"God Particle" Further Confirmed to Have Been Found

[Queen Michael]

There is no such thing as a "God particle." That's the distorted version for people who want to understand this without actually understanding it.

Clarify what you mean. Because in the practical sense, the particle that has been dubbed the "God Particle" has apparently been found and proven to actually exist. So, there is such a thing as a God Particle in that sense.


If you mean "some particle that is God, related to God, or some such thing about the religious concept of a diety", then I would agree, but your statement was kind of vague.

Well, that second alternative is pretty much what I mean. Regardless of the phrase's origins, "the God particle" is what the media call it when they want to give an easy-to-explain version of something that simply can't be explained easily. "Scientists have now discovered the Higgs boson, which proves God exists... Or something like that... We think..."

 

[Rellik San]

I'm worried, I've not seen mention of this on mainstream media which to me means one of 2 things:

1. They are waiting for further confirmation of the findings and what it means for physics.
2. They are worried people are so stupid, they'll take it negatively and the religious communities will come after them.

I like to think it's the former, it's probably the latter... and the worst bit is, that's just the UK.

 

[Korolev]

It seems to me that the biggest enemy they're facing here is the overwhelming forces of confirmation bias.

They built this massively expensive facility because they're pretty sure the particle existed.
They were pretty sure the particle existed because they've derived it from abstract concepts of particle physics that were, in many ways, tenuous.

So it's not just confirmation they've fighting against, but confirmation bias within existing confirmation bias. How do you get away from that much drive to confirm what you already believe to see anything else?

Because there is fame and fortune to any scientific team that can prove them wrong, and let me tell you other scientists are going to try. CAREERS are built proving other scientists wrong. Also, while this finding is good news for the Standard Model, there are other physicists out there who have different theories and want to tear down the Standard Model and replace it with their own.

Scientists often seem like a nice bunch of people, and they usually are, but they have a perverse joy in proving other scientists wrong - it's just one more way of saying "I'm smarter than you!", which scientists like to engage in from time to time (as do all of us). I would know - I was one, until I switched the Medical Field. There is nothing they like better than eviscerating a paper, pointing out flaws in analysis, and just downright trashing a bad paper. Which is GOOD - that's how science progresses!

So even if the folks at CERN have a confirmation bias, I can guarantee you there are rival physicists out there with exactly the opposite. In time, data, repetition and practical applications will settle the matter. People were also unsure of whether or not electrons existed when they were first discovered/theorized - cut to the 21st century and our modern electronics have pretty much confirmed electrons do in fact exist. The same will or will not happen with the Higgs Boson. I guarantee it.

 

[ColaWarVeteran]

I'm worried, I've not seen mention of this on mainstream media which to me means one of 2 things:

1. They are waiting for further confirmation of the findings and what it means for physics.
2. They are worried people are so stupid, they'll take it negatively and the religious communities will come after them.

I like to think it's the former, it's probably the latter... and the worst bit is, that's just the UK.

Here's an article about it on NBC's website from two days ago.

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/higgs-boson-picture-becomes-clearer-lhc-gears-restart-n138551

 

[Rellik San]

I'm worried, I've not seen mention of this on mainstream media which to me means one of 2 things:

1. They are waiting for further confirmation of the findings and what it means for physics.
2. They are worried people are so stupid, they'll take it negatively and the religious communities will come after them.

I like to think it's the former, it's probably the latter... and the worst bit is, that's just the UK.

Here's an article about it on NBC's website from two days ago.

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/higgs-boson-picture-becomes-clearer-lhc-gears-restart-n138551

But still I'd expect this to have some television coverage, hell I don't even think the BBC has covered it.

 

[wizzy555]

I'm worried, I've not seen mention of this on mainstream media which to me means one of 2 things:

1. They are waiting for further confirmation of the findings and what it means for physics.
2. They are worried people are so stupid, they'll take it negatively and the religious communities will come after them.

I like to think it's the former, it's probably the latter... and the worst bit is, that's just the UK.

Frankly I don't see the need for the media to alert the people at every new paper about the higgs. There will be many many more as they carefully measure various properties and then all over again after they even more carefully measure properties but with more statistics from the upgraded LHC.

The biggest news here is that it couples to fermions and that makes it one of the more boring types of higgs boson.

 

[ColaWarVeteran]

I'm worried, I've not seen mention of this on mainstream media which to me means one of 2 things:

1. They are waiting for further confirmation of the findings and what it means for physics.
2. They are worried people are so stupid, they'll take it negatively and the religious communities will come after them.

I like to think it's the former, it's probably the latter... and the worst bit is, that's just the UK.

Here's an article about it on NBC's website from two days ago.

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/higgs-boson-picture-becomes-clearer-lhc-gears-restart-n138551

But still I'd expect this to have some television coverage, hell I don't even think the BBC has covered it.

