Science things

[Bluce Ree]

Better yet, show me one SG-1 or SGA episode that mentioned the fact that the Ancients nearly always placed their stargates in the areas on the planets that were similar to southwestern Canada.

Vancouver is the center of the known universe. It's only normal that the base of the entire universe self-replicates.

I pose a challenge regarding theoretical science and you post the blueprints to a Stargate-styled cock ring.

 

[mzzz]

 

[YJ02]

So, what the hell is a "Higgs Bosun" and how would finding it do anything to make the world a better place?

I am not being sarcastic, I just really want to know what it is and why these people are so determined on finding it
thx

http://news.yahoo.com/physicists-look-future-higgs-announcement-181942009.html

 

[mzzz]

First of all, stop reading yahoo news. lol.

In particle physics, they categorize everything as either fermions or bosons. Fermions are actual particles, in the traditional sense, with specific properties such as mass, charge, spin. Fermions have matter and anti-matter. Bosons are also particles, in a non-traditional sense. They are often 'force carrier' 'particles'. So for example, the theorized 'graviton' is a theorized boson particle that is responsible for gravitational force between matter. In essence, fermions are the matter, and bosons are responsible for the interactions that fermions have in the form of forces.

Higgs boson is what is theorized to be the thing that gives a particle mass. It'd be useful to know because knowing how the universe works is always a good thing, for the future. I mean, when Newton did his mechanics way back then, no one would have dreamed of the resulting applications that came about, rockets, cars, so many other things. So while there might not be any applications we can think of right now, mostly due to tech and lack of complete understanding of the boson, applications will come in the future once we figure out how. Before we can think to even apply something, we have to know that something.

 

[YJ02]

First of all, stop reading yahoo news. lol.

In particle physics, they categorize everything as either fermions or bosons. Fermions are actual particles, in the traditional sense, with specific properties such as mass, charge, spin. Fermions have matter and anti-matter. Bosons are also particles, in a non-traditional sense. They are often 'force carrier' 'particles'. So for example, the theorized 'graviton' is a theorized boson particle that is responsible for gravitational force between matter. In essence, fermions are the matter, and bosons are responsible for the interactions that fermions have in the form of forces.

Higgs boson is what is theorized to be the thing that gives a particle mass. It'd be useful to know because knowing how the universe works is always a good thing, for the future. I mean, when Newton did his mechanics way back then, no one would have dreamed of the resulting applications that came about, rockets, cars, so many other things. So while there might not be any applications we can think of right now, mostly due to tech and lack of complete understanding of the boson, applications will come in the future once we figure out how. Before we can think to even apply something, we have to know that something.

ok, thanks--if you HAD to make a guess right now-what type of device, process, or action would this understanding enable? just curious

yahoo is just a clearinghouse for other sources-this story came from 'livescience'. if it is straight up yahoo i typically do not read it.

 

[Bluce Ree]

ok, thanks--if you HAD to make a guess right now-what type of device, process, or action would this understanding enable? just curious

Anti-gravity, for one.

 

[mzzz]

Lemme venture into some light math, fluff math, that has relevance to physics.

Most of us think of space in the traditional sense, i.e. 3d. Or x,y,z coordinate system. This usual notion of space is called Euclidean geometry, where we have such right angled coordinate system ( x axis and y axis make a right angle, x and z axes make a right angle, etc.). We've held this notion for a long time until a couple hundred years ago when we started to fool around with the math and got some non-Euclidean geometry. So what the heck does that mean?

Well, first think of our surface/space as a simple plane, just a coordinate system involving x,y axes. And your normal sense of what a triangle on that space is the normal triangle you think of. But now suppose that, that your space is the surface on a sphere. Now what would a "triangle" on that surface look like?

The purple is the traditional triangle we think of in the x,y surface. But the black traced triangle is what a triangle on a spherical surface looks like. The sides are curved. The whole surface of the triangle is curved.

So what use is this? Well considering how our earth is a sphere, sort of, wouldn't it be better to develop some non-Euclidean geometry to work with rather than try to convert everything to our traditional Euclidean space? And we do in fact. Physics does it all the time.

If I asked you what what the shortest distance between two points is, you'd naturally say a straight line. However if I asked you in relation to the Earth and your limited travel means, what's the shortest distance between two places on Earth? The answer isn't a straight line, it's a curved line. Airplanes never travel in a straight line from point A to Point B. They travel a curved path.

