Scientists may announce discovery of Higgs Boson

MMAPlayground.com » Off Topic » Off Topic » Scientists may announce discovery of Higgs Boson
Next Page »
Poor_Franklin
7/1/12 4:38:37PM
GENEVA, July 1 (Reuters) - It has been fancifully dubbed the angel of creation and, to the particular scorn of physicists, the god particle.

The Higgs Boson is said to have appeared out of the chaos of the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago and turned the flying debris from that primeval explosion into galaxies, stars, and planets.

Its formal discovery, according to a broad scientific consensus, would be the greatest advance in knowledge of the universe in decades.

But until now, in the four decades of research since its existence was first posited, no-one has claimed to have more than seen a hint of the Higgs Boson.

This may be about to change.

On Wednesday at the CERN particle physics research centre near Geneva, two separate teams of "Higgs Hunters" - a term they profess to hate - may well announce they have spotted it.

Reuters

george112
7/1/12 6:52:50PM
My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes
jae_1833
7/1/12 6:53:50PM
I'm a tactician, not a mathematician....
Cooler
7/1/12 7:03:43PM
Okay, then where did God come from?... Richard Dawkins probably the most well known Evolutionary Biologist would have a laugh at this bunch of pseudoscience about the god particle. The God particle is not peer reviewed or a consensus in the scientific community, one scientist or two do not make an idea valid it has to be peer reviewed and if it doesn't hold up against demonstrable, verifiable testing it's tossed aside until it has actual evidence. Evolution is a fact, not just a scientific theory (which is the graduation point of an idea in science) and people need to deal with it.
SmileR
7/1/12 7:37:39PM

Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



If this discovery actually comes through the whole world could change in a matter of decades. I'm not talking little advancements either I'm talking new fuel, possible colonisation of other worlds and huge scientific advances in all major areas.

The "who cares attitude" is yours to have, man. But the scientists working on this are world leaders and if they do manage to discover the Higgs Boson particle they will change the world like no one has or will for thousands of years. The practical applications of this are frightening!
Cooler
7/1/12 8:07:10PM

Posted by SmileR


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



If this discovery actually comes through the whole world could change in a matter of decades. I'm not talking little advancements either I'm talking new fuel, possible colonisation of other worlds and huge scientific advances in all major areas.

The "who cares attitude" is yours to have, man. But the scientists working on this are world leaders and if they do manage to discover the Higgs Boson particle they will change the world like no one has or will for thousands of years. The practical applications of this are frightening!



I like your enthusiasm for Science... but it sounds like it's for the wrong camp, it sounds like you're for creation science, which has contributed nothing to actual science and our advancements, none of these so called scientists have shown a correlation to their god and their particles they call god particles which just means they have no idea what its called and they "have faith" lol... I think there's definitely some irony is saying that a God particle will change everything when this "God" let the dark ages happen in his name and we are at least 1000 years behind where we should be technologically and advancement-wise because of peoples superstitious ideas they cant prove.

george112
7/1/12 8:28:24PM

Posted by SmileR


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



If this discovery actually comes through the whole world could change in a matter of decades. I'm not talking little advancements either I'm talking new fuel, possible colonisation of other worlds and huge scientific advances in all major areas.

The "who cares attitude" is yours to have, man. But the scientists working on this are world leaders and if they do manage to discover the Higgs Boson particle they will change the world like no one has or will for thousands of years. The practical applications of this are frightening!



Practical uses that will do nothing for the gain of anything but to make us humans feel better about ourselves.

SmileR
7/1/12 8:43:24PM

Posted by Cooler


Posted by SmileR


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



If this discovery actually comes through the whole world could change in a matter of decades. I'm not talking little advancements either I'm talking new fuel, possible colonisation of other worlds and huge scientific advances in all major areas.

The "who cares attitude" is yours to have, man. But the scientists working on this are world leaders and if they do manage to discover the Higgs Boson particle they will change the world like no one has or will for thousands of years. The practical applications of this are frightening!



I like your enthusiasm for Science... but it sounds like it's for the wrong camp, it sounds like you're for creation science, which has contributed nothing to actual science and our advancements, none of these so called scientists have shown a correlation to their god and their particles they call god particles which just means they have no idea what its called and they "have faith" lol... I think there's definitely some irony is saying that a God particle will change everything when this "God" let the dark ages happen in his name and we are at least 1000 years behind where we should be technologically and advancement-wise because of peoples superstitious ideas they cant prove.




