i once pointed out to a guy i was in school with about how every time particle physicists can't quite explain something, they decide it must be done by an as-yet-to-be-discovered particle. he said there have been a few of those that were right so the theory must be working but i always found it to be kind of a cop-out. yeah, the math describes *something* but i can't believe that every damn thing has to have a particle (or multiple particles) attached to it. meh, if they find all 5 particles i'll be supremely impressed with them. but i'm sure they'll get close to finding one or two then decide that there are a few more particles that describe the particles they haven't found yet 
It worked the first couple times, so it became a panacea. If the detectors aren't finding it, we need a bigger detector; it doesn't prove the thing doesn't exist, because you can't prove a negative. But we know it's there because the theory requires it; you just have to have fai--oh crap, this may not be science any more....
You have to admit, the "God particle" is aptly named.
Though it's still not as good as "giant radiating dyke swarms. "
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
US experiment hints at 'multiple God particles'
- 15/06/2010 04:04:14 AM
849 Views
- 15/06/2010 04:11:11 AM
449 Views
- 15/06/2010 04:11:11 AM
449 Views
I minored in modern physics, which means, I have enough knowledge to be.....
- 15/06/2010 04:45:35 AM
435 Views
this has always bothered me about particle physicists....
- 15/06/2010 05:32:26 AM
472 Views
Yeah, always been my problem, too.
- 15/06/2010 05:44:30 AM
403 Views
Lederman wanted to call it "the goddamn particle," but the publisher wouldn't let him.
- 15/06/2010 06:26:56 AM
426 Views
- 15/06/2010 06:26:56 AM
426 Views
Well, we've been pretty bad at name stuff
- 15/06/2010 08:52:09 AM
436 Views
"Giant radiating dyke swarms"?!!! 
- 15/06/2010 05:57:11 PM
427 Views
- 15/06/2010 05:57:11 PM
427 Views
This I can believe.
- 15/06/2010 06:02:37 PM
367 Views
It's more than a few right answers.
- 15/06/2010 06:26:35 AM
551 Views
did you go to school in wisconsin? cause you sound just like that guy
- 15/06/2010 07:07:49 AM
408 Views
- 15/06/2010 07:07:49 AM
408 Views
Yet, when determining the measure for what a planet is, Pluto vanished from the list!
- 15/06/2010 07:14:28 AM
443 Views
- 15/06/2010 07:14:28 AM
443 Views
right, but it's still out there in the same orbit with the same momentum and positioning
- 15/06/2010 08:45:43 AM
544 Views
- 15/06/2010 08:45:43 AM
544 Views
It had to lose its status or you'd have to memorize several more planets
- 15/06/2010 08:57:20 AM
454 Views
y'all are screwing up my "uncertainty principle" joke dammit! 
*NM*
- 15/06/2010 09:19:11 AM
179 Views
*NM*
- 15/06/2010 09:19:11 AM
179 Views
Totally missed it *NM*
I was disappointed they didn't make all the dwarf planets into planet planets.
- 16/06/2010 01:00:51 PM
449 Views
As a physicist, I find this quite interesting.
- 16/06/2010 09:08:15 PM
544 Views
Not quite.
- 16/06/2010 09:57:18 PM
535 Views
Re: Not quite.
- 16/06/2010 10:22:14 PM
552 Views