Could the Large Hadron Collider be held back by its own future? (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/6318034/Could-the-Large-Hadron-Collider-be-held-back-by-its-own-future.html)
Quote
............hypothesis centres around the Higgs Boson, a mysterious tiny particle and building block of life that it is hoped the LHC will discover.
They have come up with a theory that it [the Higgs Boson] will "ripple backward through time" and stop the collider before it could make one, like a time traveler who goes back in time to kill his grandfather.
Shouldn't you be able to track it backwards in time by watching it in reverse? What if it goes forwards in time?
What a wacky theory! I now formulate the theory that it will stand still and never age a day.
If the Higgs Bosun can go back and forwards in time, it can choose to be any age, and presumably all ages. That's my theory.
I wonder if it is hung up on being a singularity and must eliminate all clones? It sounds as if it is a very busy particle.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Has the LHC experiement actually demonstrated something other than what it was desiigned for - a common ocurrence. To wit, time travel works if you build very long tunnels?
I maintain that there is only *one* particle, which flits back and forth through time, doubling and re-doubling itself to appear as if there are quadrillions....
:)
so...............just all smoke and mirrors?
Perhaps Derren Brown (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derren_Brown) could throw some light on it.
And has anyone considered the collider may be haunted, or built on the wrong lay lines?
I think that more than haunted the collider haunts those who fear the results of the experiments.
Or perhaps the physicists have to spend more time with engineers to understand that sh!t happens in this business, or perhaps the chain crash reaction in the super-kamiokande a few years ago was the result of rogue neutrinos that didn't want to be discovered?
::) ::) ::)
Quote from: Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith on October 17, 2009, 02:21:01 AM
I maintain that there is only *one* particle, which flits back and forth through time, doubling and re-doubling itself to appear as if there are quadrillions....
:)
I have always maintained that the world is made up of a single particle. At least, I've maintained something along those lines since that one cocktail party when I got really drunk and had to be rescued from some guy who tried to follow me into the bathroom, and then after my friends made him leave I passed out on the couch.
You've heard of HSM Theory? :o
I expounded on this at length a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. ;)
With the greatest respect I believe the FSM and the Higgs Bosun are two distinct entities and I am not even convinced how they would take to each other should they ever meet.
If you had seen the movie Silk, Griffin, then you would know what the connection between large particle accelerators, lay lines and haunting is.
Quote from: Agujjim on October 17, 2009, 04:25:37 AM
You've heard of HSM Theory? :o
I expounded on this at length a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. ;)
HSM Theory? Do tell!
I have the full thread stashed somewhere (might be on my old crashed computer :P) but briefly, and without reference to fictional internet-meme dieties (sic), it's the concept that apparently separate objects in any given dimensional plane could plausibly be the manifestation of a single object in a higher dimension.
For example, there's nothing you could draw in two dimensions that couldn't be the cross-section of a (complex) three-dimensional single object.
Are you familiar with Flatland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland)? It's explores some of the the same ideas, although HSM theory makes some specific speculations on the nature of the 4th (or higher) dimensional* object which could manifest as "reality" as we know it in the 3rd dimension.
*spatial dimensions here; I tend to regard placing time as the 4th dimension to be an artificial construct of human observation - a two-dimensional animation has 2 dimensions + time, so time's more of a '0th' dimension in my mind.
Part of the reason I formerly claimed the title of 'False Prophet', in Other Places. ;)
Aha! Might this then explain why Jayna's hairdo appears both here and in the Guess the Movie Game (http://toadfishmonastery.com/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=32&topic=350.msg98205#msg98205) threads simultaneously?
Quote from: Swatopluk on October 17, 2009, 09:38:21 AM
If you had seen the movie Silk, Griffin, then you would know what the connection between large particle accelerators, lay lines and haunting is.
Sounds like a reason not to see it ;D
By the way, an easy question, why isn't the singular of movies: movy?
I guess because the singular form came later and movies (The Movies) are short for moving pictures.
Or it was made so by the blue meanies.
