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
913 Views
- 15/06/2010 04:11:11 AM
501 Views
- 15/06/2010 04:11:11 AM
501 Views
I minored in modern physics, which means, I have enough knowledge to be.....
- 15/06/2010 04:45:35 AM
492 Views
this has always bothered me about particle physicists....
- 15/06/2010 05:32:26 AM
528 Views
Yeah, always been my problem, too.
- 15/06/2010 05:44:30 AM
453 Views
Lederman wanted to call it "the goddamn particle," but the publisher wouldn't let him.
- 15/06/2010 06:26:56 AM
476 Views
- 15/06/2010 06:26:56 AM
476 Views
Well, we've been pretty bad at name stuff
- 15/06/2010 08:52:09 AM
490 Views
"Giant radiating dyke swarms"?!!! 
- 15/06/2010 05:57:11 PM
483 Views
- 15/06/2010 05:57:11 PM
483 Views
This I can believe.
- 15/06/2010 06:02:37 PM
414 Views
It's more than a few right answers.
- 15/06/2010 06:26:35 AM
614 Views
did you go to school in wisconsin? cause you sound just like that guy
- 15/06/2010 07:07:49 AM
467 Views
- 15/06/2010 07:07:49 AM
467 Views
Yet, when determining the measure for what a planet is, Pluto vanished from the list!
- 15/06/2010 07:14:28 AM
505 Views
- 15/06/2010 07:14:28 AM
505 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
605 Views
- 15/06/2010 08:45:43 AM
605 Views
It had to lose its status or you'd have to memorize several more planets
- 15/06/2010 08:57:20 AM
516 Views
y'all are screwing up my "uncertainty principle" joke dammit! 
*NM*
- 15/06/2010 09:19:11 AM
204 Views
*NM*
- 15/06/2010 09:19:11 AM
204 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
503 Views
As a physicist, I find this quite interesting.
- 16/06/2010 09:08:15 PM
599 Views
Not quite.
- 16/06/2010 09:57:18 PM
596 Views
Re: Not quite.
- 16/06/2010 10:22:14 PM
613 Views