General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHiggs Boson Seems To Prove That The Universe Doesn't Exist
Higgs Boson Seems To Prove That The Universe Doesn't Exist
Brid-Aine Parnell
Forbes.com, June 24, 2014
None of us should be here. In fact, the whole world, the stars and the galaxies shouldnt be here either according to a new cosmological study, our whole Universe should have blinked out of existence an instant after it was first created.
Research from British cosmologists at Kings College London (KCL) suggests that the Universe shouldnt have lasted for more than a second after the Big Bang, according to the Standard Model thats suggested by the Higgs boson seen in 2012 along with recent astronomical observations.
After the Universe began in the Big Bang, it is theorised that it went through a short period of rapid expansion known as cosmic inflation. The Universe is still expanding today, but at a rather sedate pace astronomically-speaking. In the inflationary period, matter was flung outward at an exponential rate in all directions, rippling space-time into waves of gravitational energy as it went.
SNIP...
The problem with BICEP2s results is that they predict that the Universe would have received large jolts during the cosmic inflation phase, which would have pushed it into the other valley of the Higgs field within a fraction of a second. And that would have collapsed the entire nascent Universe in a Big Crunch.
This is an unacceptable prediction of the theory because if this had happened, we wouldnt be around to discuss it! said Hogan, who is a PhD student at KCL and led the study.
CONTINUED...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bridaineparnell/2014/06/24/higgs-boson-seems-to-prove-that-the-universe-doesnt-exist/
Just when it seemed things couldn't get any weirder... Either way, I really am thankful we are here, wherever -- or whatever -- this here really is.
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)figment of my imagination?
Octafish
(55,745 posts)I don't believe in not being.
Hey, you know Borges' "Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius"?
Heh. Mirrors!
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)I am most sure if you exist, but will give you the benefit of the doubt.
icymist
(15,888 posts)Thanks for the link!
OriginalGeek
(12,132 posts)If the latter could you imagine me a little spendin' money please? I got my eye on a nice single malt...
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)I think, therefore
I think I am?
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)elleng
(129,800 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)japple
(9,769 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)japple
(9,769 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Although lacking in journalistic credentials, Gannon was planted in the White House press corpse and posed as a reporter, asking softballs and lobbing spitballs.
Very pro-Iraq War, etc. etc. etc. A regular visitor to the Bush White House, too.
japple
(9,769 posts)eom
PasadenaTrudy
(3,998 posts)non-existence thing...
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and Earth.
The named is the mother of the ten thousand things.
Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.
Ever desiring, one sees the manifestations.
These two spring from the same source but differ in name; this appears as darkness.
Darkness within darkness.
The gate to all mystery.
The Tao Te Ching, Chapter 1
GeorgeGist
(25,293 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
"I think, therefore I am."
pinboy3niner
(53,339 posts)Lurker Deluxe
(1,029 posts)Descartes walks into a bar and asks for a drink, the bartender says, "your drunk". Rene responds, "I think not".
And disappears.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)What are we looking at?
aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)whose bite poisoned Captain Kirk.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The one flaw, if it can be called that, I had with Star Trek was I seem to remember there were four episodes with two Kirks. One Doppelgaenger I can understand, two is quite a happenstance, but three is literary inaction.
chknltl
(10,558 posts)I thought naught! nuff said
Logical
(22,457 posts)ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)Very interesting article, Thanks for posting
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Higgs Boson Theorist Claims Universe Shouldn't Exist
The universe shouldn't exist at least according to a new theory.
Modeling of conditions soon after the Big Bang suggests the universe should have collapsed just microseconds after its explosive birth, the new study suggests.
"During the early universe, we expected cosmic inflation this is a rapid expansion of the universe right after the Big Bang," said study co-author Robert Hogan, a doctoral candidate in physics at King's College in London. "This expansion causes lots of stuff to shake around, and if we shake it too much, we could go into this new energy space, which could cause the universe to collapse."
Physicists draw that conclusion from a model that accounts for the properties of the newly discovered Higgs boson particle, which is thought to explain how other particles get their mass. Faint traces of gravitational waves formed at the universe's origin also inform the conclusion. [Doomsday: The 9 Real Ways Earth Could End]
Of course, there must be something missing from these calculations.