You honestly could not be more wrong dude, I'm a physicist through and through, got my B.S. from Leeds University in Physics and Acoustics and I'm working on my Masters in Acoustics. Creation science is the exact opposite of what I believe and work towards. They start with and answer and build towards the question.

I lived with two guys that work extensively with particle physics and studied it myself for the past 3 years. Not as in depth as those guys, as they are frighteningly knowledgeable. I think you might be misunderstanding the use of the phrase "God particle" though.
Its not used by creation scientists as a way of saying god exists, its used as a way of explaining how important Higgs Boson is to the structure of matter. Its basically a catchy way of describing the breaking of electroweak symmetry, which is used to explain why elementary particles have mass. Without it the standard model of particle physics would be completely different.

Cooler
7/1/12 9:31:26PM

Posted by SmileR


Posted by Cooler


Posted by SmileR


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



If this discovery actually comes through the whole world could change in a matter of decades. I'm not talking little advancements either I'm talking new fuel, possible colonisation of other worlds and huge scientific advances in all major areas.

The "who cares attitude" is yours to have, man. But the scientists working on this are world leaders and if they do manage to discover the Higgs Boson particle they will change the world like no one has or will for thousands of years. The practical applications of this are frightening!



I like your enthusiasm for Science... but it sounds like it's for the wrong camp, it sounds like you're for creation science, which has contributed nothing to actual science and our advancements, none of these so called scientists have shown a correlation to their god and their particles they call god particles which just means they have no idea what its called and they "have faith" lol... I think there's definitely some irony is saying that a God particle will change everything when this "God" let the dark ages happen in his name and we are at least 1000 years behind where we should be technologically and advancement-wise because of peoples superstitious ideas they cant prove.




You honestly could not be more wrong dude, I'm a physicist through and through, got my B.S. from Leeds University in Physics and Acoustics and I'm working on my Masters in Acoustics. Creation science is the exact opposite of what I believe and work towards. They start with and answer and build towards the question.

I lived with two guys that work extensively with particle physics and studied it myself for the past 3 years. Not as in depth as those guys, as they are frighteningly knowledgeable. I think you might be misunderstanding the use of the phrase "God particle" though.
Its not used by creation scientists as a way of saying god exists, its used as a way of explaining how important Higgs Boson is to the structure of matter. Its basically a catchy way of describing the breaking of electroweak symmetry, which is used to explain why elementary particles have mass. Without it the standard model of particle physics would be completely different.




Creation Science is Pseudoscience so I don't think you've looked into it enoug but it would benefit you to look up guys like Lawrence Krauss who has shown that you can get a universe from nothing (not literal nothing but subatomic particles, atoms etc. and you don't need superfluous ideas of creationism.

And if it's all metaphorical and it has nothing to do with god, why call it a god particle if it has nothing to do with god? like I said they might as well call it the I don't know particle because almost every mystery there was in the past real Science has come up with an explanation. People used to think lightning was from Zeus, now we know what it really is, people used to think demons caused sickness now we know better, people used to assume they were a special species on this planet, now they should know we just evolved the fastest...

And they never mention which god are they talking about so even calling it a god particle is nonsensical... To me creation scientists are always a bunch of desperate outsiders in the scientific community trying to say there's a big conspiracy against Intelligent Design in the Scientific Community and they have it out for creationism when the fact of the matter is that 90% of Physicists don't believe in god and reject this notion of a god particle, which has huge implications against all everything we know in cosmology, chemistry, biology etc and would turn science around 360 degrees...

Where is the Nobel Prize for discovering the god particle? Do you know how many have tried to thwart what we know today? a lot of people. Actually it's what Science is for, to be falsifiable and changeable with the evidence. James Randi for example challenges people like physic readers, religious con artists, magicians and supposed healers to claim a million dollars if they can prove they have any powers under scientific methods.. and they fail every time. I suspect they will never get their Nobel Prize or their money, no offense.
scoozna
7/1/12 9:57:29PM
The Cooler doth protest too much, methinks.
warglory
7/1/12 9:57:33PM
I don't mean any disrespect to the OP, as the consequences of this potential discovery could very well have large ramifications, I don't know, but my opinion about the whole big bang theory is luke warm at best. Why?

