What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
You and You and You. view!
youtube.com - You don't need to get a phone. You need a phone that gets you.
61 Comments
- radicaldementia, on 11/12/2009, -4/+80Can we please, please stop calling the Higgs Boson "The God Particle". It is only going to be the source of incredibly sensationalized articles in the future (not to mention right now). Imagine if the LHC detects a HB, then we're gonna see titles like "Scientists find God" or "Science proves God exists", and if the LHC doesn't detect it, we'll see "Scientists prove there is no God".
Between that and the whole black-holes/sabotaged-from-the-future conspiracies, all of this nonsense is clouding the real science at work here. - shutaro, on 11/12/2009, -1/+35Unforeseen consequences, dude.
- lukychmz, on 11/12/2009, -1/+29its time for another traveler to come back and save us AGAIN
- UselessTrivia, on 11/13/2009, -1/+21It's literally the largest and most complex machine ever built by man.
- fwertz, on 11/13/2009, -0/+19Finally. Like accelerating sub atomic particles around a 17 mile circumference underground with magnets as cold as deep space is that difficult.
- Alfdog, on 11/13/2009, -0/+17So, they find this particle... THEN we gotta find the particles that make up THAT! I'm already disappointed.
- jalbinson, on 11/13/2009, -0/+13They should probably just call it the "Mass Particle" since that's what it's actually supposed to be.
- catalysis, on 11/13/2009, -0/+13I, for one, welcome our new time-traveling, whole wheat overlords.
- coopaloop, on 11/13/2009, -0/+12Hopefully they are going to prove without a doubt the existence of dark matter and dark energy, something that probably makes up about 1/2 the mass in our universe according to current models.
- dawgma, on 11/13/2009, -0/+11David, they haven't even turned it on yet for ***** sakes. Shut the ***** up.
- fwertz, on 11/13/2009, -0/+11They say galaxies are far too massive than they appear given the total red shift. When really it's just that the camera that adds 10^93 kilograms.
- Catchpen, on 11/13/2009, -1/+10Lederman intended to call it "the goddamn particle", because of its elusiveness. lol.
- jgopp, on 11/13/2009, -0/+9Prepare to ***** thyself.
- alpharaptor, on 11/13/2009, -0/+7imagine how the bird felt when he dropped his meal!?!
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/13/2009, -0/+7Why do you scoff?
"science projects" like the LHC have made your entire way of life possible. - motty32, on 11/13/2009, -1/+8uh, what?
- Pother, on 11/13/2009, -0/+7That doesn't sensationalize as well as the "God Particle". The generic term "God" potentially inflames everyone... the term "Mass" potentially only inflames Roman Catholics! :)
- SpeedSteamBoat, on 11/13/2009, -0/+6I completely agree. It's a real shame what is getting attention regarding the LHC when the actual science is SO important.
- detcade, on 11/13/2009, -2/+8FOX Breaking: radicaldementia Doesn't Agree With "God"
- Locupleto, on 11/13/2009, -1/+6I can't help it, every time I read Hardon
- dig1x, on 11/13/2009, -1/+6Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson Higgs Boson
Easy to remember. No problem. - ohplease, on 11/13/2009, -0/+5As a time traveler sent back to stop them from finding the Higgs Boson I can tell you that your comment will cease to exist once my mission is complete.
- virtorio, on 11/13/2009, -0/+4Make it harder for LHC employees to find the parking lot?
- Mizery, on 11/13/2009, -0/+4What a terrible blog post. When, exactly, is the LHC going to run an actual test with actual results? I'm tired of all these stories about "soon". Wake me up when scientists have some interesting results.
Also, "according to CNN" without a link to the CNN article? ***** you, Gearlog. - McNerd, on 11/13/2009, -0/+4jshhmr, you really are defensive, aren't you? noumuon's statement has nothing to do with religion.
- GrandZooby, on 11/13/2009, -0/+4Poor David apparently didn't eat his Wheaties today. He always gets grumpy when any government money (even from a government that's not his own) gets spent on something other than new and creative ways of killing people.
What he hasn't figured out is that if we're ever going to have a weapon more powerful and devastating than our current best nuclear weapons, it's going to come out of research involving the annihilation of subatomic particles.
I'm sure once he figures that out, he'll be cheerful again and right as rain. What a little trooper! - ohplease, on 11/13/2009, -0/+3Well unlike Lost, the drama wouldn't involve love triangles, secret pasts, interwoven destinies and gun fights.
