...Wat.

Don't be so short-sighted, Carl.

We could have just kept living in caves, but for me, well I'd like to see us continue moving forward.

Don't you realize all these wonderful things like smart phones and the internet required crazy-ass investments in the potential for the future?

carl

can you imagine someone 100 years saying the same thing you just did but about electrons instead? If we didn't know about electrons you wouldn't be able to write your idiotic comment. If we didn't know about germ theory you would probably be dead right now.

@Carl Bowman

Not everything have the benefit right away. Look at the development of science, lots of study take decades before we can find a practical application. Once we established that, it benefit us greatly.

Look around you, everything you have start from a study sometimes in the past.

sooo, does this mean ftl drives??? it did say dimension stuff in there, and I have several theories on how to get it working, all we need to do is get there and back successively(dam spell checker) get back alive... any volenters(again, wtf)???

Carl

What a scientific mind you have...My guess is you are a staunch Republican who thinks global warming is a myth also...Let me know how that works out for you?..Why believe in science when you can find all the knowledge you need in the bible?..SARC...

I have a few things to say. Nothing serious, though. First! The discovery is great, if it becomes a discovery instead of an almost discovery. Second! Carl, you're an idiot. Third! rick-428133... also an idiot. Global Warming... well, that's a discussion for an hour or two, but let me sum it up for you.

Flawed tests by non-scientists prove that the area around nuclear reactors is dangerous. Duh. The history of the Earth replays as it does every so often, Man calls it "evidence human-kind is doing something wrong." Stupid. History shows that we will be fine after the poles switch. Maybe an "Ice Age," where the temparature drops, will help you realize the facts about Global Warming.

Not to say that Global Warmaing doesn't exist! It is simply on a far smaller, far more controlled spectrum than everyone seems to think. As for the bible... well, I won't tell you you're a moron, but I'll certainly think it!

By the by, science and the bible go hand in hand. Science cannot exist without a God, or you wouldn't believe in luck! Have fun figuring that one out!

No!

Well, if you want a complete flight of fancy (which are often fun), I'd imagine that if you could somehow nullify the Higgs field, you could accelerate your spaceship to lightspeed almost immediately. You could be anywhere in the universe in 0 seconds of subjective time.

Global warming is a phase that the earth goes through every thousands of years, just like we have seasons, we have great changes after a certain period of time. The world and universe has a pattern and works in cycles. Global warming in the past, ice ages in the past, and global warming and ice ages in the future. cycles.

@Justin A. Guy Science cannot exist without a God, or you wouldn't believe in luck! ... The grand design theory, maybe? Or is there a great mathematician, God, who set the universe up so perfectly, or was the universe and all the laws of nature a result of random luck? I think the answer is even more profound than we can even imagine....

And Carl is a genius... in his own little world.

johnjohn

If you dispassionatly look at the global warming data, you see virtually incontrovertable evidence it is man-made, or at least very man-influenced. The natural cycles are all very very much slower.

As for the profundity how about

Things are the way they are because....they are the way they are!

Justin said: By the by, science and the bible go hand in hand.

Oh, of course. There's loads of science in the Bible. For example, Joseph proclaiming that "the nine stars" bowed down to him in his dream. See? Science! God revealed through...

Oh, wait. There's a tad MORE than nine stars... f*ck...

Okay, let's look at the germ theory of dis... no, Jesus said "demons" were responsible. Gosh darn it to heck fire.

Hmm... Babylonian flat-earth cosmology, a very young earth (despite desperate attempts from apologists to make "six days" NOT REALLY six days), a talking donkey, a talking snake, the sun standing still...

You're right, Justin. Your mythical desert demiurge and the confused musings of his followers and empirically verifiable data go hand in hand.

Thanks for reminding us all.

I still don't know what the hell they are talking about.

I was still hoping the standard model would fall apart if no Higgs was observed. It's looking even more like it is there though. Well, only one thing left to do! See what comes after the standard model.

I would also hardly call this physics most successful theory, maybe high energies.
The standard model isn't all bad though I suppose, it doesn't have much of idea on dark matter and energy, which I think is a crock – reminiscent of the old cosmological constants.

@ Jon-2730330

Your critical thinking skills need improvement for obvious reasons after reading your comment about what Justin said...

@ Robert-2302414

Yes it would be amazing to spend $10 billion to feed starving people, but we live in a world where the rich get richer, and the poor get poor. I think you should've figured this out by now. Your comment about this being a waste is very narrow minded. We need advances in physics, science, etc. to help preserve the human race. Our little blue planet is running out of steam and room. We will have to do some extraordinary things if the human race is to survive in the future.

@ Ferrosynthesis-3490482

Things are the way we perceive them to be.

So Alan...

Do you not have the ability delete moronic posts like Carl Bowman's or are you afraid you would be infringing on his amendment rights?

Or were you leaving it alone for our amusement, because we are laughing at him, not with him.

Either way, I'll tell you one thing, I'm not going over to Carl's place any time soon.

Carl Bowman

Ummmm...yeaahh,,,,that's great and all but after spending 10 billion my question is will I be able to eat it or screw it eventually? Because if it doesn't at least eventually have that capability then i'm saying who gives a rats anal gland?

It took a whole 3 posts before some neanderthal comes stomping in b*tching about what's in it for him.

@Justin_Guy: My, you certainly take your ideas seriously! For instance, what makes you think that our magnetic poles are going to flip anytime soon --- and even if they did, how would that stop man-induced climate change? And the irony of your calling other people idiots would come shining through if your remarks weren't so damn funny.

So basically the LHC is a colossal waste of money that could better be used to feed hungry children? They are no closer to finding the God particle as they call it than they were before the LHC was built. What a WASTE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I feel stupider for having read this. Thanks.

@Carl Bowman,

Thanks for starting my day by beating me down with sheer stupidity. I feel much dumber now(sigh) Now there is no where to go but up. Much better........Thank You.

@Byron Raum,

If you build that "Hot Rod" I so want to drive it:)

BTW- Can you finish it before the November 2012 elections?

Warp Drive here we come! 100+ years from now and if the government increases NASA funding and the Russian and Chinese don't beat us to it. :(

This is "almost" the same BS they aways say. I "almost" read the whole article.

I wonder if we could eventually harness the power of the Higgs Boson to manipulate a higgs field to make something act as if it had zero mass, then it would be much easier to accelerate the object to light speed.

Whatever it is, or isn't Science should have many new plotlines, which is, in itself, great!

I wonder if an object of actual 0 mass (not near-zero, I'm looking at you photons), could actually do some really cool @!$%#, like fly through a star or a black hole. No mass, no gravity, right?

@ Janstince

That's why we need to find it. If it does exist, and we find it we will know what to look for and hopefully be able to study this radical particle even further. It could be the missing link to helping us figure out a lot of mysteries in the universe. In the future this information will give us insight on long distance space travel, origin of universe, etc...

So, this is almost a story, huh? Almost news? Almost worth reading? :-)

I am not a big fan of particle physics because like astronomy they massage the data. They claim they can even work out the size of the planets orbiting other stars. All this is from working out the fluctuations in the light from the star? hmmm. It is funny. The questions is why is it funny?