Because science often shits on religion as being this untestable series of events that doesn't fit comfortably into the logic of science. I am not religious...at all, but I just find it completely hypocritical when science judges God as being imaginary, but then talks about a singular particle, floating...somewhere (because space isn't just space, it's made up of dark matter remember), and suddenly erupts, for some reason, causing rapid growth in the amount of matter, which somehow multiplied itself from a singular particle, which goes against the very essence of testable physics, into the universe we know today. All of this may be true, but the fact that scientists don't see the blatant hypocrisy in judging religion, while then openly supporting the big bang theory as if it were quantifiable fact is laughably insane.

/soapbox.
cowcatcher
7/1/12 10:41:38PM
I'm such a hardcore atheist that I'm not just against the idea of God, I'm against the word!

Does saying Michael Jordan is a basketball god get you riled up too???

No religious talk on this forum guys, and this topic should never even have gone down that road. One of the most ridiculous things I've seen in awhile.
prophecy033
7/1/12 11:00:27PM
Although there is a ton on knowledge and intelligence throughout this thread, it has gone downhill pretty fast
Aether
7/1/12 11:47:42PM

Posted by Cooler

Okay, then where did God come from?... Richard Dawkins probably the most well known Evolutionary Biologist would have a laugh at this bunch of pseudoscience about the god particle. The God particle is not peer reviewed or a consensus in the scientific community, one scientist or two do not make an idea valid it has to be peer reviewed and if it doesn't hold up against demonstrable, verifiable testing it's tossed aside until it has actual evidence. Evolution is a fact, not just a scientific theory (which is the graduation point of an idea in science) and people need to deal with it.



No offense, but you don't know what you're talking about.

"The God Particle" is a term coined by the popular media, the name has absolutely nothing to do with the science being done. It's called the Higgs Boson, and it's part of the standard model of physics, it's not some kind of fringe science trying to prove the existence of God. We've been acting under the assumption that this particle exists for decades, this isn't a really big discovery. NOT finding it would be a big discovery, because it would invalidate the standard model of physics. We expected to find this particle long before we started looking for it.
Aether
7/2/12 12:00:11AM

Posted by cowcatcher

I'm such a hardcore atheist that I'm not just against the idea of God, I'm against the word!

Does saying Michael Jordan is a basketball god get you riled up too???

No religious talk on this forum guys, and this topic should never even have gone down that road. One of the most ridiculous things I've seen in awhile.



It has very little to do with atheism, and more to do with the fact that the name has nothing to do with what the particle actually is, and it is nonsense made up by the media to generate hype. It just causes confusion and a lack of understanding. (see cooler's posts)

Most scientists don't like it when the media makes up fanciful and inaccurate names to try to replace facts and clear explanations. I doubt that many people are offended because they're atheists. They're offended because the media takes their work and presents it as nonsense that people then use to make up crazy arguments and theories like we're seeing in this thread.
cowcatcher
7/2/12 12:05:33AM
I was simply being sarcastic. You're looking too deep into what I was saying buddy.

It seemed to me that as soon as the word god appeared the soapbox was out and ready to be preached from.

IRONY
Poor_Franklin
7/2/12 1:06:28AM

Posted by Aether


Posted by Cooler

Okay, then where did God come from?... Richard Dawkins probably the most well known Evolutionary Biologist would have a laugh at this bunch of pseudoscience about the god particle. The God particle is not peer reviewed or a consensus in the scientific community, one scientist or two do not make an idea valid it has to be peer reviewed and if it doesn't hold up against demonstrable, verifiable testing it's tossed aside until it has actual evidence. Evolution is a fact, not just a scientific theory (which is the graduation point of an idea in science) and people need to deal with it.



No offense, but you don't know what you're talking about.