It would be a bunch of European nerds standing around a blackboard going "hmm, that's a pickle" - MaTT2011, on 11/13/2009, -1/+4they're "gong" to try to find knowledge. Its not like they go in their with an agenda and when it doesn't get proven they disregard everything that doesn't fit said agenda, that's called belief.
Science is when we have a decent guess about something and then we test it out. If it turns out to be wrong the initial guess gets revised to fit the evidence and information that has been gathered by the test.
That or maybe they just hate baby jesus. Which sounds more reasonable?
also: gong. - the8thbit, on 11/13/2009, -0/+3They're going to prove (to all reasonable means) that they can or can not generate the HB particle through this process. It's more information so we win either way.
- noumuon, on 11/13/2009, -0/+3technically, i see no reason why there could not be a "sabotage" from the future, aside from the fact that sabotage implies intent. whether or not it could happen on a macroscopic scale, as opposed to "sabotage" of current experiments by future experiments in sole regards to the particle interactions, is an interesting question and isn't clouding anything.
- McNerd, on 11/13/2009, -0/+3jshhmr, the Higgs has no more or less to do with God than quarks, electrons, photons, or any other particle. Presuming it exists, which it almost certainly does, it's just another type of particle. It gives other particles mass, sure. But there's no reason to believe that mass is any more "divine" than charge, or weak hypercharge, or the "color" of the strong nuclear force.
If you want to say all these particles and forces and properties are part of God, be my guest. Speaking as an atheist, I quite like the idea. But that doesn't change the fact that the name "The God Particle" is a stupid marketing ploy for newspapers and other writers, and you've fallen for it. - worldgate989, on 11/13/2009, -0/+2What if something bad happens and the whole complex moves around like that island on Lost?
- elmuerte17, on 11/13/2009, -0/+2Haven't seen that one for a while. +1
- bklny, on 11/13/2009, -3/+5 bird with bread
Seriously how secure can this place be if you have birds flying around? - the8thbit, on 11/13/2009, -0/+2If I don't see that goddamn particle one more time...
- reticulate, on 11/13/2009, -0/+2Spambot.
- FattyMagee, on 11/13/2009, -0/+2Who the hell is this John Davis guy who commented on the actual article page? He always has that same damn RT signature at www.ultimate-privacy.cz.tc. I think 50% of the articles i read on digg have that guy commenting on actual articles page and its always a retarded, one sentence, response.
- codyman, on 11/13/2009, -0/+2Hopefully this thing will work instead of being a giant, super expensive paper weight
- elmuerte17, on 11/13/2009, -2/+4Don't feed the troll.
- Pother, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1A very boring version of "1632"...
(Boring implied by my assumption that there aren't many gun-toting scientists working at LHC to take up battle back in 1632.) - UselessTrivia, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1Typical conspiracy theorist nonsense DavidNiven. I suppose you think the moon landings were faked as well?
This thing took thousands of people to build. Outside contractors, world-renowned engineers and physicists. It cost billions of dollars. No government spends that kind of money without some accountability and assurance that the thing is designed to work.
That's not to say there won't be flaws found or issues with craftsmanship, but on the whole there are simply too many incredibly smart people involved in this project for it to be a hoax. That would require collusion of an unimaginable scale.
The principle that all particle accelerators function upon is well accepted and has proven itself in the real world. This accelerator is just like the others except much bigger and designed to operate at near absolute-zero temps to allow for superconductivity. - mike23w, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1too late
- HouseofEl, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1Wonderful, but if it breaks for a third time, I'm going to get slightly nervous.
- elmuerte17, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1CURSE YOU, SCIENCE!!!
- elmuerte17, on 11/13/2009, -1/+2So, any wagers on whether they'll actually fire it up or if it'll attempt to self-destruct?
- spriggig, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1You're not the only one:
http://largehardoncollider.com/nyt_lhc.html - GrandZooby, on 11/13/2009, -0/+0Don't feel bad... it's turtles all the way down.
- jshhmr, on 11/13/2009, -1/+1Such a compelling argument!! WHAT IS YOUR REBUTTAL?? Didn't you take debate class? Looks like you don't have the ability to debate an argument. Typical atheist.
- Neutrality, on 11/13/2009, -0/+0I dunno. What if it makes god angry and he smites us?
-
Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is