The patterns could be over lapping if there is more then one planet. Even tell us the size of the planet. Then later we will find that they were wrong. As with most things they lie and hope its true.

I do believe that global warming is a fact and is a problem. Id like the USA to take action on building walls around valuable city real estate. The other thing is to plan for it. There is a hell of alot of ice melt on the north and south pole.

I can see there is a problem. I am no fan of carbon trading scheme and I am against it. Id like a policy response from Obama to push research in electrically powered vehicles and get the government to buy them.

Id like also higher efficiency standards pushed. We have some of them for transport and appliances and California leads the way.

Id like energy conservation policy for all the states. Id like the federal government to guarantee funding for purchase of electrically powered vehicles for the government when possible.

William Bentley Understanding HB will more than likely lead to understanding to dark matter.

Alan Boyle-

My research work had to do with mathematical models for linguistics. Like those for physics, they are often exceptionally counter intuitive. Skepticism is healthy, but I think what the lay public would benefit from are practical contrasts between a particular counter intuitive property of say quantum physics, and then point out how concretely, some everyday object they rely on like the computer in their car or their cell phone, would not work if that quantum effect was not postulated by the theoretical physicists, and then proven by the experimental physicists.

Such articles will combat a very dangerous political thread of anti-science perspectives. It affects funding and our future as a nation. Today NSF spends less than one tenth of a penny of a tax dollar on university research grants. That is mind numbingly stupid given the enormous economic benefits of this research. Perhaps some simple crisp stories connecting the dots between a totally wierd principle that violates intuition and practical devices would help people have a more visceral appreciation of the power of the more esoteric sciences.

Somebody wrote in response to a Luddite-sounding piece:

My guess is you are a staunch Republican

Stupidity observes no party boundaries.

William Bentley Understanding HB will more than likely lead to understanding to dark matter.

Possibly, the standard model as it stands has more than a few problems dealing with dark matter/energy though. I don't think finding the Higgs will patch these holes in the slightest, and I suppose it really isn't suppose to.

I think quantum gravity would be a far more interesting solution for dark matter, but you can't base something on the most interesting solution and quantum gravity has its own problems.

Honestly on dark energy I'm not sold on its existence, but data does seem to suggest it's very likely. I just have trouble with plugging models to fill holes. It is the most accepted hypothesis however, even if it's just another cosmological constant.

I guess when we figure all this stuff out I won't have as much of a problem with it. I just hate hearing people talk about constantly, normally imparting some type of magical property to, when we don't even know what it is.

almost-final answer

well and it is "almost" exciting. Shouldn't Scientists wait until the actually confirm a conclusion not "almost" confirm a conclusion before a big announcement. It's just another avenue for Governments and institutes to pour money.

Science is the method by which we improve our understanding of the natural universe. Scientists stay away from absolute certainty, because they understand that the more they learn, the more they know what they do not know. If scientists declared absolute certainty about anything, the field stops being science and becomes an ideology. This is pretty clear when you look at the common usage of the word "theory". In common usage, it generally means an idea, a supposition, maybe even a hunch that requires no supporting evidence at all. The scientific use of the word "theory" is very different. Scientific theory is considered scientific fact, even though the accuracy of the theory can be improved over time with the accumulation of additional evidence that supports or criticizes the theory. I one were to use common standards for "confirmation" such as the reasonable doubt standard used in criminal law, then one could say with "certainty" that the scientists here have "confirmed" their conclusion very well beyond a reasonable doubt. At the end of the day, however, all scientific knowledge is admitted to be in a state of continual discovery even if we have the "highest confidence" in it's accuracy. Check out this article on the scientific theory to see just how rigorous the process is for a scientific theory to be rightly named as such.

Don't worry about it....when you cut open most fish after you've caught them, the bait is still there. If you lose it in the river, and you think a fish has swallowed it...wait until the sun goes down, and look for the fish that glows in the dark...HA! HA!

Did you catch anything?

heard ; ; thar great for catching pencil neck...

No, but ♫ = MC5

yes, energy equaling mass and vice versa will still be true...

How about MC Hammer ....

Could he count .... ??

No, We're gonna change our units of measurment so that E equals mass times the number of letters in the bible squared, just to be onery. Then we'll laugh at people who think that it's proof that physics confirms the bible.

Wow, Faust. Did you think that was clever or something? Internet anonymity + audience sure made you a total ass.

Actually, the comment wasn't necessarily aimed at who you think it was. I've seen well regarded physicists on television waxing all poetical about how amazing it is that c squared just happens to be exactly the right size to convert e to m. That's pretty disheartening considering c is just a constant, its sole purpose is to knock the units of measurement down to size. Einstein could have just as easily used the number of times he sneezed, and the equation would have been just as valid.

My intent was to provoke thought in those who think there's something almost magical about that equation, not to take a back-handed swipe at religion. A wise Christian would realize immediately how arbitrary the number chosen for the constant was, if anyone ever pushed that through.

This is almost good news.

this is very funny

almost...

I almost won the lottery ....

I only missed it by 6 numbers ....

bigbenalaska

do you know what a standard deviation is?

Yes ....

And which one ....

High or low .... ??

If they do find proof of the Higgs boson, will that have anything to do with confirming string theory?

bigbenalaska

well then you should know better than to crack a joke about "almost" winning the lottery and missing by 6 numbers. That is nothing like the 4.5 - 5 sigma confidence the scientists have in this study.

Your joke (incorrectly) gives credence to those who think this study is just guesswork.

evenstarbns

As far as I remember, no. This will confirm the Standard Model which is a little older and much more accepted. String theory goes beyond the Standard Model and at this point is only hypothetical, there are no experiments for it yet.

smt123-3055206 ....

We'll have to see ....

I know that they feel that they have narrowed the possibility of finding the "God Particle" down in the GEV scale and have detected and reported a couple of signals within that range ....

Can they say that it's the Higgs boson .... ??

We'll have to see ....

In other news, the Emperor has almost found his new cloths and stated that he, "almost loved them." After spending 10B he should almost love them anyway.

Evenstarbns, SMT123 is correct with regard to the Standard Model. I would add that M Theory (aka Brane Theory, aka Membrane Theory) has superseded String Theory...and is very early in its development. It is interesting to note, however, that, according to M Theory, our Universe is only one of many in a Multiverse. It also allows for the explanation of our Universe's origin, from the collision of membranes, resulting in a Big Bang. As I mentioned, it is still very early in its development. Still, we have progressed very far in the last 100 years--when we thought there were only 3 dimensions (height, length, depth). Einstein added the 4th--time. According to M Theory, there are 7 more spacial dimensions, making 11. In any event, I am hoping for a 5-sigma finding on the Higgs. BTW, Alan, could you refrain from referring to it as the 'god particle'? It only inflames religious zealots--don't we have enough of that already?

Lee appears to have raised willful ignorance to the 5 sigma level all by himself, sad to say.

Sorry, but how and where do these people come here from...

I don't think you can make such particle accelerator in China.

I know China and Russia have wifes for sale, but don't be fool and try to buy 1. You will regret it.

