'God particle' may spell doom for universe
Ron Czapala
Posts: 2,418
Higgs Boson Particle May Spell Doom For the Universe
http://news.yahoo.com/higgs-boson-particle-may-spell-doom-universe-152236961.html
BOSTON A subatomic particle discovered last year that may be the long-sought Higgs boson might doom our universe to an unfortunate end, researchers say.
The mass of the particle, which was uncovered at the world's largest particle accelerator the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva is a key ingredient in a calculation that portends the future of space and time.
"This calculation tells you that many tens of billions of years from now there'll be a catastrophe," Joseph Lykken, a theoretical physicist at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Ill., said Monday (Feb. 18) here at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
"It may be the universe we live in is inherently unstable, and at some point billions of years from now it's all going to get wiped out," added Lykken, a collaborator on one of the LHC's experiments.
But even if the universe is in for an unfortunate end, there is at least one reason for consolation.
"You won't actually see it, because it will come at you at the speed of light," Lykken said. "So in that sense don't worry."
http://news.yahoo.com/higgs-boson-particle-may-spell-doom-universe-152236961.html
BOSTON A subatomic particle discovered last year that may be the long-sought Higgs boson might doom our universe to an unfortunate end, researchers say.
The mass of the particle, which was uncovered at the world's largest particle accelerator the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva is a key ingredient in a calculation that portends the future of space and time.
"This calculation tells you that many tens of billions of years from now there'll be a catastrophe," Joseph Lykken, a theoretical physicist at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Ill., said Monday (Feb. 18) here at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
"It may be the universe we live in is inherently unstable, and at some point billions of years from now it's all going to get wiped out," added Lykken, a collaborator on one of the LHC's experiments.
But even if the universe is in for an unfortunate end, there is at least one reason for consolation.
"You won't actually see it, because it will come at you at the speed of light," Lykken said. "So in that sense don't worry."
Comments
The energy level where the Higgs appears to be doesn't introduce anything new, it's just that it's a level which doesn't absolutely leave out the possibility. There are lots of other dooms-day scenarios, e.g. the possibility of proton decay (also covered by Baxter, of course..
And then there are things like, is our universe a 'brane' which may collide with another 'brane', and if so, when will that happen?
If you want to be worried then there's lots to get worried about.. but it all reminds me of an episode of the cartoon "Ernie" where Ernie talked to a physicist at a pub who said something about black holes and the universe, and that the universe itself kind of matched the criteria for being a black hole.. and Ernie couldn't sleep for worry the following days. (And then of course Uncle Sid sold him black-hole insurance..)
-Tor
Mostly joking of course
See you at Milliways then.
A quick teaser:
[video=youtube_share;mmdIVvQZa-o]
I also believe that the big bang is not a one time event but is the destruction/rebirth of another universe and something we(or someone/something else) do in our universe will end in our demise and the birth or big bang of a new universe.
Perhaps the discovery of the higgs boson is the start of the end but at our time scale it won't affect us hopefully for a while but who knows perhaps we are interfering with the mechanics of how everything works and maybe are altering something elsewhere by doing so? The LHC may well be creating big bangs on a different scale everytime we do an experiment?
So, from that, I'm presuming they also figured out what Dark Matter is? And Dark Energy?
Heck, I thought they were still trying to figure out Dark Shadows, for that matter.
Edit :- how come this is post #13 yikkes
Man up, Gareth. Don't be so conCERNed...
It looks like the good doctor is closer to the almighty than we expected...
If anyone has questions, you know who to ask, if you can find him...
Skylight: your ideas about time variance from universe to universe has a very high probability of being correct and is an excellent summation because there is likely phase variance when crossing dimensions. For example, there was no time before our universe was born, but in an instant, time and the Universe was born. We believe a singularity opened up, like a reverse black hole that out poured material to give birth to our Universe.
Gareth: the fact that you got post #13 is proof that we are all some part of a calculating computer program and our brains are in a jar somewhere, according to the theory made popular by Hawking. There is only one thing you can do to compensate...
Jazzed: it's not the divide by zero equation but rather the i solved part of the equation that comes into effect. It was Einstein that showed you don't throw away the previously thought imaginary part of the equation. However, when this goes quantum, I think we'll need new physics.