In physics, the notion of spacetime involves non-Euclidean geometry. These non-Euclidean geometries are some of the hardest things to learn because it doesn't fit into our normal intuitions that we think of, like the standard 3d notion of things. In fact, they don't even really teach spacetime mechanics at the undergraduate level because it requires a very high level of maturity in maths cause of how lacking our intuition is. Anyways, just wanted to share.

Quick challenge: Say there is a plane in the North pole and you want to get to some place close to the equator, say somewhere in the Carribean. Would you just travel a curved path straight down, down as in relation to the picture above? The answer's obviously no, but lemme know if you figure out why.

 

[Gatefan1976]

 

[mzzz]

I've been trying to think of ways of viable space travel in the near future, even within just our solar system. So I looked up a few sites.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2000/ast15jun_1/

Summary to the best of my understanding:
Think of a pool table, you hit one ball and its momentum is transferred to the ball it hits. In a similar way, you let an ion gain energy inside your engine and expel it out with high momentum resulting in propulsion. That's sort of the general essence of the beginning of that article. The problem is that initially, that kind of thrust doesn't compare to the chemical means of propulsion we have these days. However, if you keep doing this in space, then over time, you start to get a accumulated effect which ultimately does become efficient. The initial problem would be that it does not have enough power to achieve escape velocity. This can be circumvented by using chemical propulsion systems to initially get it up there in space and then utilize it in space where you don't need to achieve liftoff. Two problems are demonstrating the longevity of such an ion propulsion system and figuring out the navigation and telemetry of such a spaceship. They have sort of addressed the first issue, lightly.

Comments:
I could see how this could be used to set up solar space exploration in the long run. My idea would be this: Think of a train system. You have sort of train tracks in space. The only difference would be that these trains would never stop but be constantly going. You set up this fixed path in space and just have the spaceship be in constant motion going from one place to another with the accumulated propulsion generated by long term ion expulsion; this accumulated effect will remain because space doesn't have as much frictional resistance to slow it down - kind of like Newton's 1st law, an object in motion will remain in motion. Of course, as you might guess, the problems would be turning the spaceship and general obstructions (comets and whatnot) in space that may come up. Hopefully with an advanced knowledge of spatial mechanics, maybe we could devise a navigation system in the future. To turn the thing on some 'train tracks', we could maybe use actual train tracks, but in the form of space stations that guide and turn the spacecraft with maybe electromagnetic velocity change. Think of the particle colliders in CERN, they use electromagnetic forces to make particles turn in the giant ring they have set up. Maybe they can somehow implement that with the spacecraft somehow. I wish I had applied to do research at the jet propulsion lab even though I probably would not have gotten in being at the lower end of the spectrum of potential candidates. Please do feel free to comment or add insight, thread's kinda become a solo act.

 

[Jim of WVa]

 

[mzzz]

Doesn't the younger version of Feynman look a lot like Q?

 

[Overmind One]

Higgs Boson and the study of it/chasing of it is nothing but bait to get government grants. Simple as that. . It is a fraud perpetuated by the physics community and the particle they are describing this to be simply cannot exist. Others know this too:

http://www.stankovuniversallaw.com/2012/07/the-fraud-higgs-boson-a-scientific-explanation/

"The Higgs-Boson, the way it is described in current physics does not exist and this is known to the specialists. It is a fallout product of their failed standard model that is unable to unite gravitation with the other three fundamental forces. This failed model embodies the total bankruptcy of this Orion-tainted, anything else but exact, natural science.

The reason for the invention of this virtual particle was the deliberate introduction of the false Anunnaki idea in quantum physics that photons have no mass. This led to a number of fundamental paradoxes in quantum physics and cosmology, such as the assumption for the existence of “dark matter” in modern cosmology, which accounts for 90% of all the mass in the Universe that cannot be attributed to any known particles. Hence the invention of the hypothetical Higgs-Boson, with which the PTB actually wanted to rectify the building of the super collider in Cern for completely different purposes."

http://softaether.blogspot.com/2012/07/higgs-boson-field-is-massive-fraud.html

This is absurdity to the extreme. They are saying the Higgs is both a boson (particle) and field (space). Now in addition to wave/particle duality we have space/particle duality. An object can be both a thing and the space it occupies at the same time. They have now defined space as matter, or at least as the source of matter. Actually, what they have done is sunk deeper into the cloud of ignorance in order to justify spending billions of dollars on a failed experiment.