Almost discovered, Almost detected, Almost, almost, almost. Spare us the non discovery announcement. How about something that can be proven from science for a change. Theory, not matter how intriguing, is not proof. All these theories and no proof. I suppose theory has been substituted for truth in science now. Proving anything appears to be too much to ask. Let's settle for a preponderance of evidence. It will be good enough to placate the masses and further their agenda. Apparently people are to thick to understand theory is not empirical nor proof. Just keep spending the money, perhaps in a 100 years you might get a very confident maybe. As with the big bang, it all started with a super atom,somewhere in nothing, powered by we don't know, exploded because we have no idea, resulting in expansion, and poof all that is, was. And not a word on how this atom came to be to begin with or the processes that resulted in all this. "You must believe us, we scientists". Almost as scary as "We've from the government and we're here to help you". Really? In my day science searched for truth, not convenient fanciful hypothesis and speculative theory to fit a preconceived notion of how it must be. Pffffft, I say. Show me the proof or keep working until you can.

I'll bet I can sell a Higgs Boson on ebay..."there's a sucker born"...

By almost sure, they mean 99% versus 99.99994%

But numbers are hard, aren't they? The ironic thing is, the kind of person who makes this "Its a waste of money" argument are the LEAST likely to actually feed the poor.

You, Nicodemus, have no idea what scientific theory is. Common language has altered the meaning of the word "theory" to essentially mean a guess, so when you see "theory" you think it's a bunch of nonsense. BUT if you paid attention in school (or even took a gander at Google), you would know that in science a theory is considered scientific fact and knowledge. Theories can then be supported by other evidence and/or laws.

All the support for gravitation are "only" theories. Do you say "Pffft" to gravity on a regular basis?

Nicodemus, gravity is only a theory, too. If you don't believe it is certain, you can always throw yourself off a rooftop and test it...

"In my day science searched for truth, not convenient fanciful hypothesis and speculative theory..."

Einstein's fanciful theories led to the splitting of the atom. Watson and Crick's models of genetic structure led to their discovery of the double helix of DNA. Unless your day was in the era of alchemy and witch doctors, Nicodemus, you have not been paying attention to scientific advances of the last 100 years and the processes through which they were made.

Nicodemus, theory in the inductive (empirical) sciences can never be proven true by experiment --- it can only be proven false or in need of modification. As close as we can come to "proving" a theory is if an experiment does not contradict it. In fact, we build confidence in a theory if successive experiments that could disprove it fail to do so.

Matt wrote:

" Theories can then be supported by other evidence and/or laws."

Theories can also be disproven or be shown to need modification by other evidence.

You're ridiculously ignorant. Yes, they can detect individual photons with a certain probability. And the disturbance in the light. Just because you don't know how doesn't mean your limited conceptions trump scientific achievements. Maybe that's why you have a B.A. and not a Ph.D. You allege these theories have circular dependencies and are therefore questionable, but perhaps it's because you haven't studied or applied any quantum physics.

And did you give yourself the 1 vote too?

Or repeatability in stupidity :P

Why don't you explain to me how they detect a single photon? come smarty pants. Quantum Mechanics is just a mess.

The complicated formulas come from data that the scientists try to use it to make predictions.

What I have noticed is that it is easy to refute with stupidity but no guts. Explain to me what detector is used?

You don't know.

I bet you are a republican. Thats what they do. Everything is too complicated for them to understand.

So they just say things like. Did you study quatum physics. I bet I know more about it then you do.

Quatumn physics is really a failure and its just using probabilities because they claim they can't anything else. Thought it works so they keep it.

The questions that arise could an electron microscope have been built without needing the understanding we have? The scientists even argue about these facts.

Johnny, I believe Einstein dreamt he was in an atom along with a neutron proton and Electron, so he was the first to see I guess he discovered it. I guess you have to dream it before it becomes real. I only have human logic no degrees

omg, did you learn nothing in obtaining your BA in physics??? A properly-wired PM tube can easily measure single photons. Have you never heard of the technique of photon counting? just amazing!

Hey, I would be happy if they could only stay inside the budget, or for that matter , to be able to balance it at least once in my life time

this other stuff , please use English for us regular people

Exactly, you moron. What do you know? It's obvious that you don't know even how to use spell checker.

Well John, Its like this. When You go to the bank. You need to read the fine print in the contract.

The devil is always in the detail. If someone tells you its too complicated. Then usually they don't understand it themselves.

The equations and math are just superficially a way to represent a way to predict what happens when you put in a figure.

Notice that these equations are limited. If you try to go outside the ranges that quantum mechanics wants you to exist in. The theory fails.

Its just like the classical physics. Its like Ohms law. It only works within certain ranges.

When I have discussions with scientists they don't seem to know even the simplist things. I wonder what kind of science is being done.

Though i do see alot of folk here in the USA with substandard medical care. That I find outrageous.

I only have a BA in physics

No kidding. A BA in physics. You've got a Bachelor of Arts in Physics. um, I think someone took your money and had a kegger with it. ;)

Seriously dude, is that like physics without the math... or science?

Ahhh. Now we have properly wired PM tube? You couldnt say Photo Multiplying tube would count it.

Ok. Now with the swearing it tells me you are the ignorant one.

Do you even understand how a photo multipying tube works? It claims that one photon will excite more and more photons and this can be measured.

How do you know that it is just one photon? Not 10 photons that are multiplied?

Any of the subsequent theories can be wrong. Then this effects the subsequent theories.

Oh i forgot. Only a genius can understand these things. hmmmm.

I guess I have only average intelligence because I can question these things. Who here has got a photo multiplying tube properly wired?

Did any of you actually do that in your physics?

Now its probability? Ahhh We can predict that most of them. Wow. That is pretty funny. Now we start to see how much guessing is involved.

Now we just use the math to massage the data to make it look like something useful and then we continue with this.

Great. work

Johnny, everything you claim you don't understand or doesn't really happen could be easily found on the net! Why don't you look before you type?

I guess all over the United states people are wiring up there Photo multiplying tubes and testing if they are calibrated.

Great.

Tyler...how about the COH and this AB chick?...interesting

I think you may have a BS degree because you are obviously full of it.

Do tell. From which University did you get your Bachelor of Arts in Physics?

johny, there is no way on Earth that you have a BA in physics.

Oh, and johny? Look into quantum computing when you get a chance. You seem to have a huge issue with using probability theory in the quantum world. If this were actually an issue, quantum computing wouldn't be possible.

A photomultiplier will produce a small current even without incident photons; this is called the dark current. Photon counting applications generally demand photomultipliers designed to minimise dark current.

Explain that. Its more an art form then science.

I have noticed everyone just says. Have you studied this or that? Its on the internet? Which website? come on? You criticize yet you don't know.

All this stuff is really messy dirty math with limitations put all over the place.

We have to account for this and that. This stuff does not match. Lets just disregard it. Thats what is going on.

Do I believe in creationism? No. I can clearily see darwin's theory of evolution makes sense. It brings up that the science says that evolution can go backward and forward.

For some of the folk on here. There is an example here in the commentary.

johny, just give it up already.

Don't you mean you have a BA in Physical Education, gym teacher?

Johny, just so I get this straight, you claim that these scientists don't actually know what they're talking about and the Quantum Mechanics is a mess, etc and so we should just give up?

