1 registered members (degenerate_762),
1,114
guests, and 1
spider. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: (LHC)Large Hadron Collider endangers earth
[Re: Spirit]
#201942
04/12/08 04:59
04/12/08 04:59
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 819 U.S.
Why_Do_I_Die
OP
Warned
|
OP
Warned
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 819
U.S.
|
I agree with you Spirit. Maybe the experiment wont be as dangerous as i read it could be , considering they are recreating the way things were a billionth of a second after the big bang , but wait , the big bang ? LOL. There is really no proof it ever happened , and is in fact a fairly new theory (50 ? 60 ? years). So I guess they are recreating how they imagine things were a billionth of a second after the big bang. Still , they ARE going to be conducting the most powerfull experiment ever done , definately something to keep an eye out for. And hey , if they discover the Higgs , or something else , well , then thats fantastic , there's definately too many questions and too little answers.
|
|
|
Re: (LHC)Large Hadron Collider endangers earth
[Re: Spirit]
#202241
04/14/08 03:33
04/14/08 03:33
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377 USofA
fastlane69
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
|
I think physicists do not understand gravity at all, But they can describe and predict it very precisely. I disagree with the first and present the second quote as proof, since the second is exactly what "understanding" means to a physicist... and really to any else. If you understand something, that means you a) know it's facts (describe) b) well enough to use those facts to create new ones (predict). Put another way, pick any of the following:... 1. mental process of a person who comprehends; comprehension; personal interpretation: My understanding of the word does not agree with yours. 2. intellectual faculties; intelligence; mind: a quick understanding. 3. superior power of discernment; enlightened intelligence: With her keen understanding she should have become a leader. 4. knowledge of or familiarity with a particular thing; skill in dealing with or handling something: an understanding of accounting practice. 5. a state of cooperative or mutually tolerant relations between people: To him, understanding and goodwill were the supreme virtues. 6. a mutual agreement, esp. of a private, unannounced, or tacit kind: They had an understanding about who would do the dishes. 7. an agreement regulating joint activity or settling differences, often informal or preliminary in character: After hours of negotiation, no understanding on a new contract was reached.
...and you will see that physicists DO understand Gravity.
Last edited by fastlane69; 04/14/08 03:34.
|
|
|
Re: (LHC)Large Hadron Collider endangers earth
[Re: Why_Do_I_Die]
#202242
04/14/08 03:44
04/14/08 03:44
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377 USofA
fastlane69
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
|
"Newton knew why gravity occurred" , No he didnt , and thats a fact , If it's a fact, then you will have no problem finding a physics text that states "Newton did not understand why gravity occurred". Or put another way, any physics text that states that gravity does not occur because of Mass, which is what Newton's Law of Gravitation states. And to make it fair, let's agree to take the definition of "understand" from one of these: 1. mental process of a person who comprehends; comprehension; personal interpretation: My understanding of the word does not agree with yours. 2. intellectual faculties; intelligence; mind: a quick understanding. 3. superior power of discernment; enlightened intelligence: With her keen understanding she should have become a leader. 4. knowledge of or familiarity with a particular thing; skill in dealing with or handling something: an understanding of accounting practice. 5. a state of cooperative or mutually tolerant relations between people: To him, understanding and goodwill were the supreme virtues. 6. a mutual agreement, esp. of a private, unannounced, or tacit kind: They had an understanding about who would do the dishes. 7. an agreement regulating joint activity or settling differences, often informal or preliminary in character: After hours of negotiation, no understanding on a new contract was reached. ------------------------ So dont talk like you really know what your talking about fasstlane , Higgs himself admitted he might not know what he talks about. You put me in excellent company putting me in with Higgs; I thank you! And you are correct, I don't have to talk like I know anything when you do such a great job of making the point for me. It is perfectly reasonable for him, and myself, to be skeptical of the Higgs and of finding it. Unlike religion, we don't hold on to our saints and angels like dogma... if the Higgs isn't found, it's a big deal for the Standard Model because it has to be re-writtent, but the nuclear reactors aren't suddenly going to stop... the gamma rays won't stop falling... the super kamiokande experiment is not suddently invalid... in short all the SUCCESSES of the SM are not nullified, we were merely mining for new success in the wrong place with the Higgs. I assert that Higgs and myself DO know what we are talking and like a good scientist, I prove it this way: a) If I know what I'm talking about, the LHC will not blow up the world. b) If I know what I'm talking about, the LHC will find a Higss (with 90% confidence) c) If I know what I"m talking about and the LHC doesn't find a Higss, the experiments will provide insight into why not and in effect, why objects have mass and how do they get it. (100% confidence). Now then, there is a testable set of hypothesis to show that I know what I'm talking about. Now then, what are your testable hypothesis that will let us know that YOU know what you are talking about??
