The Universe Solved

 


Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

No Higgs For You Options
jim
Posted: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 10:07:41 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 980
Points: 2,952
Is anyone else getting weary of the reports of "possible" "tantalizing" "hints" of the Higgs boson coming out of the LHC?

Like this one: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-08-hint-higgs-lhc.html

I shall now make a rash prediction: We will never find the Higgs as it is described in the Standard Model. We will, however, find something else, which will further advance our understanding of matter and reality in a seemingly never ending Hegelian scientific cycle.

Because that's the way the PROGRAM works. :)
spearshaker
Posted: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 10:49:04 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 10/3/2009
Posts: 31
Points: 93
Location: Canada
We are told what is to be viewed as unquestionably important by those whose interest is best served by our accepting that it’s their own special field of research. Always has been, always will be. No surprise there.

These “hints” of spectacular findings must be taken for what they are: hopeful predictions that keep our interest properly focused (by the focuser’s standards) and help insure that budgetary support is not interrupted.

For a typical example: a 3-sigma signal, a really strong hint, statistically speaking, should ensure a likelihood of 99.73% for the reality of the particle, or effect, or whatever is indicated as a possible discovery. Wow! In particle physics, the history is not so encouraging, however. See

http://news.discovery.com/space/new-physics-discovered-by-miniboone.html

Apparently, such marvelous hints turn out to be “a whopping 99%” wrong, just unaccounted-for noise in the data, or “baloney,” as the non-specialist would say.

I hope they find this Higgs thing soon, or they don't. Then we can go on to some other awe-inspiring assignment. I'm bored with this one.
Whistle
jim
Posted: Monday, August 22, 2011 9:14:33 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 980
Points: 2,952
Is this saying that a 3-sigma signal should have a success rate of 99.7% but really only has a success rate of <1%? If so, it sounds like the rigor that is put into claiming a 3-sigma signal is light by a factor of, uh, 30,000?
spearshaker
Posted: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 9:35:35 AM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 10/3/2009
Posts: 31
Points: 93
Location: Canada
Roger that, affirmative.Whistle
jim
Posted: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 10:15:00 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 980
Points: 2,952
Glupidio
Posted: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 9:06:49 PM
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/7/2009
Posts: 4
Points: 12
Location: Austin, TX
As long as they continue to believe it might exist they will be on the brink of discovering it.
jim
Posted: Thursday, September 1, 2011 6:36:02 PM

Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 980
Points: 2,952
Glupidio wrote:
As long as they continue to believe it might exist they will be on the brink of discovering it.


Totally Agree!
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Universe Solved Theme Created by Jim Elvidge (Universe Solved)
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.2 (NET v4.0) - 9/27/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
This page was generated in 0.055 seconds.