Going back to living in caves would really suck, especially since there aren't enough caves anymore. If our species is going to survive as we overpopulate this planet, we've got our work cut out for us to invent new methods for producing energy, etc.

johnny

I too have a BA in physics and I know the story of how the electron was discovered. Ever heard of J.J. Thomson? Were you awake in class?

Do you really think that the scientists at Fermilab and CERN don't know about the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics? Really?? You think you're the only one?

Basically I doubt your claim of getting a BA in physics. At least from a real school.

The sky really isn't blue ya know!

Yet most of these things are not repeatable.

They are repeatable; that's the key to building up a high degree of statistical confidence. True, only a small percentage of particle collisions will produce a "new" particle (because of quantum uncertainty), but it must happen many, many times to be accepted. One event is not enough.

If there are no photons then how the hell do solar sails work??? In a perfect vacume(sorry, spell checker seems to be broken) NASA has in fact gotten it to work...

you do realize that this is a troll right?

Yes, Johnny can have a BA in physics...there is no difference in a BA and a BS in Physics, Math, chemistry, biology or any of the pure sciences. The BA or BS distiinction only matters in the Engineering disciplines. Now, if he knows what the heck he is talking about? I have no idea.....I'm just an Engineer. Lol.

Hey, you guys quit picking on him... that BA in Physics was almost as hard to get as his GED in microbiology!

No Ken, you're wrong and Princess is right. Any liberal arts college gives out BAs in the sciences, that is normal. Do you guys know what "liberal arts" means? It doesn't mean performance art. Technically the pure (not applied) sciences, like theoretical physics, are now liberal arts. But Engineering is not a liberal art.

I have a BA in physics and I got into Ph.D. programs.

Having said that, I highly doubt Johnny has a BA in physics. If he does it was a long time ago and he's forgotten everything.

Well... I should probably leave this alone. I can't help it, though. Ignorance has always struck me as... wrong. Alright. First. Everything done is repeatable. If it happened once, it can happen again. Obviously. Next, the chances of getting the same exact cercumstances for each test is null. Zip. Zilch. Not going to happen!

Probability is what is used in the absence of perfect cercumstances. Yeah, spell checker seems off. Hmm. Anyway, nothing can happen the same way twice. Theoretically, it is impossible. This coming from a 16 year old! I know things.

Next. Republican? Really? Are you stupid? Only a liberal would say that.

Liberal. Therefore you must think college should be free. Therefore you are too stupid to get a job and go to college, therefore you don't have a legit degree! Oh, but wait. I DON'T KNOW ANY OF THAT'S TRUE. That's why I am no longer a Republican! I am an independant. Get over it.

I am beginning to worry about people of this planet. Thinking science is worthless and we should get rid of it? Have fun without computers, genius. People need to wisen up. Forget knowledge unless it is sought for the sake of knowledge itself! Try wisdom. That can't be taught. I have some, though. Not a lot, per say, but some.

On the topic of me being wise...

You should support me as leader of this country! Good old USA needs an overhaul. Support Monarchy under my leadership, and I shall, after I take over the country, re-establish democracy after clearing out all of the corruption and crap. Obama? No more! Same with any Republican or Democrat president.

Support me for Country leader!

OK, Johnny boy, when you'll be old or smart enough, you'll learn that the computer you're supposedly using is built on semiconductor chips, and the whole semiconductor theory is based on quantum theory (which also explains ferromagnetism and various magnetoresistive effects without which the hard disk drive would be impossible). The quantum theory started from Einstein studies of photoemission.

Johnny

If you have a BA in physics you should ask for your money back!

Justin

It's gratifying to know you are only 16. You still have time.

Did anyone even bother to use Photo Multiplying Tube? I doubt anyone ever used one and It has been a while. Even if you have, could you even set it up?

I doubt again that anyone here had any input into design or building of anything. I noticed the hugely inflated egos and self importance.

The fact is the devil is in the detail.

Lets look at even these theories are not even figured out yet. What is statistically important and what is not? They can't agree on that.

What? I am full of sh+t? Yea yea. Lets look at this. 400 americans have more wealth then 150 million americans.

You can see that 400/150 million is a tiny number. Is it a natural phenomena? The economists argue about this with legitimate arguments.

Now the stuff they just disregard in the photo multiplying tubes that started all this stuff. Is still disregarded. What do i Get? Upset People who think they are physicists yet they can't explain it. So instead they just let fly abuse.

Does anyone remember cold fusion? What happened with it? Does it happen or does it not happen. All we got was that its not economically viable because it could not be detected.

You have to know when to give up. I can tell you this. That 10 billion dollars could of been better spent.

Quantum computers. Its all the rage. We will see if anything comes from it practically. I doubt it. We get told that we will get tinsy computers and then you go to the lab and the machine there is bigger then two storey house and housed with parts all over the place.

Funny ha. A tiny computer and we need a lab the size of a football field to detect a one or a zero. I guess that progress. I'll stick with my laptop.

Does anyone here work in a factory where they make silicon chips. I guess they are all talking about semiconductor theory?

They don't. The photons coming out of my rear are just as much use as wasting 10 billion on this.

Johnny. Mom says, "Take your meds."

Sorry everyone. Johnny sometimes forgets his medications and finds his way onto the computer. We look around and can't find him. And then there he is: Sitting down in the basement, pounding away at the keys.

If you see him on here again, just tell him to take his meds and to go upstairs for dinner.

Thanks.

Ok,"Big Daddy",,,that being me,,has some questions,but first,,some defining statements,,,I really can appreciate what is being talked about here,I mean that seriously however,I have to state this,90% of the people in the world do not,,why?Because,most of us just want to know that when we flip a switch,the lights come on,when we turn a key or push a button,,the car starts,when we sit at the computer,,well,,,we sit at the computer,,this is the crux of daily life.For the most part,the average human being could care less about someones level of education,not that it's not appreciated,we just don't have the time to care.Yes,it's great that John has a college degree in physics and,it's really great that there are a lot of individuals that have other degrees as well,but that still doesn't detract from the fact,that most don't care,all we care about is eeking out an existance from one day to the next.I for one,have NO idea what was said in this article and again,neither does 90% of the worlds population SO,that brings me to my question.

How is it possible,that we have all of these really intelligent people in the world,but when their cars and trucks break down,they bring them to me to fix,because they haven't a clue as to how they operate.How is it possible,that someone like me,who doesn't have a BA,BS,PHD,,whatever,in anything,is handed the responsibility of making sure,that all of you can get from point A,,to,,Point B,,when the mode of transportation they utilize,,no longer functions.I suppose,it's a matter of symantics,,or,,which side of the road you walk on,,I just find it interesting that when,I try and explain to my customers,no matter how smart or dumb they are,what is wrong with their vehicles,they look at me like I was speaking to then in a foriegn language SO,,again,this is my question,How is it possible,that all of these highly intelligent people can figure out all of these scientific things,but when it comes to,one of the things in there life,that allows them to get from one place to another,,they're as dumb as a rock.Now I know,I am going to get a lot of smarta$$ remarks about my question and that's OK,but I really doubt that I will get a solid answer.

johny-388777 the drop out said:

"You have to know when to give up. I can tell you this. That 10 billion dollars could of been better spent.