Can't help you there. I don't watch much TV anymore so I have no idea if it's getting any coverage.

 

[MasterBetty]

Confirmation bias is typically when you perceive what you want to perceive because it meets with your pre-existing ideas.

Nope.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/c/confirmation_bias.htm

Confirmation bias is a phenomenon wherein decision makers have been shown to actively seek out and assign more weight to evidence that confirms their hypothesis, and ignore or underweigh evidence that could disconfirm their hypothesis.

As such, it can be thought of as a form of selection bias in collecting evidence.

The higgs boson is not identified by human perception, it is mechanically and mathematically identified - mostly by computers.

Exactly. The math tells them it should be there, and some "mechanical" experiments seem to suggest it should be there, so they embarked upon this whole project under the premise that they want to confirm it's there. Ergo, unavoidable confirmation bias on the Hadron Collider experimentation.

Except there was never any contradictory evidence to suggest they might be wrong. The math checks out, smaller experiments didn't disprove their hypothesis, and the only thing they could do next was run one final experiment.

It doesn't help that the apparatus was so overwhelmingly expensive, either. As I recall, originally we were hearing that they couldn't find the particle they expected to find. All of a sudden, they're singing a different tune.

Forbes listed the total cost of construction and running the machine so far at $13.25 billion. Now that is a lot of money. 20% was paid for by CERN, which was the group that was the driving force behind the construction of the machine. The rest came from various international organizations that have a vested interest in the results.

It's not confirmation bias. It's the scientific method.

That's not a refutation. It's a blanket statement.

Yes, the statement was indeed meant to cover the entirety of science. The refutation lies in you not having any reason to suggest why they were/are acting irrationally.

Are you seriously accusing these scientists on just saying, "This idea sounds about right. Let's pour a ton of money and time into a project we have no strong belief in the potential results of."

Are you seriously saying that never happens in science? Because I'm pretty sure I've heard of quite a few experiments that were started under those premises and only lead to disappointed scientists when the results did not match what they wanted.

Of course an experiment that doesn't yield any desired results can be disappointing. But it also proves something. A scientist will then take that proof and find the truth.

And, for the record, I'm not technically accusing them of falsifying their evidence deliberately out of confirmation bias. I'm just saying it would be an exceptional challenge to keep confirmation bias out of it.

There is a big difference between falsifying evidence and ignoring contradictory evidence. Over 10,000 scientists and engineers worked together on this for 10 years. A conspiracy that big just to build a big damn machine that does nothing?

Seriously, why are you so suspicious of this?

 

[Rellik San]

I'm worried, I've not seen mention of this on mainstream media which to me means one of 2 things:

1. They are waiting for further confirmation of the findings and what it means for physics.
2. They are worried people are so stupid, they'll take it negatively and the religious communities will come after them.

I like to think it's the former, it's probably the latter... and the worst bit is, that's just the UK.

Frankly I don't see the need for the media to alert the people at every new paper about the higgs. There will be many many more as they carefully measure various properties and then all over again after they even more carefully measure properties but with more statistics from the upgraded LHC.

The biggest news here is that it couples to fermions and that makes it one of the more boring types of higgs boson.

Because it's of a damn sight more public interest than some kid taking a photo with the Queen, which is something that seems to have been lavished with media attention and no that is also not a minority view.

I pay for the BBC, I pay a TV License to access it's content, as such you could very much consider me an investor and it's their duty to keep the investors happy. I wouldn't mind, but there isn't mention on their own science news section of the BBC news Website.

 

[wizzy555]

Except there was never any contradictory evidence to suggest they might be wrong. The math checks out, smaller experiments didn't disprove their hypothesis, and the only thing they could do next was run one final experiment.

This isn't one final experiment it's the continued evolution of particle physics. If there is continued interest and funding (which will depend on whether or not we find anything more interesting and if economics permit the funding) there could be more particle colliders. There is a rough draft for one to be built in Japan (but not for many years). If there has been a mistake the next experiment will be unable "to see" the higgs.

Technically 2 experiments have found the higgs. The ATLAS and CMS detectors are run by independent teams. Technically they aren't allowed to confer (although in practice that is hard to achieve since husband and wife can be on opposite experiments).

There are 4 experiments in total at the LHC, but the other 2 aren't designed with the Higgs in mind.

It doesn't help that the apparatus was so overwhelmingly expensive, either. As I recall, originally we were hearing that they couldn't find the particle they expected to find. All of a sudden, they're singing a different tune.

No one ever said that in that way. They could have said they excluded lower mass region higgs, which is to be expected as you need more time to achieve statistical significance in different mass regions.

 

[Roxor]

If you want to annoy creationists, you could say it's called the "god particle" because it's filled in the last gap for God to hide in. It's God's replacement.

Yes, I know that's total BS, but considering how much the creationists spout, I think they deserve a taste of their own medicine.