Results from the LHC soon?


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Results from the LHC soon?

Previous · 1 . . . 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 . . . 13 · Next
Author Message
Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1259065 - Posted: 11 Jul 2012, 19:14:58 UTC - in response to Message 1258999.
Last modified: 11 Jul 2012, 19:32:08 UTC


Thats rubbish. Show me a link to a science article on the internet that described the Higgs boson like that.

John.

From CERN Bulletin:
Antoniadis: If the new particle is confirmed to be a Standard Model Higgs boson, then we must observe that it is relatively light, perhaps lighter that what a large part of the community was expecting up until just a few months ago.

The Higgs field associated with the boson would still permeate the Universe but it may need to be partly reinterpreted. Given the low mass of the boson, the potential that describes the field could for instance present two minima instead of just one. The universe is currently set in one of the two minima but quantum mechanics could allow for a transition to the second minimum. This, in my opinion, might signal the existence of some new physics that would compensate for this instability (**).

Tullio
As I wrote, the ground state of the universe is degenerate, because it has two minima, hence the Higgs boson is a massive Goldstone boson. QED
____________

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1259815 - Posted: 13 Jul 2012, 12:46:34 UTC
Last modified: 13 Jul 2012, 12:49:39 UTC

I've read a review of a book by Frank Close:
The Infinity puzzle: Quantum Field Theory and the hunt for an orderly universe.
2011 Basic Books.
The review was in a copy of Physicsworld by the American Institute of Physics which was offered to me as a PDF file for free. It covers all the history of quantum field theory starting from the work of Feynman, Schwinger and Tomonaga up to the search for the Higgs boson. The Schwinger-Feynman-Tomonaga story, which obtained for them the Nobel prize, is narrated also by Freeman J.Dyson in his book "Disturbing the universe", Harper&Row 1979, which covers also subjects such as extraterrstrial life forms and space travel,
Tullio
____________

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3091
Credit: 2,460,351
RAC: 2,459
Ireland
Message 1259868 - Posted: 13 Jul 2012, 15:58:35 UTC
Last modified: 13 Jul 2012, 16:01:09 UTC

Sounds like a good book Tullio,
Tullio very regularly on these boards you talk about the physics type books you read and it seems that you read a lot of these type books. Why?

I mean whats your motivation for reading physics books?
1. General curiosity maybe?
2. Just to learn and understand the physics maybe?
3. To try understand the problem, and maybe try to solve the problem?
4. ???

I will tell you why i ask Tullio! I read hugh quantities of information, more of it on the internet rather than from books. But i do buy books when i cannot get the information on the internet. I also get a lot of information through watching video lectures from universities on Youtube. There is also a massive amount of physics information on Wikipedia.

But i limit the information i read to very specific pieces of information i'm looking for. I go looking for answers to actually "solve" the problems i read about. So i won't buy someones book just to get their "opinion" on a scientific subject. I will only read the information if i think the information gets me closer to the answer i am searching for. I guess i go looking for solutions, rather than just to simply educate myself on some topic in physics.

John.
____________

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1259871 - Posted: 13 Jul 2012, 16:15:17 UTC - in response to Message 1259868.

As you know I have a theoretical physics degree. But that was many years ago, and physics has progressed while I was doing other things just to make a living. So I try to keep up with this progress, mostly by reading magazines such as "Science", "Nature" and, by a lesser degree, "New Scientist". When I was a physics and astronomy editor at Mondadori I had all these magazines in the office. But, since exiting Mondadori, I could not afford to pay all the subscription rates. Then came Internet, and I can read at least some articles on the online version of these magazines. When I find an interesting article, I download it and print it on my printer. So I have a private library made up from printed papers. I don't buy many books, but I still have my copies of the books I have used in my studies. The only science book I bought in recent times is Einstein's scientific biography by Abraham Pais, "Subtle is the Lord", not an easy book that covers many subjects besides relativity. Einstein was really a master of science and covered many fields. Cheers.
Tullio
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8346
Credit: 4,093,766
RAC: 1,144
United Kingdom
Message 1260033 - Posted: 13 Jul 2012, 22:52:39 UTC - in response to Message 1259815.

... It covers all the history of quantum field theory starting from the work of Feynman, Schwinger and Tomonaga up to the search for the Higgs boson. The Schwinger-Feynman-Tomonaga story, which obtained for them the Nobel prize, is narrated also by Freeman J.Dyson in his book "Disturbing the universe", Harper&Row 1979, which covers also subjects such as extraterrstrial life forms and space travel,
Tullio

I still have that book on my shelves from many years ago. I remember it as a good and easily accessible read.