Quantum computers. Its all the rage. We will see if anything comes from it practically. I doubt it. We get told that we will get tinsy computers and then you go to the lab and the machine there is bigger then two storey house and housed with parts all over the place."

Rewind a bit. When Maxwell derived his equations many said 'what are they good for'. The point being no one knows ahead of time where the next huge step will come from. Any student of science knows this.

That's why Johny you are a failure. If it were up to humans like you we would still be in caves.

johny-388777

I doubt any of this stuff. They claim they can detect a single photon. Hmmmm.

They claim they can detect a planet far far away by the disturbance in the light?

I have noticed that scientists like to get way ahead of each other with more and more outrageous discoveries.

Instead they go on this hugely expensive experiments which I doubt show anything. Though what do I know?

I only have a BA in physics :P

The last line in your post says it all. You only have a BA. I'm sure you're a smart person but an undergraduate degree isn't NEARLY enough to qualify you to critique the science. That's like someone with a BS degree in premed trying to argue with a room full of neurologists about the right way to perform brain surgery.

This post is for Arthur. Corrected quote: “They’re as dumb as a rock.” Arthur, if they would be dumb, they couldn’t be called scientist and if they would find time in their 16 or more hours daily work schedule, they would probably figure out how to fix a car. You would be then out of work and I am sure you don’t want that. We live in very complex world and specialization is a must. I am Engineer working in highly specialized manufacturing facility; I can care less about car repair business, I have highly trained mechanic for that just around the corner. I hope that by now you know how stupid your question is.

That is not the case. Some folk spend time to find out what the hell is going on. Others are busy with other things.

I agree with specialization. I doubt that most of the things I put in commentary are easy to come by.

Lets Even look at a proton beam? Its asked about in many forums. Yet the answers are obscure and even not answered. Yet Even I know how to make a proton beam.

Though My lack of knowledge in the subject is self-evident by the genius commentary.

Where do protons come from? They come from excited materials. Which materials? WE see protons emitted from decaying radioactive material. We also can generate protons from exciting electrodes using electricity as a specific frequency. What material? I dont know. I gave you enough to go and find out. Its more then alot of the science websites that claim to be experts I have answered more then them.

As with most things they use complicated words to describe the simple. The complicated wording is relevant when using a science journal but mostly irrelevant went discussing it with general public.

My favorite word is mathematical model. TO a child they thinks it is a big deal. Its just an equation. Funny.

Trolls like Johnny enjoy the benefits conferred upon mankind by science every minute of every day, from the fabrics from which his jumpers are made to the medications he takes to control his erratic behavior, yet people like him will deny the validity of scientific research when it exceeds the ability of his limited intellect to comprehend its implications...which may explain why Johnny and his ilk still think the earth is flat and we were placed on this planet by imaginary supernatural beings. Therefore, it is best to ignore Johnny because arguing with him is a waste of time and effort. He cannot and he will not understand.

Johnny is truly obscessed with photomultiplying tubes. This is where his education stopped.

Johnny, I'll tell you a secret: protons can be produced in large quantities by ionising hydrogen. Because hydrogen-1 nucleus is a single proton.

AlexG

I was thinking the same thing as I skimmed through this massacre of a thread.

"But what about the Tubes!!!"

Thank you for posting.

what?? Was the discovery of everything else that you use and take for granted (electricity, magnetism, modern medicine, germ theory, aerodynamics) also ego chasing? You don't deserve to use a computer.

Maybe it's your ego that is bruised because you haven't contributed to our knowledge like these scientists have.

Our society should put people back in caves that think new discoveries are unimportant.

Al

Is ignorance really bliss?

Al - you are ignorant. Back to Jersey shores for you.

Was the discovery of everything else that you use and take for granted (electricity, magnetism, modern medicine, germ theory, aerodynamics) also ego chasing?

I don't believe it was, but it is possible. Just because someone's discovery ends up benefiting mankind as a whole doesn't mean the discoverer wasn't an egotistical a$$.

How dumb can a person get? The Higgs boson represents the Higgs field which is theorized to give mass to things. Do you understand the importance of the preceding statement? There are many more subatomic particles left to be studied, which contrary to your belief, do actually explain how the world works.

It is obvious that all these forces and particles exist and interact, or the Universe, and us would not be here. That's how the real world (universe) operates.

Eye of America-1693099 - is so blind.

I don't think they will ever truly find it as it disappears in a trillionth of a trillionth of a second after it is allegedly found. I heard that comparing a quark to a blood cell is like the Earth in relation to the Universe. Were talking small, blows my mind

According to the article, they are trying to find it by detecting the particles it decays into.

And these particles leave traces which can be observed.

Exactly John, mind blowing. Imagine, there are 100 trillion atoms in each blood cell, within each atom there are even smaller objects such as quarks and strings are the smallest.
If you want to imagine the size of string, it would be as comparing atom to
size of solar system. So how small is that? It is behind a human logic or imagination that is why we need LHC to be able to see the unimaginable small. People who argue that it is waste of money are the same people who would argue that microscope is useless, what can you possibly see trough that assembly of glass that I can't see with my own eyes.

ladislaver - These are the same short sighted fools that decry all pure research. If it doesn't have an immediate engineering application they think it's a waste of money. They don't have the foresight to see what technology can eventually come from pure discovery.

Just to throw a wild possibility out there - what if one day we could use the Higgs Boson to alter mass, change particles from one type to another? That would give us our Star Trek replicators, or maybe somehow lower the mass of spaceships to near zero so we could fly very close to the speed of light.

Nice and rational post. I am dreaming of the day that we will be able to defy gravity. Perhaps Higgs could do it.

Great posts above; nice to see people who see the possibilities of research beyond just immediate commercial value. I'd call understanding the very foundation of mass itself a pretty worthwhile endeavor, whether it yields commercial applications or not.....

Not at all ....

If you're trying to spell "Alan Boyle" ....

And poor guy .... ??

This article got your attention ....

Cuz some of us are way smarter than you.

True

faith in a higher being doesn't mean we don't believe in science. it just means we don't believe something from nothing was created by other than a higher being. science is still relevant, just not our "god".

hrdawg

Please explain to me where in the bible it says anything about the higgs boson. If god could talk to Abraham and Moses why didn't he say anything about it? Or about electrons... gravity... germs... evolution... the solar system... weather... action and reaction... forces...he didn't even tell us to wash our hands! Worst god ever.

God thought he made you smart enough to figure out how to wash your own hands, He thought He was creating intelligent beings like Himself, YOUR proof that the longer we live here the dumber we get. What I mean by that is we learn a thing or two then get all high and mighty and think we know it all. Then all that you "smart" people can do is mock God and your fellow man. Sad...

Lisa

Umm... actually no, I'm doing the opposite, which is celebrating man's achievements, not mocking them. I'm celebrating all that we have learned despite the centuries of ignorance that magical thinking (religion) has condemned us to.

There are many bibles. Which one is the correct one?. I think the estimate is 500 significantly different in circulation. Jesus has even different names and even easter dates vary and then what he did and stories in the bible vary.

There are 38,000 denominations of Christians.

Lisa said:

"God thought he made you smart enough to figure out how to wash your own hands"

And which god would that be Lisa? Yours right, the one YOU picked. What a fool.

When you understand why YOU reject all other gods, you will understand why I reject yours.