"The God Particle" is a term coined by the popular media, the name has absolutely nothing to do with the science being done. It's called the Higgs Boson, and it's part of the standard model of physics, it's not some kind of fringe science trying to prove the existence of God. We've been acting under the assumption that this particle exists for decades, this isn't a really big discovery. NOT finding it would be a big discovery, because it would invalidate the standard model of physics. We expected to find this particle long before we started looking for it.



thank you aether
seriously guys. it's a nickname of a particle that they say holds atoms & shit together. this post was meant to show scientific discovery, not whether the discovery would prove/disprove any religion you may or may not believe in
Poor_Franklin
7/2/12 1:07:13AM

Posted by cowcatcher

I was simply being sarcastic. You're looking too deep into what I was saying buddy.

IRONY



you are correct CC. the heat is starting to get to some people
Aether
7/2/12 1:09:59AM

Posted by warglory

I don't mean any disrespect to the OP, as the consequences of this potential discovery could very well have large ramifications, I don't know, but my opinion about the whole big bang theory is luke warm at best. Why?

Because science often shits on religion as being this untestable series of events that doesn't fit comfortably into the logic of science. I am not religious...at all, but I just find it completely hypocritical when science judges God as being imaginary, but then talks about a singular particle, floating...somewhere (because space isn't just space, it's made up of dark matter remember), and suddenly erupts, for some reason, causing rapid growth in the amount of matter, which somehow multiplied itself from a singular particle, which goes against the very essence of testable physics, into the universe we know today. All of this may be true, but the fact that scientists don't see the blatant hypocrisy in judging religion, while then openly supporting the big bang theory as if it were quantifiable fact is laughably insane.

/soapbox.



There's no hypocrisy because scientists don't talk about certainties, they talk about probabilities and they back those probabilities up with testable, verifiable data. The reason scientists believe that The Big Bang is likely is because that's exactly what all of the available data indicates happened.

The reason you think it's hypocrisy is because you have not examined the data. You can look at the research into the cosmic microwave background and its anisotropies, or the isotropic redshift of every galaxy we can see, which are both incredibly compelling pieces of evidence that our universe is and has been expanding from a very early time.

Also, if you ask any actual physicist, they will tell you that we do not know what happened at the start of The Big Bang, we only have information back to a certain amount of time, before which any physicist will tell you we simply have no clue what happened, and that the laws of physics break down at a certain point by the current understanding of the theory.

Any perceived hypocrisy is a result of your lack of understanding. Scientists back everything they say up with data which is readily available to anyone who wants to try to disprove it or offer alternate theories.
Aether
7/2/12 1:11:48AM

Posted by cowcatcher

I was simply being sarcastic. You're looking too deep into what I was saying buddy.

It seemed to me that as soon as the word god appeared the soapbox was out and ready to be preached from.

IRONY



I thought you were referring to the article, because it talks about how scientists hate the term "God Particle".

Also, I missed the last sentence where you said the discussion shouldn't have gone down that road, somehow.
Aether
7/2/12 1:16:56AM

Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



OK... So if you bake some cookies, leave the room, and then come back and see the cookies are gone and your kid is sitting on the floor covered in crumbs and chocolate, would you say that you will never know what happened to the cookies because you weren't there?

There are ways that we can see the after-effects and deduce information based on that knowledge, Scientists don't just make stuff up and try to make it sound true, they analyze data and come to conclusions based on that analysis.

Are you saying that scientists "made up" black holes? I am not sure how you came to this conclusion, but I'd like you to explain what you're talking about.
airkerma
7/2/12 1:17:06PM

Posted by SmileR


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



If this discovery actually comes through the whole world could change in a matter of decades. I'm not talking little advancements either I'm talking new fuel, possible colonisation of other worlds and huge scientific advances in all major areas.

The "who cares attitude" is yours to have, man. But the scientists working on this are world leaders and if they do manage to discover the Higgs Boson particle they will change the world like no one has or will for thousands of years. The practical applications of this are frightening!