Here we go:
<Quote> BBC
Scientists at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) are expected to reveal on Wednesday* the strongest evidence yet for the Higgs particle.
*i.e. today
They've just formally announced it. Actually, with a lot of qualifications - it looks like the Higgs but ... blah, blah ...
I think they want a bigger toy to check that they were really right ;) :mrgreen:
Now if they were looking for the Hoggs Bison, that would be easier.
Do you know how difficult it is to accelerate bovines and suidae to near the speed of light and then having them collide in exactly the right spot? :mrgreen:
Quote from: Swatopluk on July 04, 2012, 09:39:12 AM
Do you know how difficult it is to accelerate bovines and suidae to near the speed of light and then having them collide in exactly the right spot? :mrgreen:
That'd be easy: make both of them males, and then tell them it's their turn to wash the dishes....
::)
That only takes care of the first part. Pub collisions are low speed affairs.
Interesting hypothesis, if a little nutty, but is it falsifiable? If a particle travels back in time to annihilate itself, therefore causing it not to show up in tests, how could you prove that? Would there be a gap somewhere? If so, would not that gap show that something should be there? Or does it mean it just doesn't show up? Isn't this whole idea just a paradox dressed up in particle physics?
If it goes back in time to destroy itself and succeeds, then it wouldn't be there to go back in time. If so, it would exist and show itself, in which case it would be able to go back in time and etc, etc.
:microwave:
As to the article, it started out so well, laying out the hypothesis accurately, calling it a hypothesis, and not mentioning the "g" word. Then right near the end it dive-bombed into incredulity by mentioning that very same "g" word that was thankfully absent before, although the first instance was a quote from one of the scientists, but then further uses the "g" word in relation to the HIGGS BOSON.
I was hoping that would be the end of it, but oh no. They said, "First scientists claimed it would create a black hole that would devour the world," which, if I recall correctly, wasn't quite what was said. I seem to remember it being postulated that very small black holes may be created with lives of fractions of fractions of fractions of a second, being so small as to be less than microscopic.
All this was annoying enough. If only I hadn't seen the headline, "London 2012 Olympics: 'biblical storm' lashes capital as women's marathon starts." Oh yeah? I remember it raining for 40 days, covering the entire Earth with water...
:canoe:
I think you are missing the point. It was a biblical storm because it was the womens marathon. Ask Eve about it :mrgreen:
Quote from: Griffin NoName on August 07, 2012, 08:44:05 PM
I think you are missing the point. It was a biblical storm because it was the womens marathon. Ask Eve about it :mrgreen:
Ok, so I confess to being totally clueless here. i know who Eve was meant to be in the Bible, but i'm not totally sure how that relates to a storm. ???
Quote from: Roland Deschain on August 13, 2012, 05:33:18 PM
Quote from: Griffin NoName on August 07, 2012, 08:44:05 PM
I think you are missing the point. It was a biblical storm because it was the womens marathon. Ask Eve about it :mrgreen:
Ok, so I confess to being totally clueless here. i know who Eve was meant to be in the Bible, but i'm not totally sure how that relates to a storm. ???
By association. Eve was a woman. The wroth of a storm was visitated on women. The marathn was the women's not the men's. Same as all Cretians are liars.
My ignorance again. Where was the wrath of a storm visited specifically upon women? Is this in relation to Biblical texts or ancient Greek ones? Also, I thought it was only men who competed in the original Olympics?
Quote from: Roland Deschain on August 15, 2012, 03:53:36 PM
Where was the wrath of a storm visited specifically upon women?
Here:
Quote from: Roland Deschain on August 07, 2012, 07:58:58 PM, "London 2012 Olympics: 'biblical storm' lashes capital as women's marathon starts."
Now you need to deconstruct what I was saying ;D (but it's not really wirth it as it was just a throw away comment).
Lol. I'll stop now before I annoy you with more questions. :mrgreen:
Actually........what is a biblical storm? How does it differ from an ordinary storm?