|
|
|
Re: (LHC)Large Hadron Collider endangers earth
[Re: fastlane69]
#202281
04/14/08 08:56
04/14/08 08:56
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,439 Red Dwarf
Michael_Schwarz
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 7,439
Red Dwarf
|
Now then, what are your testable hypothesis that will let us know that YOU know what you are talking about?? The outpointing that other people DO NOT know what they are talking about, thus rendering their hypothesis invalid, relative to him
"Sometimes JCL reminds me of Notch, but more competent" ~ Kiyaku
|
|
|
Re: (LHC)Large Hadron Collider endangers earth
[Re: Nems]
#202291
04/14/08 09:44
04/14/08 09:44
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,210 İstanbul, Turkey
Quad
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,210
İstanbul, Turkey
|
aaaand, the expirement will fail, but the energy that is generated by the LHC wont vanish, it will fall on to wide areas of the earth, especially France and Switzerland and there will be some mutants and super-hereos caused by this highly loaded energy. As always happened, mutants will lose their minds and attack human world, thus the LHC-generated superheros have to save the damn world.
Here is the scenario. So, now somebod go and make a "LHC experiment failed game".
(i may suggest something like, expirement is failed, and creatures from another dimension invaded the earth etc. But this is already done in Half-Life)
Yes, i know im not okay. I think im not ok with my mind.
Last edited by Quadraxas; 04/14/08 09:45.
3333333333
|
|
|
Re: (LHC)Large Hadron Collider endangers earth
[Re: Michael_Schwarz]
#202318
04/14/08 12:46
04/14/08 12:46
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,134 Netherlands
Joozey
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,134
Netherlands
|
Quote: "Newton knew why gravity occurred" , No he didnt , and thats a fact ,
If it's a fact, then you will have no problem finding a physics text that states "Newton did not understand why gravity occurred". Or put another way, any physics text that states that gravity does not occur because of Mass, which is what Newton's Law of Gravitation states.
There is a difference between why and how.
Click and join the 3dgs irc community! Room: #3dgs
|
|
|
Re: (LHC)Large Hadron Collider endangers earth
[Re: Joozey]
#202383
04/14/08 18:35
04/14/08 18:35
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377 USofA
fastlane69
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
|
There is a difference between why and how. Not to a scientist. The How is the Why. Because a science works from phenomenology, that which we see and touch and can measure, the only tangible thing is the How. Put another way: the "how" of a subject is scientific and objective, based on observation and experiement; the "why" of a subject is personal and unobjective, based on speculation and ill defined terms. Example: Mass. We know how it's created and destroyed, how it moves, and how we interact with it. Now ask why it's created, why it's destroyed and why it moves... you can come up with a million reasons why but none of them are testable, none objective, and thus to a scientist none "real". Try it: take any statement in physics that uses "why" and replace with "how"... you'll see that asking "why" doesn't quite stack up to asking "how": Why is the sky blue? (Because god intended it that way?) How is the sky blue? (By the refraction of light from the atmosphere) Why do the planets revolve around the sun? (Because they felt like dancing?) How do the planets revolve around the sun? (The Sun's gravity forces the planets into ellipses) Do you see? "Why" seemingly anthropomorphizes a statement, makes it sound like the object in question has reason and motivation and will and thus does something for a reason. "How" is merely a descriptive statement that ask us pay attention to what we can see instead of the reason for that movement.
|
|
|
|