Large Hadron Collider, Higgs Boson and Philosophy: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Philosophy of Science » Large Hadron Collider, Higgs Boson and Philosophy » Large Hadron Collider, Higgs Boson and Philosophy

Large Hadron Collider, Higgs Boson and Philosophy

Page: 1 2 3

Large Hadron Collider, Higgs Boson and Philosophy

Cadrache
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 09, 2006
Location: AB, Canada

Total Topics: 104
Total Posts: 2644

Posted 10/01/08 - 06:35 PM:	#11
I suppose. Depends on exactly where you define the difference between atomic and particle science. I've normally looked at it at an atomic level; since the actual spaces and smoothing processes for the movements of electrons has been mostly based from that range. (like smoothing pot-holes; as an example) While I don't look at 'all' materials of interest, this side has fallen to the wayside a little bit. Hadn't realized they applied QM states yet for marketable chips.
"...There was a writer who asked why it was that when we find positive experiences we say that only the physical facts are real, but in negative experiences we believe that reality is subjective. He made an example of those who say that in birth only the pain is real, the joy a subjective point of view, but that in death it is the emotional loss that is the reality." - Tony Ballantyne, Recursion. _____________________________________________ Truth is want. - The internal state of matters. Truth is Need. - The external state of affairs.

Kurt_Godel
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 25, 2008
Location: Long Island, NY

Total Topics: 15
Total Posts: 528

Posted 10/02/08 - 01:04 PM:	#12
Of course, the standard model would be more relevent than QM when talking about electronics. But QM is the logical next step from the standard model. Besides, Kwalish didn't mention QM per se...he said particle physics.

CognitiveDissonance
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 27, 2008

Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 7

2 of 6 people found this post helpful Posted 10/04/08 - 03:03 PM:	#13
On A MacroScopic Economic level who doesn't understand that the findings here are trivial. I wouldn't mind that physicists did whatever they wanted with the particle accelerator were it not costing us hundreds of millions of dollars. Here we have a best case scenerio where we discover whether or not a particle exists, and this is only a possibility. All the studies will likely be somewhat inconclusive and we will be back to the drawing board with a whole bunch of maybe this maybe that. How about maybe this.. maybe the sub-atomic level is what it is very small, too small for us ever to see definitively, we will never be able to be on this level or find other dimensions to travel to, we can just guess. Which is fine but don't build this billion dollar machine to determine if your guess was right. This is going to satisfy a total of about about 20,000 people in the world, the rest of "us" don't give a shit. I have a small understanding of what laws of physics are being tested, but one way or another it is not going to affect our life in any sense. A small paragraph in a science book, and a few books which will be read by people who want to have something esoterically interesting to talk about. I sometimes wonder to, I wonder about things that would help people out in the real world, not sending people to other dimensions. I could thing of countless things to spend that money on that would benefit the majority of people. But despite everything about Mr Higg's Busom, I would like to tell the person who started this thread that he is a total knit-wit. This question is confusing and broad. I think there never will be such thing as a philosophical truth, is this not an oxymoron. Philosophy is inherently never true of false. Redefining time and other dimensions, not that it couldn't disprove some philosphies, but how do the scientists plan to use the LHC to do this. Unless they can show to me some far out dimension, or make time stop I don't think anyone is going to give a shit. Much respect to those deutsch bags though, they are probably a lot smarter then me, but I am happy not worrying about this worthless bullshit.

Cadrache
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 09, 2006
Location: AB, Canada

Total Topics: 104
Total Posts: 2644

Posted 10/05/08 - 03:45 PM:	#14
I don't know for sure... I mean Scientific American is having a field day. Their head title for this month is "The bouncing universe:" Ie. Due to Quantum Gravity; we can give the expanding/contracting universe theory a bounce; and alls' well on the new sciences front.
"...There was a writer who asked why it was that when we find positive experiences we say that only the physical facts are real, but in negative experiences we believe that reality is subjective. He made an example of those who say that in birth only the pain is real, the joy a subjective point of view, but that in death it is the emotional loss that is the reality." - Tony Ballantyne, Recursion. _____________________________________________ Truth is want. - The internal state of matters. Truth is Need. - The external state of affairs.

rent
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 06, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 2

Posted 10/06/09 - 06:29 PM:	#15
I for one hope that the LHC does precisely the opposite of its hypothetical intent - that it will bring the Standard Model crashing down around our ears like so many carefully placed matchsticks, throw Einstein's relativity to the side like an overused prostitute, and possibly even rob Newton's grave. Ah, well, we all have our dreams...

wuliheron
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Location: Newport News, Va