Life on the other hand is handed to us one day at a time and all rather mysterious... and likely to always be. If you can't enjoy the journey, change your mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Particle:_If_the_Universe_Is_the_Answer,_What_Is_the_Question%3F
A particle is a particle, not a god or a demigod.
I like it. Hold that thought. It leads to some interesting conclusions:
1) I will take the view that "The universe is just a concept".
2) Therefore everything I experience of this so called universe is just a concept that I am holding.
3) You, loopy, are part of my experience of the universe, which itself is just a concept that I am holding.
4) Therefore you, and by similar logic all the rest of humanity are just part of that concept I have.
5) Clearly nothing exists apart from from myself and my concepts (not even sure about the physical "me" as that seems to be "out there" and therefore my physical being is just part of the big concept as well).
6) Simply put nothing exists without my conception of it.
7) That implies that before I reached consciousness, became aware and could hold the concept, the universe did not exist. No concept = no universe.
8) Likewise, I suspect I might cease to be at some point. At the point the universe will also cease to be as there is no concept to sustain it.
Conclusion: I am the Higgs Boson, the God Particle.
Well, If I follow this logic seriously enough at some point the guys in white coats will be looking after me.
Hmmm...is that why you are called "loopy"?:)
I don't think so. Most of the hype and gibberish around these subjects comes from the media presentation of science rather than the physicists themselves.
Some story about a new theory in Physics is probably totally totally unintelligible to all but a few physicists and mathematicians. Anyone reporting on it needs to employ analogies and hype to make a story for us mere mortals. Hence nonsense like "God Particle". Few physicists like that monica.
Have a look here: http://www.sixtysymbols.com/videos/higgs_discovery.htm . Physicists are just like regular guys.
If you follow logic enough, you will go nowhere. You seem to subscribe to Descartes "I think therefore I am". Whereas I simply accept "I am therefore I think."
Should we be worried about you? You seem to be thinking too hard.
I call myself "Loopy Byteloose" in memory of
Gyro Gearloose.. a tribute to all that is mad about science and inventors.
What I fear is that these guy will discover a 'wonderful new weapons system'. We had enough of that in the 20th century.
"I am therefore I think." Interesting.
It does not work for me because:
1) I can say the same thing this way "I exist therefore I think".
2) That is basically saying that "existing" implies "thinking".
3) The problem with that is that I get the feeling that rocks exist but they do not think.
4) Therefore 2) is false and hence 1) is false and hence your original statement is wrong.
Of course that refutation relies on my assumption that there are things, like rocks, that exist but do not think. Perhaps I am wrong and the Buddhists are right, rocks do think.
On the other hand you might want to revise your statement to "I am human therefore I think". However that is not so clear to me either:)
5) Clearly nothing exists apart from from myself and my concepts (not even sure about the physical "me" as that seems to be "out there" and therefore my physical being is just part of the big concept as well).
I shall claim exactly the same logic, for are we not just the same bits of left-over supernovae that happen to have evolved into intelligent, thinking organisms?
So, I follow your logic with this, from Douglas Adams:
The Babel fish, said The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy quietly, is small, yellow and leech-like, and probably the oddest thing in the Universe. It feeds on brainwave energy not from its carrier but from those around it. It absorbs all unconscious mental frequencies from this brainwave energy to nourish itself with. It then excretes into the mind of its carrier a telepathic matrix formed by combining the conscious thought frequencies with nerve signals picked up from the speech centres of the brain which has supplied them. The practical upshot of all this is that if you stick a Babel fish in your ear you can instantly understand anything said to you in any form of language. The speech patterns you actually hear decode the brainwave matrix which has been fed into your mind by your Babel fish.
Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
The argument goes something like this: I refuse to prove that I exist, says God, for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.
But, says Man, The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isnt it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you dont. QED.
Oh dear, says God, I hadnt thought of that, and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.
Oh, that was easy, says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
Most leading theologians claim that this argument is a load of dingos kidneys, but that didnt stop Oolon Colluphid making a small fortune when he used it as the central theme of his best- selling book Well That About Wraps It Up For God.
Meanwhile, the poor Babel fish, by effectively removing all barriers to communication between different races and cultures, has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/OhMyGodParticle/
Logic is not a complete tool set for life as we keep reviewing and revising priorities and patterns.
@Heater
If I could stop thinking without blowing my brains out I might agree with you.
But I am certainly not the God that thought up this living experience... hence "I think therefore I am." is rather wrong. It implies that I can thing and therefore not be."