I'm with rmann. I don't necessarily consider myself a "believer," but just because there's no proof doesn't mean something doesn't exist. People used to believe the earth was flat, until it was proven the earth was round. You can point to all kinds of things that people believed or didn't believe, until science discovered the reality.

One thing I am sure of, if there is a God, he/she will not be anything even close to what the world's religions have described. In that respect, organized religions ARE fantasies.

flbikerchick

OK time to state the obvious- atheists know that lack of proof is not proof of lack of existence. But lack of proof for something DOES mean that belief in that thing is either unnecessary or irrational.

Do you KNOW 100% that I have 2 arms and not 3? No, you can't know that. Maybe I do have 3 arms. But do you waste any time BELIEVING I have 3 arms? Of course you don't. Same way I am with god... and Vishnu... and Thor... Zeus... Manitou... unicorns... fairies...

Science, unilaterally denounced by faith, may play a role in supporting creationism.

What? Don't think so. Creationism has been debunked as an attempt by religious nut to try and wrap a scientific approach around their religion. Too funny.

God thought he made you smart enough to figure out how to wash your own hands

You mean god didn't know? He thought he made us smart enough?

How is that a perfect god?

Whoops.

smt123-3055206

"OK time to state the obvious- atheists know that lack of proof is not proof of lack of existence. But lack of proof for something DOES mean that belief in that thing is either unnecessary or irrational."

Sooooo, also stating the obvious... since the H-B has no proof, as yet... to quoote you, "...belief in that thing is either unnecessary or irrational..."

Annnd, just to stir the pot: since atheism *also* cannot be proven, "...belief in [atheism] is either unnecessary or irrational..."

Sooooo silly!

Curious (and stupid). There is no such a thing as believing in atheism. You either are atheist or not. According to you; atheists, who do not believe in fairy
tale stories, always seeking empirical evidence for claims of seeing anything,
are silly (you wrote “silli”, unless it is word of your invention, you have
misspelled “silly”). Well, how is this for silly? Like it or not, but there is
English language definition for God = supernatural creator and
overseer of the universe. Problem is that this definition includes all deities, goddesses and supernatural beings. Invention of writing occurred about 6000 years ago and since that time we have a record of 3700 supernatural beings. This is small number compared to Hindu believe that entire universe is manifestation of Ishvara, meaning that there are at least 330 million gods and goddesses.

Judging by composition of your post, you may not have the brain power to understand my post, but give it a try or ask any 7 grader for help. Don’t be silli, please.

Anyone with the ability to rationally think has already come to the conclusion that God is imaginary.

For starters, Jesus of Nazareth existed. He was a real man
made of flesh and blood. The record for this is overwhelming. And no I'm not
talking about the documentation of the Christian Bible. As someone who takes
quite an interest in history, especially of this period, I am amazed at the
sheer volume of material that testifies to a historical Jesus, most of it
coming from sources hostile to or neutral to Christianity. I suggest the
following research before you engage in a discussion. I would be interested to
discover what you consider to be proven historical record.

To begin:

Given that there are very few manuscript sources for ANYONE
in this period, and that Jesus only worked for three years in a tiny corner of
a vast empire, the evidence is surprising: Thallus (52AD), documented in Julius
Africanus, Pliny the Younger (63-113), Suetonius (69-140AD), Tacitus
(56-120AD), Mara Bar Serapion (70AD), Phlegon (80-140), Lucian of Samosata
(115AD), Celsus (175AD), Josephus (37-101AD) all wrote about Jesus of
Nazareth…the carpenter.

We have more historical evidence for Jesus than many other
historical figures whose existence is not doubted. The real issue is whether
Jesus is who he said he was.

Therefore, I begin this examination with a question for you: What are the ONLY two ultimate experiences that one can undergo? Meaning what can only be experienced once and one time only during one's lifetime. You're right: birth and death. Leaving birth aside let's look at death. No one, with the possible exception of Jesus, has returned from the dead. I mean no one from the beginning of our planet some 4.5 billion years ago to this very second. Wow. Talk about a great unknown. However, many individuals have come close. I personally know of one. A close friend of mine was in a horrific car accident and clinically "died" three times. Once at the scene, once during transport and once during the six months he spent in the intensive care unit. My friend, let's call him "Fred," tells the same
story that countless others have told: a calming, overpowering white light
beckons. Could this be simply an illusion planted into our subconscious by our
collective understanding? Possibly. Or could it be something else altogether we
experience? A calling to an after-life perhaps? No one can say with one-hundred
percent certainty. Not you nor I nor anyone. No one.

Now let's look inward to our physical bodies. As you are well aware from your freshman classes in science and chemistry: matter is neither created nor destroyed. (The law of conservation of mass (matter is neither created nor destroyed) was first clearly formulated by Antoine Lavoisier in 1789. However, in modern physics, this is not true. It has been observed that energy can be converted to mass and mass to energy. So, now, the law has been changed to "mass-energy cannot be created nor destroyed" in modern physics. In chemistry, however, the former is true.) Therefore, it is well understood that every thought we have or motion we undertake is the result of electro-chemical transmissions inside our bodies. Therefore, one may, I believe, rightly ask: what happens to this electricity inside our bodies when we die? Could this be the soul or spirit so often referenced in writings on this matter? For those with a truly open mind I think the answer is obvious. The ancients knew this. How could they know this? Can you tell me? With absolute certainty can you tell me?

Next we turn our attention to the big-bang. I believe in the big-bang. I'm sure our physicists and astronomers and theoretical folks are spot on with their observations. However let's look at a small often overlooked detail: the big-bang theory does not begin to describe events until 1x10ˉ32 second AFTER the big-bang took place. That's right folks the big-bang theory does not describe how or why this singularity came into existence. Now this in and of itself is not necessarily a problem. Quantum mechanics does allow for matter to -- poof -- appear out of thin air as it were. However, this would also allow for God to materialize from nothing. If the laws of physics allow for our universe to spontaneously appear then so to the laws would allow for God to appear. I think the argument is: what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The Bible tells us God speaks and says: I am the Alpha and the Omega. (The beginning and the end). Is this not then the description of the big-bang? How could the ancients know anything of this? The answer, obviously, is that they couldn't. Unless, of course, it was told to them.

Now, dear reader, you are beginning to ask: when is this
Christian going to start preaching. I'm not. I do not consider myself a
Christian. You see, I can't make up my mind. Depending on my mood or the time of day or any other number of reasons I think differently on this subject all
the time. The important point to consider here is: I think. So many atheists or
agnostics take this holier-than-thou attitude and speak with absolute certainty
and authority on the subject. To this I say loudly and unequivocally: hogwash!

A final thought before I sign off. It is often the argument put forth by many that religion is the cause of so much pain and suffering in this world. That religion is a way for the powerful to prey upon the weak minded and control them. I think there is some merit in this argument. However, this argument only goes so far in my opinion. Jesus came and told us he was the "New Covenant." Therefore, out the window, as it were, with the Old Testament. (Naturally my Jewish brethren take umbrage with this point of view but I digress.) Therefore, it is people and not religion that we should take issue with. Jesus was, after all, a teacher. He showed a lifestyle that promoted love, compassion and understanding for all. If, as a species, we all followed the teaching of Jesus to the letter, imagine, John Lennon, the possibilities.

tl ; dr

Can't help you there pal. Believe me, it took longer to write then it would take you to read. I guess you are not really into seeking all possible outcomes.