Total Topics: 15
Total Posts: 4152

Posted 10/06/09 - 07:48 PM:	#16
CognitiveDissonance wrote: On A MacroScopic Economic level who doesn't understand that the findings here are trivial... This is going to satisfy a total of about about 20,000 people in the world, the rest of "us" don't give a shit. Besides such nortorious things as the atomic bomb particle physics is responsible for the invention of nuclear medicine that today saves millions of lives a year. It is also responsible for modern electronics which accounts for over a quarter of the world economy and is still growing. Research such as that produced by the LHC is so basic it is difficult to determine just how much of an impact it will have, but you can rest assured that it has already more than paid for itself many times over. If you are going to complain about the misallocation of resources there certainly is no end to the number of things worthy of your attention like Alaska's "Bridge to nowhere". Which raises the question of whether you are really complaining just to have something to complain about.

play
Tat Tvam Asi

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 20, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 111

Posted 10/07/09 - 09:31 AM:	#17
rent wrote: I for one hope that the LHC does precisely the opposite of its hypothetical intent - that it will bring the Standard Model crashing down around our ears like so many carefully placed matchsticks, throw Einstein's relativity to the side like an overused prostitute, and possibly even rob Newton's grave. Ah, well, we all have our dreams... I wouldn't have put it that callously perhaps, but I too hope they do not find the Higgs. If they find it, it's pretty much a "whoopty-doo" discovery because they were expecting to find it. Not finding it is much more interesting. And since the Standard Model is so ugly, and we know it isn't a complete theory, something dramatic must happen for us to have to rethink the universe. Maybe not discovering the Higgs will be dramatic enough, maybe not, but something very strange and unpredictable needs to happen. And I think it is inevitable for something to happen because this model is quickly approaching the limits of reasonable credulity.
There once was a man who said so, "It seems that I know that I know. But what I would like to see Is the I that knows me when I know that I know that I know."

swstephe
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2006
Location: borneo island

Total Topics: 28
Total Posts: 3304

Posted 10/13/09 - 06:19 PM:	#18
Since this thread was already waking up, I found this an interesting article, joke, for physics-nerd appeal. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/science/space/13lhc.html?_r=2 The idea is that creating a Higgs-Boson particle is so abhorred by nature, (or God), that some physical process will always go back in time to prevent that from happening. A reverse "grandfather paradox" event. It is impossible to go back in time to kill your grandfather which would prevent you from existing -- but it is possible to save his life, (as what must have happened to allow for your existence). So apparently a working LHC created a time-travelling event which caused the destruction of the LHC in the past to prevent it, thus saving the universe from allowing the LHC to produce the particle. The same could have happened to other attempts to produce this particle. Could it be scientific proof of predeterminism?
Ethics is the measuring of morality. Morality is the measuring of good. Good is the measuring of benefit. Benefit is the measure of values.

wuliheron
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Location: Newport News, Va

Total Topics: 15
Total Posts: 4152

Posted 10/13/09 - 10:56 PM:	#19
It could also be that the recent fighting amongst the LHC scientists is responsible for the setbacks. Perhaps after the machine is turned on they will learn the secrets to influencing the past, and the two groups will undermine each others attempts to control the machine.

Minyun
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 14, 2009

Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 247

0 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 10/14/09 - 03:36 AM:	#20
If I had published a picture on the internet of say... A man walking on water, would you believe it? Or perhaps, if I had created a magazine advert that showed a beautiful girl in a bikini, would you believe she was beautiful? Maybe you didn't, and you asked: what makes her beautiful? And I showed you how I had changed her curves through some photo-manipulation application, is it no longer really beautiful to you? What if I put something under a microscope, and said that this was the particle that was responsible for all mass, would you be amazed? Maybe you wouldn't, and you asked: How is it that you come to these conclusions. Then I had said that the government had given me billions of dollars to create a machine that would prove it. Would you still not be amazed? Maybe you wouldn't, perhaps you did not quite understand the mechanism, and so spent your life trying to figure it out. Years pass by, and through the faith of your instruments and machines you were made to believe, and suddenly you were amazed. I forget who had said it (names mean very little to me), but it went a little something like this: We should question everything that is not made self-evident by our own reasoning. So by this, these examples are made evident by another things reasoning (human or inanimate, even time). How is it that you can believe in something that you cannot see/hear/taste/touch/smell except only with the aid of an instrument? Is it still real? Is this as someone has said: As soon as the Higgs boson is found, it is no longer hypothetical, and becomes an actual, proven elementary particle just like quarks, electrons, photons, etc. Wether they find it or not, means nothing. For it does not exist in our plane of reasoning, it does not dwell in our immediate sensory field. I know that a lifetime of studying will draw my faith to it, though this is an unnatural faith, likened to a soldier in an army moulded into being patriotic. A scripture is to theists as the microscope is to scientists, just replace iodine for the blood of christ.

Page: 1 2 3

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.