|
Physicists about to discover the material source of material existence!
(Note: In a comment below, I show the common ground shared by the search for the material cause of material existence, the project to democratize the Muslim world, the project to “close the gap in academic skills,” and Darwinism.)
Ben W. writes:
This is from the London Times:
“The 40-year hunt for the holy grail of physics—the elusive ‘God particle’ that is supposed to give matter its mass—is almost over, according to the leading scientist who first came up with the theory.”
So we begin with a theory, a hypothesis in search of experimental proof. Same as Darwinism.
“Peter Higgs, whose work gave his name to the elusive Higgs boson particle, said that he was more than 90 per cent certain it would be found within the next few years.”
Like Darwinism, there is “certainty” that this “God particle” will soon be found—a promissory note.
“The Higgs boson was the professor’s elegant 1964 solution to one of the great problems with the standard model of physics—how matter has mass and thus exists in a form that allows it to make stars, planets and people. He proposed that the universe is pervaded by an invisible field of bosons that consist of mass but little else.”
It begins as a mental construct, with no empirical foundation and without any proof is yet deemed an “elegant solution.” Much like Darwinism.
“The mysterious boson postulated by Professor Higgs, of the University of Edinburgh, has become so fundamental to physics that it is often nicknamed the ‘God particle.’”
Even though it is simply an intellectual postulate, it already is “fundamental to physics”—just as Darwinism is supposedly “fundamental” to biology.
“It is even possible that the critical evidence already exists, in data from an American experiment in Illinois that has yet to be analysed fully.”
It’s presumed to probably exist in reams of data—but yet to be anaylzed or detected. Much like Darwinism, where the transitional forms all existed, but somehow the evidence of them is evasive.
“If he turns out to be right, ‘I will certainly open a bottle of something’, he said. If the boson is not found, however, ‘I should be very, very puzzled. If it’s not there, I no longer understand what I think I understand.’”
Well what about the rest of the physics community that accepted his hypothesis? What will the others have “understood?” Or the media that trumpets that finding “the God particle” is just around the corner?
Is it possible that a lot of science, including physics, is as bogus as Darwinism? Darwin may have done us a favor by doing ‘bad science’ thus showing us correspondingly how science can be equally bad in other of its domains…
LA replies:
Yeah, right, they be on the verge of putting their hands on that God particle!
“The mysterious boson postulated by Professor Higgs, of the University of Edinburgh, has become so fundamental to physics that it is often nicknamed the “God particle”.”
Even though it is simply an intellectual postulate, it already is “fundamental to physics”—just as Darwinism is supposedly “fundamental” to biology.
That’s very funny. And all the scientists have to do is declare that such and such postulate is “fundamental” to all of physics or all of the biological sciences, and that persuades people that the postulate must be true. Talk about piggybacking. Which, of course, is the way Darwinism began: piggybacking macroevolution by natural selection onto microevolution by artificial selection.
“The Higgs boson was the professor’s elegant 1964 solution to one of the great problems with the standard model of physics—how matter has mass and thus exists in a form that allows it to make stars, planets and people. He proposed that the universe is pervaded by an invisible field of bosons that consist of mass but little else.”
Or:
Ezekiel cried, “Them dry bosons!”
Ezekiel cried, “Them dry bosons!”
Oh, hear the word of the Lord.
Your foot boson connected to your leg boson,
Your leg boson connected to your knee boson,
Your knee boson connected to your thigh boson,
Oh, hear the word of the Lord!
Them bosons, them bosons, gonna walk around,
Them bosons, them bosons, gonna walk around,
Them bosons, them bosons, gonna walk around,
Oh, hear the word of the Lord!
- end of initial entry -
Gintas writes:
If you look for the words “possible,” “may,” “perhaps,” and other “hope for the future” words and phrases, you can figure out the Darwin Quotient of an article. Such articles are always well-larded with the certainties of faith and hope, that will be soon realized.
(This article would also fall into the category of corrupt journalism; the author is clearly cheerleading, not reporting.)
Here are the examples I found in the Times article:
The 40-year hunt for the holy grail of physics—the elusive “God particle” that is supposed to give matter its mass—is almost over, according to the leading scientist who first came up with the theory.
he was more than 90 per cent certain it would be found within the next few years.
After more than 40 years of research, and billions of pounds, scientists have yet to prove that it is real. But Professor Higgs, 78, now believes the search is nearly over.
A new atom-smasher that will be switched on near Geneva later this year is virtually guaranteed to find it
It is even possible that the critical evidence already exists Tantalising glimpses of the boson from other, less powerful particle accelerators, have suggested that unequivocal evidence should emerge almost immediately when the LHC begins its experiments.