Let me also put it to you another way. They are saying that some cosmic process is using cosmic construction paper for cutting out a particle that wastes more than 99% of the paper. That is what a proton is to the Standard Model. What happens to the rest of the Higgs field and why does it not affect macro matter if it can affect quantum matter? When 1% of the Higgs is used to make a proton, what happens to the other 99%?

If that 99% produces another proton, then the Higgs obviously no longer has the mass discovered by CERN! If that 99% does not produce a proton, it means there is a lot of unused Higgs field that can affect other protons. The logic clearly does not work.

Anybody looking at the money pit known as CERN knows that it has sucked down BILLIONS of dollars and the ROI is basically nil. They need more money to pay fat "scientists" to sit and search out a particle which does not exist. They need to give hope to companies and governments that they will discover something of use to science or space exploration or the military.

Physics cannot prove that there are 3 or 4 "fundamental forces" to begin with! I have ranted about the physics community before, and this is more proof that it is far behind the other sciences. Sure, you can attack my rebuttal sources, but the logic is undeniable. Higgs Boson is a fraud to the extreme.

 

[Overmind One]

So, what the hell is a "Higgs Bosun" and how would finding it do anything to make the world a better place?

I am not being sarcastic, I just really want to know what it is and why these people are so determined on finding it
thx

http://news.yahoo.com/physicists-look-future-higgs-announcement-181942009.html

They arent determined on finding it. They are wanting MONEY to find it...but it does not exist. Specialists in this field know it does not..and CANNOT...exist. It is a fraud, like CERN is. That huge waste of money cost BILLIONS OF EUROS. Its annual budget is more than 1 BILLION Euros per year. It is a continued drain the likes of which have never been seen before, and what has it given us for that investment? NOT MUCH.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#Cost

 

[YJ02]

They arent determined on finding it. They are wanting MONEY to find it...but it does not exist. Specialists in this field know it does not..and CANNOT...exist. It is a fraud, like CERN is. That huge waste of money cost BILLIONS OF EUROS. Its annual budget is more than 1 BILLION Euros per year. It is a continued drain the likes of which have never been seen before, and what has it given us for that investment? NOT MUCH.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#Cost

Here is where the "science and math people" get mad and call me a lowbrow Luddite,but-Reading and seeing some results of science experiment and research is cool-sometimes- but I do not really see a point to them unless they ultimately are going to lead to a "betterment of society".

This goes hand in hand with the research to publication process I have ranted about before in other threads (that is the speed at which anything "new" found in history/archaeology and other areas takes to get from the find to public domain/ "in the books") research done for the sake of research; so that physics post grad can get another PhD-with the PhD being the only 'good' that comes from the experiment.

I realize things come in steps and a lengthy process can ensue in science--hence my questioning of what could the higgs bosun do for us in time--and that rarely, if ever, are new findings completed in one step.

With the research in switzerland for example, and the search for the "god particle"-what is the purpose beyond the find? With us knowing how the god particle works-it will allow us to do what?

 

[mzzz]

wow...

 

[Overmind One]

Here is where the "science and math people" get mad and call me a lowbrow Luddite,but-Reading and seeing some results of science experiment and research is cool-sometimes- but I do not really see a point to them unless they ultimately are going to lead to a "betterment of society".

This goes hand in hand with the research to publication process I have ranted about before in other threads (that is the speed at which anything "new" found in history/archaeology and other areas takes to get from the find to public domain/ "in the books") research done for the sake of research; so that physics post grad can get another PhD-with the PhD being the only 'good' that comes from the experiment.

I realize things come in steps and a lengthy process can ensue in science--hence my questioning of what could the higgs bosun do for us in time--and that rarely, if ever, are new findings completed in one step.

With the research in switzerland for example, and the search for the "god particle"-what is the purpose beyond the find? With us knowing how the god particle works-it will allow us to do what?

CERN and the LHC is a money pit. The governments funding it know it, private researchers know it, and its strategy is to promise major breakthroughs "eventually"...as long as the funding allows the searching and studies to continue. The numbers associated with funding the LHC and CERN are mind boggling. More than the GDP of many countries.

I repeat: Physics has NOT proven that the "four fundamental forces" even exist!

Stating that physics has found the Higgs Boson particle is akin to saying that the actual Tree of Life has been found in the Garden of Eden (), and then asking for billions of dollars to study the genome of the tree to "verify its identity".