"We are here talking about it," Hogan told LiveScience. "That means we have to extend our theories to explain why this didn't happen."
How the Big Bang went bang
One possible explanation holds that during the fiery flash after the primordial Big Bang explosion, matter raced outward at breakneck speeds in a process known as cosmic inflation. This bent and squeezed space-time, creating ripples known as gravitational waves that also twisted the radiation that passed through the universe, Hogan said.
Though those events would have occurred 13.8 billion years ago, a telescope at the South Pole known as the Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarization, or BICEP, recently detected the faint traces of cosmic inflation in the background microwave radiation that pervades the universe: in particular, characteristic twisted or curled waves called the B-mode pattern. (Other scientists have questioned the findings, saying the results may just be from dust in the Milky Way.)
CONTINUED...
http://www.nbcnews.com/science/weird-science/say-what-higgs-boson-theorist-claims-universe-shouldnt-exist-n138911
Still need to re-read it about 20 times for the better parts to set in. It is amazing, snagglepuss.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)...I was driving to a new job near Los Angeles from about an hour from where I lived in Orange County, summer 1986. On the radio, a guy with a sophisticated Oxford accent was talking about Zen and Christianity and psychoanalysis and nuclear physics and consciousness and everything good and bad under the sun and I thought, "This must be Alan Watts." And it was. I, a longtime reader of his, first heard him broadcast on KPFK and recognized him, even though he'd passed more than a dozen years earlier. What a great day it was -- changed the course of my day, summer, year and life.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)I lived in the San Fernando Valley at the time. He certainly helped in changing my view of life.
safeinOhio
(32,461 posts)4am on Sunday mornings.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)so i have an excuse to tell my landlord or Chelsea.
Since I live in this matrix anyway.
I'm imagining this porridge as steak tonight which helps with the delusion.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)If you want it, it's not going to be what you want. And what you really want doesn't exist. Yet.
JI7
(89,151 posts)aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)built by denizens of a virtual reality, in turn built by denizens of a virtual reality, in turn built by denizens of a virtual reality, etc., etc. ...
tblue37
(64,860 posts)virtual realities all the way up.
Ye know nothing, Jon Snow.
derby378
(30,252 posts)Last edited Wed Jun 25, 2014, 09:13 AM - Edit history (1)
Seriously, I laughed until I cried watching this commercial. You watch now! (NSFW!)
daleanime
(17,796 posts)abakan
(1,814 posts)This may be the most stupid thing I've ever seen, thanks a lot!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)fess up!
Teh kitteh at the end does not make up for boobs, and fucks.
Sorry, after last week I just had to ask.
Otherwise hilarious, but you might want, for the gentle minds here, add a NSFW warning
and yes, I laughed until my sides hurt. Tractors... now that was hilarious.
derby378
(30,252 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)I Friended this guy for you:
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE CANNOT BE ETERNAL because it could not have sustained itself eternally due to the law of entropy (increasing net energy decay, even in an open system). Einstein showed that space, matter, and time all are physical and all had a beginning. Space even produces particles because its actually something, not nothing. Even time had a beginning! Time is not eternal. The law of entropy doesn't allow the universe to be eternal. If the universe were eternal, everything, including time (which modern science has shown is as physical as mass and space), would have become totally entropied by now and the entire universe would have ended in a uniform heat death a long, long time ago. The fact that this hasn't happened already is powerful evidence for a beginning to the universe. Popular atheistic scientist Stephen Hawking admits that the universe had a beginning and came from nothing but he believes that nothing became something by a natural process yet to be discovered. That's not rational thinking at all, and it also would be making the effect greater than its cause to say that nothing created something. The beginning had to be of supernatural origin because natural laws and processes do not have the ability to bring something into existence from nothing. What about the Higgs boson (the so-called God Particle)? The Higgs boson does not create mass from nothing, but rather it converts energy into mass. Einstein showed that all matter is some form of energy. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence and power for the origin and order of the universe. Where did God come from? Obviously, unlike the universe, Gods nature doesnt require a beginning. EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life or the universe works doesn't mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws may explain how the order in the universe works and operates, but mere undirected natural laws cannot explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell then the genetic code and biological machinery exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how could life or the cell have naturally originated when no directing code and mechanisms existed in nature? Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM. WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Some things dont need experiment or scientific proof. In law there is a dictum called prima facie evidence. It means evidence that speaks for itself. An example of a true prima facie would be if you discovered an elaborate sand castle on the beach. You dont have to experiment to know that it came by design and not by the chance forces of wind and water. If you discovered a romantic letter or message written in the sand, you dont have to experiment to know that it was by design and not because a stick randomly carried by wind put it there. You naturally assume that an intelligent and rational being was responsible. I encourage all to read my popular Internet articles: NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION and HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM Visit my newest Internet site: THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION Babu G. Ranganathan* (B.A. Bible/Biology) *I have given successful lectures (with question and answer period afterwards) defending creation before evolutionist science faculty and students at various colleges and universities. I've been privileged to be recognized in the 24th edition of Marquis "Who's Who in The East" for my writings on religion and science.