Perhaps Johnney should read a little more around his subject to find and maintain context. I also remember long ago reading a small book, possibly by Robert P. Crease, that gave a good example of how you can dive into deep arcanery from just a small number of assumptions taken in isolation when combined with a wilful ignorance of the wider world.


True Science is when you can look at everything without prejudice. However, that all should also be tempered by Occam's Razor!

Keep searchin',
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1260097 - Posted: 14 Jul 2012, 1:41:44 UTC - in response to Message 1260033.

Physics is not confined to CERN and LHC, despite all the media clamoring about the Higgs boson. Dr Ben Segal of CERN has promised us volunteers to talk to the ATLAS experiment people after the clamor has subsided to convince them to give some of their real data to the Test4Theory@home volunteers. For the moment we are only running MonteCarlo simulations of p-p events.
But other events are developing at the Gran Sasso underground laboratory, the home of the neutrino fiasco. The GERDA experiment has found evidence of a neutrino-less double beta decay (see Beta Test in "Nature" of 12 July) which would prove an hypothesis made in 1937 by Ettore Majorana, that is the existence of particles which are their own antiparticles. This would really revolutionize physics. The claim is contested and other experiments are being planned.
Tullio
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8346
Credit: 4,093,766
RAC: 1,144
United Kingdom
Message 1260256 - Posted: 14 Jul 2012, 11:50:06 UTC - in response to Message 1260097.

Physics is not confined to CERN and LHC, despite all the media clamoring about the Higgs boson. ...

But other events are developing at the Gran Sasso underground laboratory, the home of the neutrino fiasco. ...

That 'fiasco' has likely done far more good than harm, despite the sacrifice of a few people...

How few people had heard of that lab compared to now? Let alone know anything of what the lab does?...


Hopefully, the political interest will boost funds to replace more than those poor souls sacrificed as part of the media glare.

Keep seaarchin',
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1260268 - Posted: 14 Jul 2012, 12:33:14 UTC
Last modified: 14 Jul 2012, 12:33:46 UTC

The Government has cut funds to the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare and other scientific institutions. Meanwhile they are still going to buy a sizable number of F35 short take off and landing stealth fighters which cost 200 million dollars each. Since we have no enemies and already have a number of Eurofighter Typhoons and leased F16, we don't need them. Ok, they can't fly from our 2 jump jet carriers, but Italy is a long, unsinkable, carrier.
Tullio
____________

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3091
Credit: 2,460,351
RAC: 2,459
Ireland
Message 1260308 - Posted: 14 Jul 2012, 15:03:09 UTC - in response to Message 1260033.
Last modified: 14 Jul 2012, 15:07:43 UTC

... It covers all the history of quantum field theory starting from the work of Feynman, Schwinger and Tomonaga up to the search for the Higgs boson. The Schwinger-Feynman-Tomonaga story, which obtained for them the Nobel prize, is narrated also by Freeman J.Dyson in his book "Disturbing the universe", Harper&Row 1979, which covers also subjects such as extraterrstrial life forms and space travel,
Tullio

I still have that book on my shelves from many years ago. I remember it as a good and easily accessible read.

Perhaps Johnney should read a little more around his subject to find and maintain context. I also remember long ago reading a small book, possibly by Robert P. Crease, that gave a good example of how you can dive into deep arcanery from just a small number of assumptions taken in isolation when combined with a wilful ignorance of the wider world.


True Science is when you can look at everything without prejudice. However, that all should also be tempered by Occam's Razor!

Keep searchin',
Martin

You got to be kidding me Martin!
If i get any closer to the research i'm doing, i will become a Higgs Boson!

Occam's Razor Martin??? What planet have you been living on? Have you heard whats been going on in the physics community for the last 10 years? Have you heard some of the "theories" that are going around? Super symmetry, string theory, dark matter, dark energy, black holes, matter "Big Banging" into existence out of no where?? Particle Zoo's and a complete periodic table of the elements inside the proton?

And i will tell you whats worse. All those theories are being taken seriously! Many of them are almost being taught as fact! Without even a shred of proof!

So Martin don't be quoting Occam's Razor to me buddy!

I'm the realist here! My theory brings the whole lot back into the realm of reality! I can't get any closer than solving the problem.

John.
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8346
Credit: 4,093,766
RAC: 1,144
United Kingdom
Message 1260384 - Posted: 14 Jul 2012, 17:55:42 UTC - in response to Message 1260308.

... Have you heard whats been going on in the physics community for the last 10 years? Have you heard some of the "theories" that are going around? Super symmetry, string theory, dark matter, dark energy, black holes, matter "Big Banging" into existence out of no where?? Particle Zoo's and a complete periodic table of the elements inside the proton?

