# Physics Rap?



## HLGStrider (Sep 5, 2008)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50ZssEojtM

K, I'm not a science geek by any stretch of the term, but I found this the other day and just can't stop watching it. It reminds me a lot of stuff from the show Square One I watched when I was probably 7-9 before it for some reason disappeared off the air; watching that show was the only time I actually became interested in math.


----------



## Illuin (Sep 6, 2008)

That was great! I’ve actually contributed some work concerning the existence of the Higgs boson (or shall I say; work on my “doubts” ). The LHC (CERN) will find nothing (I’ll wager anyone a lobster dinner). It’s been a flawed theory since day one; along with much of quantum physics and the unbelievably bogus “String Theory”. Oops…a rant…got lost…dangerous topic. Loved the video. That was a treat. Thanks Ranger .


----------



## Sidhe (Sep 6, 2008)

Illuin said:


> That was great! I’ve actually contributed some work concerning the existence of the Higgs boson (or shall I say; work on my “doubts” ). The LHC (CERN) will find nothing (I’ll wager anyone a lobster dinner). It’s been a flawed theory since day one; along with much of quantum physics and the unbelievably bogus “String Theory”. Oops…a rant…got lost…dangerous topic. Loved the video. That was a treat. Thanks Ranger .



Problem is if they don't find the Higgs then it'll give the string theorists renewed hope. Does anyone want a "theory" with no evidence - outside of a blackboard - to be given any more grace? The question is if not the standard model and the: "if only things worked like we imagine" string theory then what now..? Loop Quantum Gravity? Even more tentative interpretations than most? Must admit either way it's a fascinating time to be alive... My hope is it reveals something tangible, even if it's not The Scarlet Pimpernel.


----------



## Illuin (Sep 6, 2008)

> by Sidhe
> _My hope is it reveals something tangible, even if it's not The Scarlet Pimpernel. _


 

Do you mean CERN? I don’t believe any "*Linear* Accelerator" will come anywhere near detecting the Higgs. If they hope to find this (in my opinion) "fictitious particle", technology will need to advance significantly. They are discussing “Muon Colliders”, which are still in their infancy; but...um, OK; why even bother? This is all in hopes of leading to a quantum theory of Gravity. Why look for a quantum theory of gravity, when gravity (and its effects) is simply the actual "geometry" of space? How can you discover force particles (bosons) from a result of the way space is "*laid out*"? You have the best minds in physics wasting time and money (and wasting time and _*making*_ money).


----------



## HLGStrider (Sep 7, 2008)

Wonders what she started . . .


----------



## Sidhe (Sep 8, 2008)

Illuin said:


> Do you mean CERN? I don’t believe any "*Linear* Accelerator" will come anywhere near detecting the Higgs. If they hope to find this (in my opinion) "fictitious particle", technology will need to advance significantly. They are discussing “Muon Colliders”, which are still in their infancy; but...um, OK; why even bother? This is all in hopes of leading to a quantum theory of Gravity. Why look for a quantum theory of gravity, when gravity (and its effects) is simply the actual "geometry" of space? How can you discover force particles (bosons) from a result of the way space is "*laid out*"? You have the best minds in physics wasting time and money (and wasting time and _*making*_ money).



I have seen a tentative suggestion of a Higgs particle in the last run of the old accelerators before they shut down (but of course this isn't good science as the run was never repeated) I could try and fish it out if you like. I think it would be premature to assume that the particles don't exist before putting in some groundwork to move the energy ranges upwards, that is if nothing else attenuating the gaps. After all there isn't an infinte range the Higgs can fall into mass wise, so if we eliminate realistic energy ranges, we can modify the standard theory. Not to mention the Higgs is hardly the only area they are looking into.

It may well be they are wrong but simply claiming they are without doing the leg work is bad science, you are guilty of jumping the gun a little, much like the string theorists. 

I also think that scientist wouldn't have pushed this hard if they didn't think they were right, I don't think this is a cynical attempt to further peoples careers as you imply.

That said if they are wrong and I don't pass judgement prematurely, then so be it. We simply need more refined theories, the LHC is part of the process... Any more ideas of how to unify general relativity with the standard model, anyone..?


----------



## Durin's Bane (Sep 9, 2008)

Things are going bad... Do you remember what happened last time when dear Gordon participated in an experiment


----------