The Higgs boson is hard to detect because it is hypothesised to exist only at very high energies, which last existed in nature in the moments after the Big Bang, hence the need for an atom smasher.
Four vast caverns hold sophisticated detectors that will track the particles produced by the collisions.
If the LHC is successful, all that might then stand between him and a Nobel prize will be the mammoth task of interpreting the reams of data the collider will produce If all goes well, he hopes he will be celebratingby the time he turns 80 in May 2009.
“My prejudice would certainly be, on the basis of the evidence we already have, that it’s not far off,” said the professor. “But there’s a lot of analysis of the data to be done before you make the announcement that you have found it. That’s what will take the time.”
If he turns out to be right, “I will certainly open a bottle of something,” he said. If the boson is not found, however, “I should be very, very puzzled. If it’s not there, I no longer understand what I think I understand.”
Why even bother with the experiments? Just call it done and over, and save the time and money. Publish the anticipated results (they’re virtually guaranteed) in the proper journals, it’s good enough now.
LA replies:
“The 40-year hunt for the holy grail of physics—the elusive ‘God particle’ that is supposed to give matter its mass—is almost over …”
This is like:
“A win in Fallujah will mark the birth of their new nation.”
Ralph Peters, NY Post, November 2004
It’s also like Abigail and Stephan Thernstrom and Clint Bolick stating breathlessly that charter schools were “closing the gap” between the academic performance of black and white pupils, making it sound as though the gap was just on the verge of being actually closed, i.e., eliminated, when in reality they were saying that a four year gap in academic skills between blacks and whites had been narrowed to 3 1/3 years.
And it’s like the Darwinists, of whom I’ve written:
I’ve mentioned an article by Paul R. Gross in the New York Sun several months ago in which Gross with supreme confidence proclaimed the absolute truth of Darwinian evolution, but then, in the second half of the article, matter-of-factly admitted that, by the way, evolutionists have not yet established certain aspects of evolution, such as, oh, how new species came about. It is changes at the molecular level they have demonstrated, he explained, not changes leading to new bodily organs and new life forms. Gross acted as if this revelation were of no importance; since the truth of evolution is already known, he said, naturally we will fill in those little remaining blanks soon enough.
In fact, it has been this way from the start of the Darwin project 147 years ago. Ernst Mayr, one of the leading evolutionist of the twentieth century, said of Darwin that he “failed to solve the problem indicated by the title to his work. Although he demonstrated the modification of species in the time dimension, he never seriously attempted a rigorous analysis of the problem of the multiplication of species.” Similarly, George Simpson, another eminent evolutionist, wrote in 1964 that “the book called The Origin of Species is not really on that subject.” (Mayr and Simpson are quoted by Francis Hitching, The Neck of the Giraffe: Where Darwin Went Wrong, p. 105.)
Statements like this reveal Darwin, his exponents, and the entire evolutionary establishment as a giant version of the Wizard of Oz. They’re all theory, no cattle.
The ever impending “proof” of Darwinism, the ever impending achievement of Muslim democracy, and the liberal project to produce equality are always, in the words of their promoters, getting closer, closer, “We’re there! Uh, well, we’ll be there next week! Victory is at hand!”, but never actually getting there. And in the meantime, anyone who expresses doubts about these projects is denounced and marginalized as a stupid, superstitious, condescending, bigoted reactionary.
Derek C. writes (April 9):
Ben W. writes that the idea of a Higgs boson was a “…a theory, a hypothesis in search of experimental proof.” Well, yes, that’s right. Scientists look at phenomena in the real world, try to come with explanations, and then test them to see if those explanations have any predictive value. I grant that the article he cited is full of breathless cheer-leading and careless language, and that Higgs is certainly offering up a pretty big hostage to fortune, but his theory is being put to the test. His theory predicts that given the capabilities of the LHC, we should see the Higgs boson. If we don’t, then a lot of people are going to head back to the drawing board.
The problem you seem to have is that physics has used his supposition as a fundamental basic for over forty years with no observed proof. Yes, that is a problem, but in a field like theoretical quantum physics, our observations are necessarily limited by our technology, so we have to wing it and come up with conjectures that may eventually be verified. This is not the first time. Einstein had to wait for suitable technology—and a solar eclipse—to verify his relativity theory.
LA replies:
Will Derek join Michael Hart in acknowledging that the indispensable test that, according to Darwin himself, Darwin’s theory had to pass in order to be viable—the discovery of the missing transitional forms—has failed? (Michael Hart holds out the possibility that this problem may be solved in the future, saving the theory, yet he also plainly states that within the present state of science the theory has failed.)
Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 08, 2008 10:48 AM | Send
|