A 'storm of biblical proportions' (US NewsSpeak) means a gargantuan, destructive storm.
;)
It's hyperbole. Or, constructions in biblical times were particularly fragile so that a little rain and wind would destroy them. Perhaps they should've used the help of the little pig that built his house of bricks? :mrgreen: :P
What do you think all those houses and palaces and temples in Mesopotamia were built with. Even the Tower of Babel was a brick building.
And according to the Bible the Israelites were fed up with producing bricks for pharaoh and left for Palestine.
Of course I know that most of those bricks were air-dried with burned bricks only for the outer layer. The epic of Gilgamesh begins with a boast that the hero had his famous walls built from burned bricks only (singularly luxurious and expensive, that was the whole point).
I hear that brick buildings are a bit of a luxury in some parts of the US due to haulage costs, which is why so many are built of wood. It this true? If it is, times haven't really changed that much, have they? ;)
Standard US housing falls down at winds where Europeans would still discuss whether closing the windows is really necessary ;)
I'd say the early blockhouses of the white settlements in what today are the US were far more stable than most of the modern pre-fabricated houses in suburbia. I guess in the long term the US could save huge amounts of money by building in stone or concrete in those parts of the country where strong winds, fire etc. are a regular feature instead of plywood and paper pulp.
What? And p**ss off the Wood Products lobby? Never!
Here in the USA, buildings are built out of materials that are controlled by various interest groups. Including concrete, lumber/wood and brick. They fight each other over territory like little warring feudal lords too.
The local building codes, which govern how you may construct your buildings, are quite revealing: they show which faction is currently in power in any given locale.
It has darn-all to do with safety, or public interest ...
Politicians are bought and sold like commodities futures.
Quote from: Swatopluk on August 16, 2012, 02:55:34 PM
What do you think all those houses and palaces and temples in Mesopotamia were built with. Even the Tower of Babel was a brick building.
And according to the Bible the Israelites were fed up with producing bricks for pharaoh and left for Palestine.
Of course I know that most of those bricks were air-dried with burned bricks only for the outer layer. The epic of Gilgamesh begins with a boast that the hero had his famous walls built from burned bricks only (singularly luxurious and expensive, that was the whole point).
And we all know the pillars were made of salt ;)
Quote from: Griffin NoName on August 16, 2012, 07:11:46 PM
Quote from: Swatopluk on August 16, 2012, 02:55:34 PM
What do you think all those houses and palaces and temples in Mesopotamia were built with. Even the Tower of Babel was a brick building.
And according to the Bible the Israelites were fed up with producing bricks for pharaoh and left for Palestine.
Of course I know that most of those bricks were air-dried with burned bricks only for the outer layer. The epic of Gilgamesh begins with a boast that the hero had his famous walls built from burned bricks only (singularly luxurious and expensive, that was the whole point).
And we all know the pillars were made of salt ;)
At least a Lot of them
Sodom, I say. :mrgreen:
OK, about the 2:30 mark the contestants ramp up the Lot/Salt/Sodom jokes. Bob Smeerfak's channel is, in my humble opinion, criminally under-appreciated. His Your Bible On Psychotherapy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFMYV01P2LE&feature=plcp) series is great.
[youtube=425,350]GTx8gtUxWfI [/youtube]
But his Bob's Notes: Matthew (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSYim7znQCk&feature=plcp) series is, Good Golly, Miss Molly, my favorite! Each episode begins:
QuoteHello. I'm Bob Smeerfak. But not really. This series is designed for theological seminary students with approaching exams who have not had time to read the Bible, and for bored housewives in Duluth who want to fantasize that the resonant cadences of my voice belong to Brad Pitt.
Matthew Chapter 1. Let's go.
(italicized "for" text changes each chapter.)
I encourage those siblings so inclined to subscribe and vote for his videos; more Bob and less Hovind would do the world a lot of good. ;)
Quote from: Swatopluk on August 16, 2012, 02:55:34 PM
What do you think all those houses and palaces and temples in Mesopotamia were built with. Even the Tower of Babel was a brick building.