Mohammad and Buddha were also historical figures, and better documented than Jesus. Does that mean that their holy texts are also correct? That seems to be your logic.

ACL SCFL:

The religious nutters are out in full force casting their delusions around. What a sad and pathetic bunch they are.

Your gods are nothing but bronze aged myths so silly that children see through them as you can tell by their questions.

ACL SCFL There is absolutely NO proof that said jesus existed. None.

ACL,

I believe the reason krazymop didn't read is because you start out with the same tripe we've all heard before.

Your discussions of the reality of some guy named Jesus from Nazareth; the tired near-death-experience story; the questionable understanding of science as you try to prove a soul; we've all heard it before.

Your final paragraph (yes, I read the whole thing) starts out well until you go into the same defense your fellow apologists use: it's not religion, it's human beings.

I really wish people would stop typing up these long-winded posts with the same recycled stories and ideas, making it necessary for other people to repeat the same facts used to debunk them in the first place. Please give us new thoughts.

Thanks for replying hambone. I appreciate your point of view. However, I do cite sources. Nowhere has anyone who refutes my writing bothered to provide one shred of evidence that Jesus did not exist except: "because I said so." Your post, alas, falls into this category. Furthermore, if you read my post you will notice I say I am not a Christian rather I am undecided. The point is to keep an open mind on a subject that not you nor I nor anyone can say with 100% certainty does or does not exist. Therefore, I question your choice of the word "tripe" and assert that this description fits your post better than it does mine. Reading your post you do not offer one piece of evidence. Rather it is the same old Atheist/Agnostic reaction that somehow they are "gifted" with insight that the rest of us knuckle-dragging clods are unable to fathom. I reject this point-of-view categorically and welcome comments to the contrary. Unlike some others, you see, I keep an open mind.

ACL,

Remember that I said in my final sentence that these things have already been refuted.

First, Jesus of Nazareth. Yes, there probably was a man named Jesus from Nazareth. It was a popular name at the time. And he may have even been a preacher. So?

Second, a near-death-experience proves nothing. And yours isn't even yours, it's a friend's. So it's not just anecdotal, it hearsay. And I have had a near death experience; it was rather pleasant, but, again, proves nothing.

Third, the electricity in your brain is not a spirit. It is electricity. Is the electricity in my computer its soul?

For those with a truly open mind I think the answer is obvious.

Indeed.

Fourth, you are correct that we do not know what happened at the Big Bang, only moments after. How again does this suggest a god? And a personal god, at that?

And finally, I do not perceive myself as "gifted". Apparently, I'm missing something that a large percentage of humans are seeing. I also do not consider myself superior, and neither do a majority of atheists. In general, I try to ask questions of believers rather that make statements and defenses (depending on my mood).

I do not deny a god. I merely don't believe there is one. And nothing in this world, nor in your comment, gives me reason to believe otherwise.

Nowhere has anyone who refutes my writing bothered to provide one shred of evidence that Jesus did not exist

How can anyone prove a negative? That's like saying prove Pink Unicorns didn't exist. Dumb. Anyway here is some reasons why not to believe. Provided by FrogMorton!

I'll never understand why religious folks have to LIE in order to try and make an argument favorable to their cultism.

Not one single passage purporting to be written, as history, within the first hundred years of the "Christian
era", can be produced to show the existence at or before that time of such a person as Jesus of Nazareth, called the Christ, or of such a set of men as could be accounted his disciples or followers. No contemporaries wrote about "christ jesus" except for the alleged scribblings within the cult book, Bible, represented to be from his disciples. And, by the way, we have nothing from his own hand. As well, the assertion about Josephus is a fraud.

Those who would be likely to refer to Jesus or his disciples, but who have not done so:

A.D. 40 Philo1

40 Josephus

79 C. Plinius Second, the Elder2 Philosophers

69 L. Ann. Seneca

79 Diogenes Laertius

79 Pausanias Geographers

79 Pompon Mela

79 Q. Curtius Ruf Historians

79 Luc. Flor

110 Cornel Tacitus

123 Appianus

140 Justinus

141 Ælianus

Out of this number it has been claimed that one (Josephus) spoke of Jesus, and another (Tacitus) of the Christians. Of the former it is almost needless to speak, as that was given up as a forgery many years ago. However, for the sake of those who still cling to it, you haven't considered the following:

1. It was never quoted by any of our Christian ancestors before Eusebius.

Eusebius, then, is the first person who refers to these passages. Eusebius, "whose honesty is not so great as to allow of our considering everything found in his works as undoubtedly genuine." Eusebius, who says that it is lawful to lie and cheat for the cause of Christ. [sound familiar?] This Eusebius is the sheet-anchor of reliance for most we know of the first three centuries of the Christian history. What then must we think of the history of the first three centuries of the Christian era?

2. Josephus has nowhere else mentioned the name or word Christ, in any of his works except the testimony above mentioned, and the passage concerning James.

3. It interrupts the narrative.

4. The language is quite Christian (Josephus was a Jew and died a Jew).

5. It is not quoted by Chrysostom, though he often refers to Josephus, and could not have omitted quoting it, had it actually been there then, in the original text.

6. It is not quoted by Photius, though he has three articles concerning Josephus.

7. Under the article Justus of Tiberius, this author (Photius) expressly states that this historian (Josephus) has never taken any notice of Christ.

8. Neither Justin, in his dialogue with Typho the Jew, nor Clemens Alexandrinus, who made so many extracts from ancient authors, nor Origen against Celsus, have even mentioned this testimony.

9. But, on the contrary, Origen openly affirms (ch. xxiv., bk. i, against Celsus), that Josephus, who had mentioned John the Baptist, did not acknowledge Christ

The celebrated passage in Tacitus which Christian divines—and even some liberal writers—attempt to support, is to be found in his Annals. In this work he is made to speak of Christians, who "had their denomination from Christus, who, in the reign of Tiberius, was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate."

So, consider the following:

1. This passage, which would have served the purpose of Christian quotation better than any other in all the writings of Tacitus, or of any Pagan writer whatever, is not quoted by any of the Christian Fathers. [oops!]

2. It is not quoted by Tertullian, though he had read and largely quotes the works of Tacitus.

3 It is not quoted by Clemens Alexandrinus, who set himself entirely to the work of adducing and bringing together all the admissions and recognitions which Pagan authors had made of the existence of Christ Jesus or Christians before his time.

4. It has been nowhere stumbled upon by the laborious and all-seeking Eusebius, who could by no possibility have overlooked t, and whom it would have saved from the labor of forging the passage in
Josephus; of adducing the correspondence of Christ Jesus and Abgarus, and the Sibylline verses; of forging a divine revelation from the god Apollo, in attestation of Christ Jesus' ascension into heaven; and innumerable other of his pious and holy cheats.

5. Tacitus has in no other part of his writings made the least allusion to "Christ" or "Christians."

6. There is no vestige nor trace of its existence anywhere in the world before the 15th century.

7. The worshipers of the Sun-god, Serapis, were also called "Christians," and his disciples "Bishops of
Christ.

So much, then, for the celebrated passage in Tacitus.