Just because most people feel that it is a trivial advancement, doesn't actually mean that is true. I doubt when Einstein came up with the photoelectric effect that people instantly thought "oh shit, now we can take x rays of people in order to diagnose a massive array of possible ailments". I'd also be willing to bet that when what's his face invented the transistor that people didn't instantly think "fuck. yes. now we can make smart phones!". It takes a discovery before advancement can occur, and that advancement may very well be something nobody would have expected to be possible before the discovery was made. Finally, science and religion don't have to be enemies, and in the most fundamental ways can improve upon each other...it's simply the arrogant outspoken ones on each side who have brought about these views that science must remain at least 100 feet away from religion at all times. I'm just glad that nobody on this thread mentioned the chances of CERN creating a black hole and killing us all
Gogoplatapus
7/2/12 1:29:21PM
Came for a Chael_Sonnen comment. Leaving disappointed.
george112
7/2/12 2:10:15PM

Posted by Aether


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



OK... So if you bake some cookies, leave the room, and then come back and see the cookies are gone and your kid is sitting on the floor covered in crumbs and chocolate, would you say that you will never know what happened to the cookies because you weren't there?

There are ways that we can see the after-effects and deduce information based on that knowledge, Scientists don't just make stuff up and try to make it sound true, they analyze data and come to conclusions based on that analysis.

Are you saying that scientists "made up" black holes? I am not sure how you came to this conclusion, but I'd like you to explain what you're talking about.



Observation does not make something true.

And yes black holes and antimatter were created to explain things that we cannot.


Have we ever seen a black hole?
Have we ever seen anti matter?

No. We have seen something we do not understand that directly influences something else. That causes something else. Scientists come up with these things to give reason to the why.


Same problem with gravity.
What proof do we have that these things exist?

You tell me

And tell me without saying, well this happens because this happens which makes this real because In our formula it says its reala
airkerma
7/2/12 2:20:44PM

Posted by george112


Posted by Aether


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



OK... So if you bake some cookies, leave the room, and then come back and see the cookies are gone and your kid is sitting on the floor covered in crumbs and chocolate, would you say that you will never know what happened to the cookies because you weren't there?

There are ways that we can see the after-effects and deduce information based on that knowledge, Scientists don't just make stuff up and try to make it sound true, they analyze data and come to conclusions based on that analysis.

Are you saying that scientists "made up" black holes? I am not sure how you came to this conclusion, but I'd like you to explain what you're talking about.



Observation does not make something true.

And yes black holes and antimatter were created to explain things that we cannot.


Have we ever seen a black hole?
Have we ever seen anti matter?


Sorry, this is wildly inaccurate. We have seen black holes, they can be seen devouring neighboring stars. We have seen anti matter, a positron is an anti electron and is the P in PET scans. Certain radioactive elements emit positrons, and furthermore, anti neutrinos are emitted from other radioactive decays, which are anti particles. You also need to be careful saying observation does not make something true...in some instances that is correct, but I'm mostly just saying that because at the moment I can't think of anything that we have observed that we deemed "false" or whatever you would deem something that you have just witnessed but don't accept.
george112
7/2/12 2:43:57PM

Posted by airkerma


Posted by george112


Posted by Aether


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



OK... So if you bake some cookies, leave the room, and then come back and see the cookies are gone and your kid is sitting on the floor covered in crumbs and chocolate, would you say that you will never know what happened to the cookies because you weren't there?

There are ways that we can see the after-effects and deduce information based on that knowledge, Scientists don't just make stuff up and try to make it sound true, they analyze data and come to conclusions based on that analysis.

Are you saying that scientists "made up" black holes? I am not sure how you came to this conclusion, but I'd like you to explain what you're talking about.



Observation does not make something true.

And yes black holes and antimatter were created to explain things that we cannot.


Have we ever seen a black hole?
Have we ever seen anti matter?


Sorry, this is wildly inaccurate. We have seen black holes, they can be seen devouring neighboring stars. We have seen anti matter, a positron is an anti electron and is the P in PET scans. Certain radioactive elements emit positrons, and furthermore, anti neutrinos are emitted from other radioactive decays, which are anti particles. You also need to be careful saying observation does not make something true...in some instances that is correct, but I'm mostly just saying that because at the moment I can't think of anything that we have observed that we deemed "false" or whatever you would deem something that you have just witnessed but don't accept.



No you see you misunderstand me

We have observed what devouring neighboring stars?

Black holes you say? How do you know its a black hole and not something else?

Is it a black hole because matter is disappearing and our only logical solution to this would be a black hole?

Your thinking too hard about what I said. And I suspect everyone will too.

Why is something we say it is. Our physical world is measured and experimented with a set of laws called theory. For a black hole to exist general relativity would have to be without a doubt correct.
Same with quantum mechanics.