-- Babu G. Ranganathan
SOURCE: http://news.discovery.com/space/cosmology/the-higgs-boson-should-have-crushed-the-universe-140624.htm
August. Profound. And September 2.
derby378
(30,252 posts)"You atheists don't know how the universe began because you weren't there!"
"Neither were you!"
"I don't have to be. The Gideons gave me this book..."
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)As mineral water goes, I'd rather watch sarah palin ad-lib about astrophysics.
what a video.
derby378
(30,252 posts)Do the electrons in your body still chant and burn with shamanic fury? Or is it time for another bottle?
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)Lithuanian community here (Vytautas is the name of one of their grand dukes in the 1500s) and they have lots of foods and drinks from there.
Lithuanian beer is fantastic. World class. Really really good.
Their mineral water? Not so much. Think sewage.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)A scientist publishes a new finding (e.g. the BICEP2's gravitational-wave evidence for the Big Bang), and other scientists immediately set out to prove it wrong.
As opposed to religious faith, which posits the existence of an original, revealed Truth that can never change and which can never be proven wrong.
The problem we see with Creationists is that they expect science to work the same way as faith, and view ongoing revision of theory as a weakness of the method, not a strength. Neil Degrasse Tyson said it best: scientists aren't afraid to be wrong, because that means there is more mystery to be solved.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Religious faith does not necessitate a belief in an ultimate, unchanging truth.
Simply believing in the supernatural could constitute religious faith.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I'm referring specifically to Creationist dogma, which insists on the literal truth of the Bible.
I concede that not all religious faith is as rigid.
ECHOFIELDS
(25 posts)The Bible saith,
GOD created the universe 6000 years ago,
therefore the universe exists.
End of Proof
QED
deutsey
(20,166 posts)Nothing is real...
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The Higgs Boson Should Have Crushed the Universe
by Ian O'Neill
Discovery.com, Jun 24, 2014 03:42 PM ET
EXCERPT...
In research presented today (Tuesday) at the Royal Astronomical Societys National Astronomy Meeting in Portsmouth, UK, Malcolm Fairbairn and Robert Hogan of Kings College London (KCL) discussed the implications of recent discoveries in particle physics and the origins of our universe. Their conclusions will likely cause some unrest.
Since the discovery of a Higgs-like boson by Large Hadron Collider (LHC) physicists in 2012, further studies and data analysis has proven that this particular boson really is the Higgs boson a subatomic particle that mediates the Higgs field. The Higgs field is believed to fill the entire known universe and endows all matter with mass. Since its discovery, physicists have been getting up-close and personal with the Higgs and experimental analyses has not only proven its existence, scientists are also becoming very familiar with the bosons (and, by extension, the field it exchanges) properties.
But the problem with the Higgs field is that, if given enough energy, it has the power to reverse cosmic expansion and create a Big Crunch.
The mathematics to arise from accepted Higgs field theory suggests the universe is currently sitting comfortably in a Higgs field energy valley. To get out of this valley and up the adjacent hill (as shown in the energy diagram, right), huge quantities of energy would need to be unleashed inside the field. But, if there were enough energy to push the universe over the hill and into the deeper energy valley next door, the universe would simply, and catastrophically, collapse.
