Thursday 5 July 2012

OF BOSONS AND REAL SCIENCE!!! HYPOTHESIS CORRECTION!!

OF BOSONS AND REAL SCIENCE!!!


A critique by Geoff Seidner

It is the basic element of science that a HYPOTHESIS that cannot be invalidated is questionable or plainly fraudulent.


No - we are not discussing the inane global warming / cooling / theories.
It is merely the latest example of scientific modelling and peer reviewed tripe a la the Higgs Boson.


Sydney University particle physicist Kevin Varvell is quoted in The Australian July 5 2012: Elementary, Dear God


''While an alternative Higgs Boson would not invalidate observations based on the Standard Model, it could be "really exciting" for physicists, says Varvell. "We would be back to square one."


Does the reader see the innate contradiction? How would it not be invalidated if they found themselves back at square one?
And exactly what would be ''exciting'' about being humiliated?




''It is considered a hugely successful theory but has several gaps, the biggest of which is why some particles have mass and others do not.''


Then astonishing that this professional scientist then goes on to say that


 ''there is more work to be done.''



And that is only the start.
They admit that there are '' ..a few intriguing inconsistencies..''
How about this ''inconsistency'' from Physics.org.

''It is considered a hugely successful theory but has several gaps, the biggest of which is why some particles have mass and others do not.''


I recall the sensations about life proven to have been extant on Mars - via a meteor landing via happenstance. The major banner headlines in newspapers in August 1996  were soon vitiated via the realility.
http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c011.html


Like with their climate work - NASA messed up - and had to admit it.
But they were not so inept as to  provide proof of their own ineptitudes in their premature claims - as the progenitors of this Boson theory have!

Furthermore, Paul Davies is offensive in his oft - repeated quote about a ''goddamn particle''!
His own frustrations were / are no excuse for obscenity.


The Almighty remains by far the best explanation for what scientists embedded in evolutionary theory fail to even nihilistically admit or even contemplate.


''Little wonder the Higgs is called the God particle. Or as Arizona State University cosmologist Paul Davies calls it, the "goddamn particle" because, until now, it had failed to turn up''.



Perhaps the ultimate indictment of blind scientists is that I have no formal scientific or tertiary education!



Geoff Seidner


Note related links immediately below, including the original items in The Australian 




######################################################################################################################################################


Salient parts of article from Leigh Dayton's article Elementary, Dear God July 5 2012

Cosmologists and physicists can now probe the earliest moments of existence, confident they have a reliable intellectual tool to do so, despite a few intriguing inconsistencies.
For instance, some subatomic particles, such as photons, pass through the field untouched.
Little wonder the Higgs is called the God particle. Or as Arizona State University cosmologist Paul Davies calls it, the "goddamn particle" because, until now, it had failed to turn up.
Getting the goddamn particle to show its spots involved creating subatomic particle collisions. That was the job of the Large Hadron Collider. Built at a cost of $10 billion between 1998 and 2008, it lies beneath the Franco-Swiss border, in a tunnel 27km in circumference, as deep as 175m. It hurtles beams of subatomic particles - part of the nuclei of atoms - into one another at phenomenally high speed.

###################################


After the LHC created Higgs bosons - which blink out of existence immediately after they're created - both experiments found that the subatomic particles decayed in the same two of many ways predicted by the Standard Model.
The other predicted modes of decay must now be tracked to confirm that physicists have truly found the God particle and not a god-like particle.
It's vital that there be no suggestion that the findings are statistical aberrations or evidence of a new type of Higgs, for instance, one predicted by another explanatory model such as supersymmetry.
While an alternative Higgs boson would not invalidate observations based on the Standard Model, it could be "really exciting" for physicists, says Varvell. "We would be back to square one."
That's why Incandela was careful to stress that there's more work to be done. It will involve scouring the data already produced and generating more collisions for study.
"What we've looked for is a few grains on a beach," says Incandela. "I did some calculations, and if you replaced every event, every collision of the (particle) beams that we've scanned or had taken place in our experiment over the past two years, if you let each of those be represented by a grain of sand, you'd have enough sand to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool.
"And the number of events that we've collected that we claim represent this observation are in the order of tens, or dozens."
Still, he predicts the finding will hold.
"It could be a gateway . . . to the next phase of exploring the deepest fabric of the universe, which is pretty profound when you think about it."
And that's just what scientists worldwide are doing right now

The complete article is also on this blog
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@





Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)