Are you getting the jist of what I'm saying or do I need to elaborate more?
george112
7/2/12 2:51:07PM

Posted by airkerma


Posted by george112


Posted by Aether


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



OK... So if you bake some cookies, leave the room, and then come back and see the cookies are gone and your kid is sitting on the floor covered in crumbs and chocolate, would you say that you will never know what happened to the cookies because you weren't there?

There are ways that we can see the after-effects and deduce information based on that knowledge, Scientists don't just make stuff up and try to make it sound true, they analyze data and come to conclusions based on that analysis.

Are you saying that scientists "made up" black holes? I am not sure how you came to this conclusion, but I'd like you to explain what you're talking about.



Observation does not make something true.

And yes black holes and antimatter were created to explain things that we cannot.


Have we ever seen a black hole?
Have we ever seen anti matter?


Sorry, this is wildly inaccurate. We have seen black holes, they can be seen devouring neighboring stars. We have seen anti matter, a positron is an anti electron and is the P in PET scans. Certain radioactive elements emit positrons, and furthermore, anti neutrinos are emitted from other radioactive decays, which are anti particles. You also need to be careful saying observation does not make something true...in some instances that is correct, but I'm mostly just saying that because at the moment I can't think of anything that we have observed that we deemed "false" or whatever you would deem something that you have just witnessed but don't accept.




Black holes are a theory that is impossible to prove.


When I said observation does not make something fact I was referring to the effects and influences that the black holes exhibit on other forms of matter. Which just so happen to be the only thing proving they actually exist.
State_Champ
7/2/12 3:24:40PM

Posted by Aether


Posted by warglory

I don't mean any disrespect to the OP, as the consequences of this potential discovery could very well have large ramifications, I don't know, but my opinion about the whole big bang theory is luke warm at best. Why?

Because science often shits on religion as being this untestable series of events that doesn't fit comfortably into the logic of science. I am not religious...at all, but I just find it completely hypocritical when science judges God as being imaginary, but then talks about a singular particle, floating...somewhere (because space isn't just space, it's made up of dark matter remember), and suddenly erupts, for some reason, causing rapid growth in the amount of matter, which somehow multiplied itself from a singular particle, which goes against the very essence of testable physics, into the universe we know today. All of this may be true, but the fact that scientists don't see the blatant hypocrisy in judging religion, while then openly supporting the big bang theory as if it were quantifiable fact is laughably insane.

/soapbox.



There's no hypocrisy because scientists don't talk about certainties, they talk about probabilities and they back those probabilities up with testable, verifiable data. The reason scientists believe that The Big Bang is likely is because that's exactly what all of the available data indicates happened.

The reason you think it's hypocrisy is because you have not examined the data. You can look at the research into the cosmic microwave background and its anisotropies, or the isotropic redshift of every galaxy we can see, which are both incredibly compelling pieces of evidence that our universe is and has been expanding from a very early time.

Also, if you ask any actual physicist, they will tell you that we do not know what happened at the start of The Big Bang, we only have information back to a certain amount of time, before which any physicist will tell you we simply have no clue what happened, and that the laws of physics break down at a certain point by the current understanding of the theory.

Any perceived hypocrisy is a result of your lack of understanding. Scientists back everything they say up with data which is readily available to anyone who wants to try to disprove it or offer alternate theories.



ghandikush
7/2/12 6:02:14PM

Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



This is wrong, black holes are proven, however gravitons etc subatomic theoretics are so full of shit its eyes are brown.

I wait for the time we realize that every cell is made of multiverses etc.
george112
7/2/12 6:08:58PM

Posted by ghandikush


Posted by george112

My stance on this is who cares?

What is it going to change? Nothing.


We will never know what happened during or after the big bang. Why? Simply because we were not there.


Also I don't like how science has to create something just to explain why something is. Ex. Black holes



This is wrong, black holes are proven, however gravitons etc subatomic theoretics are so full of shit its eyes are brown.

I wait for the time we realize that every cell is made of multiverses etc.



Black holes are not proven . Their influences on different things is proven.

I think your on to something there with the multiverse thing.

I tend to think everything has to do with consciousness.
Pages: [1] 2 3