This is where the BICEP2 results come in. If their observations are real and gravitational waves in the CMB prove cosmological inflation, the Higgs field has already been kicked by too much energy, pushing the Higgs field over the energy hill and deep into the neighboring valleys precipice! For any wannabe universe, this is very bad news the newborn universe would appear as a Big Bang, the Higgs field would become overloaded with an energetic inflationary period, and the whole lot would vanish in a blink of an eye.
This is an unacceptable prediction of the theory because if this had happened we wouldnt be around to discuss it, said Hogan.
CONTINUED...
http://news.discovery.com/space/cosmology/the-higgs-boson-should-have-crushed-the-universe-140624.htm
Peter Max continues to grow on me. Plus, Ringo's in town Friday.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)in something smaller than a breadbox...
retread
(3,751 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,029 posts)We're not collapsing because we're connected to some cosmological uterine wall.
That's my take on it, anyway.
Thanks for the thread, Octafish.
Rex
(65,616 posts)― Mark Twain
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...it's your study's fault.
Two possibilities here without digging in more, and I'm betting on the first one:
1. As par for the course a popular media article about a scientific research paper screwed up its description of their findings in the interests of formulating controversial click-generating headlines... and what the researchers actually said is basically that there's still just something they don't understand yet about the early formative period of the universe.
2. The researchers missed something and are about to have an "oops, duh" moment.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Their theories are f**ing wrong!! Remember Zeno's paradox, "demonstrating" that motion does not exist? OKAY...
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)Parmenides. It's actually a reductio ad absurdum of rationalism: that the mind can comprehend everything, and anything the mind can't comprehend can't exist.
So you start with: try to think of nothing. You can't since if you try you always wind up thinking of something. (I know, Zen Buddhism and all that. Just play along, alright?)
So, that means nothing doesn't exist. Given that, empty space can't exist. So everything is all filled up, and motion is therefore impossible. Which means everything is an illusion, including of course your own existence.
Zeno's Paradoxes are a way of proving that Parmenides is right.
Little-known fact (except among philosophy geeks): Democritus' atoms are Parmenidian wholes: each is kinda like a mini-Parmenides universe. Atomism was actually an attempt to answer Parmenides and get around Zeno's paradoxes. It wasn't until calculus came along that those paradoxes could get solved.
Philosophically, of course, all you had to do was ditch the rationalist assumption behind the whole thing and you're done. But the Greeks were rationalists so they had a tough time with that.
struggle4progress
(117,949 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)ECHOFIELDS
(25 posts)but I'm not so sure about the Universe anymore.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)LuvLoogie
(6,823 posts)I just didn't make...
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)This is an unacceptable prediction of the theory because if this had happened, we wouldnt be around to discuss it!
LongTomH
(8,636 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Alex P Notkeaton
(309 posts)...
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)opiate69
(10,129 posts)pnwmom
(108,915 posts)hunter
(38,240 posts)... before we reach the "other valley of the Higgs field."
pediatricmedic
(397 posts)An infinity of time could happen within that "fraction of a second", at least from our limited POV.
Atman
(31,464 posts)I need to drop some acid now.
colsohlibgal
(5,274 posts)I remember in school, when I heard that it all started with all matter in an incredibly small form exploded, starting it all. My first thought was what was before and where did the stuff of the big bang come from.
It's all mysterious - and at some point there had to be nothing that sprung into something. That's why, looking at this free of religion and myth, I classify myself as an agnostic - there is something we can't understand but something had to be behind the creation of matter out of thin air.
I have a book by Robert Charles Wilson, "Darwinia", which gets into the truth of existence. Maybe it's close to what is what, maybe not, and likely we won't ever know for sure till we expire - and maybe not even then if that's the end of it for us.
ismnotwasm
(41,885 posts)Back to the drawing board so to speak. Perhaps we are just a computer generated game of some advanced civilization.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Takket
(21,353 posts)I think they need to go back to the drawing board.
Renew Deal
(81,774 posts)Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Yeee haw.