And according to the Bible the Israelites were fed up with producing bricks for pharaoh and left for Palestine.
In fairness, the fact that many 'biblical' constructions are still standing is a testament (:P) to their durability, although I imagine that the overwhelming majority of housing was made of very simple materials, hence much more susceptible to extreme weather. Regardless, biblical accounts are prone to hyperbole anyways, be it the size of the exodus or the number of children killed by Herod*.
*Two kids of his own family IIRC, absolutely no evidence of mass murder of children.
Quote from: Swatopluk on August 16, 2012, 03:33:31 PM
Standard US housing falls down at winds where Europeans would still discuss whether closing the windows is really necessary ;)
I'd say the early blockhouses of the white settlements in what today are the US were far more stable than most of the modern pre-fabricated houses in suburbia. I guess in the long term the US could save huge amounts of money by building in stone or concrete in those parts of the country where strong winds, fire etc. are a regular feature instead of plywood and paper pulp.
As Bob said, business interests have cornered regulations for their own profit. Even after a number of hurricanes you can see the construction lobby in FL constantly pushing to lower the (already meager) standards. Usually the damages of the next storm that hits derail their efforts for a while but they keep trying.
I still think we are way better of than the guys in tornado alley, who keep building paper houses in lowlands, and then complain that FEMA isn't fast enough to help them. How exactly is that you get your house blown away and then go back to rebuild it with the same poor foundation, thin lumber and cardboard walls, or in the same lowlands at the bloody same elevation despite almost annual inundations is beyond me.
Quote from: Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith on August 16, 2012, 04:49:30 PM
What? And p**ss off the Wood Products lobby? Never!
Here in the USA, buildings are built out of materials that are controlled by various interest groups. Including concrete, lumber/wood and brick. They fight each other over territory like little warring feudal lords too.
Ayuh, and break international trade agreements to do so (tariffs on Canadian softwood). We have the Dairy Mafia to do that, up here. ::)
Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on August 17, 2012, 04:40:00 PM
I still think we are way better of than the guys in tornado alley, who keep building paper houses in lowlands, and then complain that FEMA isn't fast enough to help them. How exactly is that you get your house blown away and then go back to rebuild it with the same poor foundation, thin lumber and cardboard walls, or in the same lowlands at the bloody same elevation despite almost annual inundations is beyond me.
Childhood literacy is perhaps becoming inadequate... does nobody read/tell the Three Little Pigs anymore? :P
Quote from: Aggie on August 17, 2012, 07:38:44 PM
Childhood literacy is perhaps becoming inadequate... does nobody read/tell the Three Little Pigs anymore? :P
No idea, but my grandaughter just learnt Ba, Ba, Black Sheep.
The most affected ones have been told that they are actually the wolf
Childhood literacy is all about two things: parental/guardian encouragement, and natural ability. I used to read the labels on mum and dad's LPs when they were playing, and I was 3 at the time. I could read before I started infant school (my handwriting was carp, though :mrgreen: ), and had a reading ability well above my actual age. I know i'm not unusual in that, but so many people don't do this.
I look upon early take-up of reading, and educational attainment in general, like vaccination. If you encourage enough parents and children to do so, it vaccinates the majority against the minority who appear not to care, and you go from a culture of ignorance to one of enlightenment.
Brilliant satire piece, pieces.
I too could read before infant school. So much so, that in reading lessons I was co-opted to help other children with their reading. Slave labour, never got paid for it. By the age of 7 or 8 I had read the whole of the local childrens library so started on the adult books. Unfortunately A LA Recherche Du Temps Perdu proved a little too difficult and I have never returned to it, but I do remember lapping up Ulysses. I could have been obnoxiously precocious but I read secretly in my bedroom and the activity/knowledge I gained was not used!! though as an adult I wasn't so shy.
Agree on early reading/education. However, it seems you really can't teach some people (for varying reasons). Maybe it should be given as a real vaccination; we just need the science.