And i will tell you whats worse. All those theories are being taken seriously! Many of them are almost being taught as fact! Without even a shred of proof!

... I'm the realist here! My theory brings the whole lot back into the realm of reality! I can't get any closer than solving the problem.

Hey! All that lot has been going on for a lot longer than just the last ten years!!

OK... So sounds like we need at least a first draft introduction to get a glimpse of your direction for your competing hypothesis, prophecy, observations, research, explorations, discovery, book, whatever... For without substance, we deliberate for naught...


As an aside, the Casimir Effect has been directly measured on equipment very similar to that used myself from my research days. There's all the quantum and electromagnetic radiation hocus-pocus that gives one explanation that also fits in with a lot of other observed effects, and includes the 'creation' of 'phantom' particles... So, we have one family of explanations that do seem to work very well. Those explanations could all be an oversimplification, or they could be all wrong. However, those ideas work well for what we can observe at present.

Which is where the LHC may prove us all wrong... Or worryingly correct enough to suggest even weirder things!


So... From your research, your alternate theory is?

(Or is this an alternate "Creationism" to be taught as "fact"?!)


Keep searchin',
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3091
Credit: 2,460,351
RAC: 2,459
Ireland
Message 1260427 - Posted: 14 Jul 2012, 21:36:20 UTC
Last modified: 14 Jul 2012, 21:48:28 UTC

Martin,
My research is in two half's. There is the ancient "book" i claim to have found. And the other half is my physics discovery. When i am discussing physics, the ancient book will not come into the discussion. Yes, i know, it sounds like some amazing coincidence that i have made two unconnected discoveries. But they ARE connected, i just haven't told you guys yet how they are connected, I can't. But physics is physics, so i won't veer off the scientific track.

Physics;

Spread across many threads at this stage, i have spelt out many of the consequences of my physics theory. And i have also said that i am not yet willing to part with the root of my physics discovery. But again i will summarise some of the consequences of my physics discovery.

Most, if not all, of theoretical astronomy and cosmology will be obsolete within a few years. Note that i specifically say "theoretical" stuff. Lets say Hubble telescope, or any telescope for that matter takes an astronomy image. That image is REAL astronomy, its real stuff. It might be real stars, real Galaxy's, real galaxy clusters, real nebula, or whatever. That stuff is NOT theoretical and is exactly what is out there!

So what's theoretical in astronomy and cosmology?

Here is a list of stuff that is "theoretical";
1. Black holes
2. Dark matter
3. Dark energy
4. Singularities
4. The Big Bang
5. The ending, i.e. the Big crunch or the endless expansion to infinity or the cold ending.

They are all "theoretical" constructs that are now propagated by astronomers and cosmologists as being "fact". But the true fact is that we haven't a single telescope in the sky that can take a picture of any of them, at any wavelength of the electromagnetic spectrum. None, we can't see any of them!! And if you "believe" the astronomers, we can only see 4% of the matter in the universe! The other 96% is missing!!

How could all that "stuff" be missing Martin? Lets get real here, what the hell is wrong? This is not a joke, this is science and we should be able to explain this stuff. But no, instead astronomers are quoting all the things i mentioned above as 100% scientific fact.

Now Martin i appeal to your better sense of scientific intelligence. Does this smell like a rat or what? Martin doesn't this just sound like something is wrong? Could it be Martin that, somewhere, buried in the maths, the endless pages of maths, there might be a small error? Yes, maybe there really is 96% of the universe missing! But i don't think so Martin, i think there is a small error in the endless pages of maths buried in the universities of the world.

Martin maybe it took a guy from outside those universities to find the error. Maybe i found the error Martin. I'm clearly saying that i found an error!

John.
____________

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1260484 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 0:54:33 UTC - in response to Message 1260427.

A black hole is not visible, this was already known to Pierre Simon de Laplace in the XVIII Century. The matter falling into a black hole is visible because it emits X-rays. Pictures of it have been taken by the Chandra X-ray space telescope and now, with greater resolution, by the NuSTAR telescope. I have already published this information and someone else has posted an image of Cygnus X-1 black hole taken by NuSTAR. You cannot ignore this fact.
Tullio
____________

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3091
Credit: 2,460,351
RAC: 2,459
Ireland
Message 1260496 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 1:43:31 UTC - in response to Message 1260484.
Last modified: 15 Jul 2012, 1:45:59 UTC

A black hole is not visible, this was already known to Pierre Simon de Laplace in the XVIII Century. The matter falling into a black hole is visible because it emits X-rays. Pictures of it have been taken by the Chandra X-ray space telescope and now, with greater resolution, by the NuSTAR telescope. I have already published this information and someone else has posted an image of Cygnus X-1 black hole taken by NuSTAR. You cannot ignore this fact.
Tullio

Tullio what do you mean "I cannot ignore this fact". What does that mean Tullio? Are you taking the pi*s here? Have i not clarified my point enough?

