, as far as info is concerned.







Who's saying the Higgs wasn't discovered????

Since you say "there's a lot that's wrong with her article" - what are they?
Can you offer anything to support your claim?
Surely you don't expect anyone to just take your word for it, huh?
 

you seem to be saying the higgs wasn't discovered with the thread name

God par·ti·cleDictionary result for God particle
noun
an informal name for the Higgs boson or particle.




The "God" Particle: it was just a burp, folks.
 

I see, so now that it's transparent that your OP is completely wrong, you're going to back-pedal and pretend like that wasn't what your OP plainly said. But it's the title of your thread, you're going to need to be Lance Armstrong to try to back-pedal your way out of this.
 
Who's saying the Higgs wasn't discovered????

Somebody called tosca1.
 
Mr Person said:

Thread: The "God" Particle: it was just a burp, folks.
Click to expand...

That's the title. :lol: Do you make conclusions out of reading headlines? :mrgreen:



Did you read the OP? Here's the first sentence:


Remember the big event announced by mainstream media when
science discovered a new particle called, the God Particle?




What's the issue? It's in the OP, too!


Well, mainstream media seemed to have
failed to give a heads up on what happened next.


Is it clear now?




zyzygy said:
Who's saying the Higgs wasn't discovered????

Somebody called tosca1.
Click to expand...

hahahahaha Somebody needs a nap? :lamo
 
Last edited:
tosca1 said:
That's the title. :lol:


Did you read the OP? Here's the first sentence:

Remember the big event announced by mainstream media when
science discovered a new particle called, the God Particle?
Click to expand...

Now it's time for tosca to spin her self-defeating OP into something that almost makes sense. Lots of big, bold, bright letters are coming, I'm sure.:lol:
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Now it's time for tosca to spin her self-defeating OP into something that almost makes sense. Lots of big, bold, bright letters are coming, I'm sure.:lol:
Click to expand...

It's unbelievable how people will try to pretend like they didn't say something embarrassingly wrong, and try to argue that secretly they meant something different than what they plainly said.

Like, at first I felt bad because I don't expect a layperson to know technical minutiae in a very technical field, but jesus. Just admit you were wrong. But some people just can't do it.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Now it's time for tosca to spin her self-defeating OP into something that almost makes sense. Lots of big, bold, bright letters are coming, I'm sure.:lol:
Click to expand...

TBH, one of those people that in my experience just aren't worth engaging with due her utterly entrenched, double down mentality regardless of the facts; a model partisan.

On the plus side however, she can often be very entertaining, albeit unintentionally.
 

Yes.

BTW, thanks for the detailed take down. That should have been /thread right there.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Yes.

BTW, thanks for the detailed take down. That should have been /thread right there.
Click to expand...

I'm not a physicist by trade anymore, but it's so frustrating to see people walk into the public sphere and start asserting really wrong things. Again, the entity most responsible here for this thread is not the OP, but the Telegram. That was egregiously incorrect, irresponsible reporting. It's frustrating to see major news outlets not even bother to correctly report science because they aren't even interested enough to get to the truth or else they are so concerned with sounding flashy and making a news-bite that they discard any pretense of journalistic integrity.

This is also why I'm so frustrated with people like Lawrence Krauss, Sabine Hossenfelder, Peter Woit, Lee Smolin, and Lubos Motl. It's bad enough when journalists make **** up or misrepresent what's going on in contemporary physics research (e.g. drivel like this by Jim Baggot). But when physicists get in on the action and make mountains out of mole-hills, and then when they largely lose their case in the court of science, they try to take it to the court of public opinion where they aren't up-to-date or understanding of the really subtle issues... It's just such an egregious abuse of their public platform and their scientific burden to inform the public.

I think "4 Gravitons" and "Of Particular Significance" are the only physics blogs I've found that actually shoulder the burden of responsibly informing the public. Although both are not as frequently updated as I would like. Sean Carroll's blog isn't bad, either.
 

Thanks for the recommendations.

Physics isn't my field, but a bit of it was required in my curriculum (EE). Just because of my career trajectory I didn't remotely keep up. Still, it's always interesting to try to wrap my head around the stuff the smart folks are exploring.
 

My father's favorite pet peeve.
I'll never forget him showing me a framed copy of a 1947 Washington Post story in which the science editor announced that Bell Laboratory scientists had "invented a new type of transistor tube".

 

That would make an awesome guitar amp! Unfortunately, you can only digitally simulate them these days.:lol:
 
<alt>doxygen said:
That would make an awesome guitar amp! Unfortunately, you can only digitally simulate them these days.:lol:
Click to expand...

Not so, you just have to pay through the nose to get a new vacuum tube amp.
Or, if you're a dinosaur like I am, pick up some old crap and restore it.
I'm restoring a couple of old Dynacos and an Altec, both are 1960's vintage, they're going to scream.
They're not guitar amps, they're for my stereo, but the Altec does use the giant 6L6's...YEAH BUDDY!!
 

I've had 6L6 guitar amp power stages before, but the amps I still have laying around here are a 100W EL34 and a 100W KT88. I also have an old 70's Acoustic (brand) guitar combo amp - 200W. That Acoustic has 2 settings : Loud and Peel Paint.

I can't play anymore, so I really need to get that stuff up on reverb.com and sell it.

My (currently non-functioning) home audio system has a tube pre and a solid state power amp. It's actually a good combination. The power amp has tons of clean headroom and the pre gives the setup all the warmth and smoothness I could want. Well, I could always want more/better, but I can't afford to add more of that stuff right now. I need to get what I have fixed and working again. Until I do, I'm listening to music through the powered studio monitors on one of my computers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…