Now, for a man who was able to perform so many miracles and inspired such large crowds, why did no contemporary historian take notice write anything about him (that wasn’t forged)? Josephus did write about John the Baptist, so…why not Jesus? Why didn't jesus himself ever put pen to paper? Why didn't the apostles ever write anything else, other than just the NT scribblings??

In a panicked, pathetic attempt to give their cult mythology some value and relevance, xians frequently overlook the details and facts which show it to be quite false.

And, before anyone comes up with any of these others, here: Thallus, Pliny and Trajan all post date Christ and make the same sort of references to christ that I am making in this sentence. (hearsay). Since "Lucian" is Lucian of Antioch, then his source was the Bible, so he is also out as a corroborative source.

BTW, my disbelief in the existence of the man (ignoring his nature for the moment), is that he does not appear in any records or writings of his contemporaries. The Roman empire was just too bureaucratic and chatty to not credit someone who caused such a hullabaloo…he would not have escaped multiple notations in various records…official, historic and personal. But, somehow, he managed to, even though he was such a controversial individual running around performing miracles and such...pretty ridiculous, really.

For Abe Lincoln, we have letters written in his own hand. Alexander the Great left a wake of cities, coins, and monuments during his day. Plato left his own writings and physically influenced numerous students. There is nothing similar for Jesus. All written testimonials start up almost a generation after he was supposed to have died. There are no records, no likenesses. Nazareth doesn't even show up in non-biblical sources until much later.

Does this all mean that Jesus didn't exist? Well, not exactly. The complete absence of proof like this doesn't directly mean he didn't exist. Does it mean that there's no evidence and all followers of Jesus are having to make a leap of faith to believe that the gospels are true? Yes. Is that a bad thing? Depends on who you ask. Their body count throughout history isn't much to brag about, though, when contrasted with
the teachings of their mythical icon... and NONE of this makes the jesus-myth a fact of history. However, to suggest that someone was this influential and iconic in this time period, and yet not one single shred was ever written down about him by his contemporaries, as history, is extremely unlikely and makes the concept of the jesus-myth highly suspect at best.

Another point that is conveniently ignored by the faithful is that the Middle East was a very literate society during that period, and people were eager to document the history of their cities, the region, and their times. Therefore, it is very important to note that there is no contemporary corroboration of any of the alleged miracles, deeds, or words of jesus. One would expect that if an itinerant preacher were raising the dead, multiplying fish and loaves for the multitudes, walking on water, turning water into wine, etc. that such miraculous behavior would have attracted the attention of the Romans, local Greeks, or Jews living in the region. The fact that he was possessed of such prowess because he claimed to be divine would certainly have been of interest of local authorities, too. It is also impossible to believe that anyone entering a cosmopolitan city like Jerusalem and being welcomed by cheering crowds wouldn't be recorded somewhere. In fact, however, the historical record is blind to jesus, his alleged miracles, or any other detail of his life. The only documentation of these alleged events are contained in the NT, and none of these tales were written by first hand witnesses. Everything contained in the NT was written years, decades, even a century or more after jesus was supposed to have died. Consequently, there is no credible evidence at all that jesus as a historical figure, much less as a divine character, ever existed.

The bottom line is that there is no more proof or evidence of a christian deity that there is of allah, yahweh, vishnu, zeus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or flying teapots. Because of this unalterable fact, is inconceivable to me that people would cling desperately to these myths as though they had any real meaning while at the same time discounting the tangible achievements of science that allow them to post their blithering ravings on the internet for the entire world to see.

This is why I really hate the mainstream press referring to the Higgs Boson particle as the "God Particle." It is nothing of the sort, and it has NOTHING to do with religion. It's about understanding the very nature of atomic mass. I know they didn't coin the term god particle (a physicist is to blame for that one, sadly), but they sure as hell use it for sensationalism (and apparently to draw out the fundamentalist nutjobs....).

Msnbc is the first mainstream news agency that hasn't headlined the discovery with that idiotic (and ill-fitting) expression; I salute them (and Alan Boyle) for that!

The Super Collider is in France, not the USA.

Well actually only half in France the other in Switzerland, but close enough lets just say Europe and then everyone is right.

You're right Johny, lets stop spending money on science so we can spend more on WAR.

johny

Oh... you're back. Where did you get your degree in physics again?

The budget for science is MINISCULE compared to what we waste on war. And the war on drugs. And tax breaks for oil companies. Give me a break.

We CAN afford medical treatment in the USA, it's just that we chose not to. Right wingers don't want to pay a couple more % points in taxes for single payer health insurance.

ahh i get it.

So we just blow the cash because its minscule.

So the real science does not get done. I forget I am too stupid to even understand that.

This unified theory tells us that there are more particles out there.

There is a huge bunch of them. I noticed all the big egos. They have to call it the boston.

Why not call it the New york particle? Even the USA particle. Might get more funding for it.

I guess i will take a stab at it too. Just give me 10 billion dollars. :)

What an ignorant troll.

Are you aware, johny, that the money that was spent didn't just disappear? It went into the economies of every country involved.

It didn't evaporate into the Super Collider.

Johny. It is not US taxpayers money, LHC is operated in Europe and
Europe is not part of USA just ask any 1st grader, you dimwit.

Ladislaver~

To understand that, johnny would've had to actually READ the article.... ;-)

Funny!!!!!!

Wow, Alan! It must have been an awesome experience for you to be at CERN and in Switzerland! The bathroom sure was teeny tiny but I would have used an outhouse just to be there. lol

I suppose I could follow you on twitter without creating an account or just go ahead and open one.

Either way, I can't wait for the great news.

Thanks for the link to your video! :-)

It's the field that gives particles their mass. And if you can't see why that is a hugely important discovery, you aren't fit to comment on budgets.

If you don't know Google it. It's called scientific research. Don't be like johny388777 with his apparently online physics degree. We need science so we can advance and not be like johny "what do we do now that we're out of oil?" 388777 (See 'A Crude Awakening' on Netflix).

robert

How can you know something is a waste of money if you don't even know what it is?

I cain't hep but think of Bill Murray in Ghostbusters (when they're in jail) and he says:

Whoa-oo ...Somebody's Coming

He cracks me up. It's Groundhog Day!

Alan, you shouldn't have to spoonfeed people their information. Any news article I read is just a starting point. What do other outlets say? What kind of primary sources of information are out there? Do we not teach critical thinking in school anymore?

This seems like a very promising intellectual discovery, but are the possible real-life applications? Faster-than-light travel? Gravity manipulation? Or is this just a stab in the dark with the slight possibility of one day finding an application? In any event, I guess it's nice to know more about the universe around us.

Falcon~

I don't think ANY discovery will lead to faster-than-light travel (despite what Star Trek 'teaches' us), but altering/manipulating mass or at the very least a better understanding of it would be very enlightening. Not all research has to yield immediate commercial returns to be of value.

Exactly Sebastian. Alan, you should have posted warning perhaps at the beginning of the article: “For readers who completed at least 3 rd grade education”. Some of the responses, judging by content and spelling suggest uneducated people asking their 2^nd grader to type.