Lets spell this out like we are teaching children here;

1. Astronomers CAN'T see "Black holes". (We seem to agree on this)
2. Astronomers CAN see matter and energy, at various wavelengths, being ejected from the centre of Galaxy's, like our Milkyway. They describe this area where the matter and energy are being ejected as a "Black hole".
3. The one in the centre of the Milkyway is called Sagittarius A*; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagittarius_A*
4. If you read that page about Sagittarius A*, it will tell you that the mass of the black hole in the centre of the Milkyway has an approximate mass of 4 million Suns(One Sun Mass is based on our Sun).

IMPORTANT;
5. They cannot "see" the black hole in the centre of Sagittarius A*, they "infer" that the black hole is there through mathematics.
6. They estimate the 4 million solar masses as the mass of the black hole because the stars that orbit Sagittarius A* are travelling at a certain speed and have particular orbits. This allows them to "infer" that there is an object that these stars are orbiting around. And because of the brightness of the stars, and the orbital periods of the stars, they "infer", through mathematics, that the black hole has 4 million solar masses.

Here is my problem with this;

The word "infer", thats my problem!! They cannot see the black hole, they infer that the black hole is there through mathematics.

If there is an error in their mathematics, then the black hole might not exist. Simple as that. And no, i'm not elaborating any further than that. I have to protect my discovery.

John.
____________

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1260498 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 1:47:50 UTC - in response to Message 1260496.

If Cygnus X-1 is not a black hole, what is it? Please detail.
Tullio
____________

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3091
Credit: 2,460,351
RAC: 2,459
Ireland
Message 1260505 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 2:09:36 UTC
Last modified: 15 Jul 2012, 2:13:11 UTC

Ok Tullio, i read this page; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_X-1

This is my personal take on this;
Exactly the same physics is happening in Cygnus X-1, as is happening in Sagittarius A* at the centre of the Milkyway galaxy. Same physics as i described in my previous post. It would appear to the observer that there is, what astronomers describe as a black hole. They see bright x-rays and matter being ejected. In other words, they see stuff going in, and they see stuff coming out. They don't see the black hole. From mathematics, they "infer" that the black hole exists.

Dam, there's that word again that i dislike so much; They Infer the black hole exists.

Tullio do you understand that it can be dangerous to infer anything in science?

John.
____________

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1260507 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 2:11:57 UTC - in response to Message 1260505.

Yes and what is YOUR explanation for celestial X-ray sources?
____________

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3091
Credit: 2,460,351
RAC: 2,459
Ireland
Message 1260508 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 2:14:35 UTC - in response to Message 1260507.

Yes and what is YOUR explanation for celestial X-ray sources?

They are created exactly the same way we generate x-rays in particle accelerators. Particle decay.

John.
____________

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1260509 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 2:28:54 UTC - in response to Message 1260508.
Last modified: 15 Jul 2012, 2:29:30 UTC

No, particle decays are caused by the weak nuclear interaction, which is weaker than the electromagnetic interaction. You have to accelerate charged particle by strong em fields and make them hit a solid target. Modern free electron lasers use modulated em fields to make electron beams emit coherent X-rays. X-rays are caused by high energy phenomena, both here on the Earth and in the sky. Think of Einstein's equation E=hnu (sorry, I have no Greek characters).
Tullio
____________

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 3091
Credit: 2,460,351
RAC: 2,459
Ireland
Message 1260512 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 2:40:34 UTC
Last modified: 15 Jul 2012, 2:43:04 UTC

There are multiple ways to create x-rays; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray

Whats your point? Cygnus X-1 is a bright source of x-rays, so what? The only thing this confirms is that there is a lot of matter being thrown around near the centre of Cygnus X-1 and there is massive energy involved. In fact going by black hole theory, it could only happen outside the event horizon, otherwise we couldn't see it. And in my books, there is no black hole, and no event horizon either.

Simple, matter is going in, and matter and energy is coming out. Simple, matter and energy in, and matter and energy out. Both equal!! No black hole needed! See, my theory is easier to understand!

John.
____________

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3637
Credit: 366,702
RAC: 220
Italy
Message 1260514 - Posted: 15 Jul 2012, 2:49:01 UTC - in response to Message 1260512.

Yes, maybe, but if you don't publish it I cannor judge it. Hic Rhodus hic salta.
Tullio
____________

Previous · 1 . . . 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 . . . 13 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Results from the LHC soon?

Copyright © 2014 University of California