It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Jordan River
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by AfterInfinity
Agnosticism for the win.
Thats like saying bisexual win, when compared to all other sexualities
Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DARREN1976
Why does it matter who paid for it? This was clearly the only way such research could be conducted...the only other solution would be to say, "Stop looking for these answers." And if that's your sentiment, I have one question for you:
WTH?
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Originally posted by DARREN1976
Errr.... this is kind of why they named it the God Particle in the first place, as it's apparently the glue that holds everything together, and if their theories are correct, it's fundamental in making everything else work, with regards to speed, energy, the effect of gravity on objects with mass...... and its all due to it supposedly giving evreything else its mass..
Higgs field does NOT "hold everything together". It is responsible for the electroweak symmetry breaking, it gives mass to gaguge bosons and other particles, but how it all relates to gravity is not clear at all at this point.
Look up "Higgs Mechanism" on Wikipedia.
Originally posted by The GameKeeper
If this doesnt tell you we are living in the end times I dont if anything will.. Its quite unfortunate the GOD particle is in the hands of the wrong people, whose only desire is to create the ANTI God Particle. Wake up people.
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Originally posted by reject
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Ok, guys. Now for the $65K dollar question: Does this discovery have any bearing on nuclear fusion research?
No.
Anything's possible, but right now there is no way we can actually manipulate either strong, weak or electromagnetic fields of the particles involved. If we could, this would be way bigger than the Higgs.
Neutrino oscillation is a quantum mechanical phenomenon predicted by Bruno Pontecorvo[1] whereby a neutrino created with a specific lepton flavor (electron, muon or tau) can later be measured to have a different flavor. The probability of measuring a particular flavor for a neutrino varies periodically as it propagates. Neutrino oscillation is of theoretical and experimental interest since observation of the phenomenon implies that the neutrino has a non-zero mass, which is not part of the original Standard Model of particle physics.
Many experiments have searched for oscillation of electron anti-neutrinos produced at nuclear reactors. The KamLAND experiment, started in 2002, has made a high precision observation of reactor neutrino oscillation. Neutrinos produced in nuclear reactors have energies similar to solar neutrinos, a few MeV. The baselines of these experiments have ranged from tens of meters to over 100 km.
The Sun is a natural nuclear fusion reactor, powered by a proton–proton chain reaction which converts four hydrogen nuclei (protons) into helium, neutrinos, positrons and energy. The excess energy is released as gamma rays and as kinetic energy of the particles and as neutrinos — which travel from the Sun's core to Earth without any appreciable absorption by the Sun's outer layers.
As neutrino detectors became sensitive enough to measure the flow of neutrinos from the Sun, it became clear that the number detected was lower than that predicted by models of the solar interior. In various experiments, the number of detected neutrinos was between one third and one half of the predicted number. This came to be known as the solar neutrino problem.
The solar neutrino problem was a major discrepancy between measurements of the numbers of neutrinos flowing through the Earth and theoretical models of the solar interior, lasting from the mid-1960s to about 2002. The discrepancy has since been resolved by new understanding of neutrino physics, requiring a modification of the Standard Model of particle physics – specifically, neutrino oscillation. Essentially, as neutrinos have mass, they can change from the type that had been expected to be produced in the Sun's interior into two types that would not be caught by the detectors in use at the time.
The most likely mechanism for producing this transformation requires that neutrinos have small, but non-zero mass. This is an indication of exciting new physics beyond the Standard Model of elementary particle physics. Although the mass of the neutrinos is tiny, the total mass of all the neutrinos in the universe is comparable to that of all the visible stars.
Originally posted by Kryom
Originally posted by The GameKeeper
If this doesnt tell you we are living in the end times I dont if anything will.. Its quite unfortunate the GOD particle is in the hands of the wrong people, whose only desire is to create the ANTI God Particle. Wake up people.
Anti god particle? How about SATAN particle.
Throughout my career, I have been fascinated by the mystery of mass - what is the missing piece that gives mass to the fundamental particles of the universe? I started by performing one of the first measurements of the W boson mass with the ALEPH experiment at CERN. The W boson carries the weak nuclear force, esssential for the nuclear fusion reactions that power stars, and was discovered in 1983 at CERN. The W boson acquires mass in the standard model of particle physics via the hypothetical, much-hunted but exceedingly elusive, Higgs boson. Interpretation of improved measurements of the W boson mass in the context of the standard model of particle physics leads to a better constraint on the unknown mass of the as-yet-undiscovered Higgs boson - and a better idea of where and how to search for it.
Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Jordan River
Well.. that's a pretty dumb analogy.
There are really no comparisons to be made between the two. Why on Earth would your mind even go there.
I don't even know what the implication is.. were you joking or being prejudiced?edit on 3-7-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)