 

[YJ02]

wow...

i figured that would make your head explode

sorry

 

[Overmind One]

i figured that would make your head explode

sorry

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...on-particle-little-real-science-involved.html

"The basic hypotheses of particle physics have changed little since Democritus of Abdera proposed, sometime around 44 B.C., that all matter was composed of tiny, jittering units. Aristotle rejected this 'atomist' theory, and for centuries his assumption--that all substances were compounds of fire, earth, water, and air--was the prevailing one." Then along came the heroic poet Lucretius who "had similar [i.e., atomist] inspirations....But his vision, too, was rebuffed and forgotten until a moldering copy of Lucretius' poem was rediscovered in a German monastery library in 1417."

The truth of the matter, is that the following is absolutely correct:

1. The Higgs Boson particle is theoretical, not real.
2. The "four fundamental forces" have not been verified as correct, much less existent.
3. There have been no actual physical constants found anywhere in the Universe.
4. The Standard Model is theoretical, not a law or verified entity: (from CERN) http://home.web.cern.ch/about/physics/standard-model and it MAY BE WRONG.
5. Supersymmetry predictions have failed (conducted by CERN as well) to find particles they think "should exist".

But most of all, CERN needs MONEY to continue its fruitless experiments. The entire facility is designed to smash particles into each other, and this method cannot reveal the true nature of matter because it cannot bring them together the way they come together in the Universe. An analogy...if you wanted to know something about the nature of this planet, how much would you learn by smashing a moon into it at high velocity? There is nothing we have that can recreate the natural formation of structures like subatomic particle systems or solar systems or galaxies. That is because the Standard Model ignores non-particles largely. Its pathetic.

There are several incentives to "discover" things in physics. First being the Nobel Prize in Physics. The second, having your name put on a particle or a process or even a matter-energy relationship. There are more personal names put on these things in physics than in any other field of science. Physics today has become a "glory train". As a result of this culture in physics, many have literally invented "new particles" to explain unpredictable or unexpected results in (flawed) equations. And they get to name it. We have a semi-workable body of data to guide further discoveries, but facilities like CERN at most can help with only half the story.

 

[Bluce Ree]

They arent determined on finding it. They are wanting MONEY to find it...but it does not exist. Specialists in this field know it does not..and CANNOT...exist. It is a fraud, like CERN is. That huge waste of money cost BILLIONS OF EUROS. Its annual budget is more than 1 BILLION Euros per year. It is a continued drain the likes of which have never been seen before, and what has it given us for that investment? NOT MUCH.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#Cost

Have they tried colliding politicians at high speed in the collider? That would be so worth all the money they've poured into it.

 

[Overmind One]

Have they tried colliding politicians at high speed in the collider? That would be so worth all the money they've poured into it.

If they did that, half their money would dry up! The funding strategy of CERN and the LHC is no different from UNICEF or any charitable organization. They tell you all the wonderful things they are doing (or going to do) with your money, and kindly ask for donations starting at one million dollars to continue their noble cause. The ROI is dismal for the facility. The advancements made at CERN are mediocre considering the cost of the projects. There is even a subset of parasitic private entities which sell specialized chips and hardware specifically for the facility and survive solely on their vendor relationship with CERN.

Check this out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...llider-lhc-god-particle-hiatus_n_2410871.html

GENEVA -- The world's largest and most powerful atom smasher goes into a 2-year hibernation in March, as engineers carry out a revamp to help it reach maximum energy levels that could lead to more stunning discoveries following the detection of the so-called "God particle."
With the reopening of its $10 billion proton collider in early 2015, the stage will be set for observing more rare phenomena – and unlocking more mysteries, said James Gillies, chief spokesman for the European particle physics laboratory known as CERN.
The Large Hadron Collider under the Swiss-French border will operate for two more months then shut down through 2014, allowing engineers to lay thousands more superconducting cables aimed at bringing the machine up to "full design energy," Gillies told The Associated Press on Friday.
Physicists at the European Center for Nuclear Research, known by its French acronym CERN, won't exactly be idle as the collider takes a break. There are still reams more data to sift through since the July discovery of a new subatomic particle called the Higgs boson – dubbed the "God particle – which promises a new realm of understanding of the universe.

BTW, anyone with evidence debunking what I have said, please chime on in and swing with the best you got! Particularly my numbered list of things known to be theoretical (like the higgs Boson and also the "four fundamental forces").

The Higgs Boson will not be found. But glorious "new discoveries" will pepper the journey to nowhere, continuing funding for a bit longer until the gig is up. By then there will be requests for money to communicate to (theorized) beings existing on large subatomic particles.