A God Particle?
13March 14, 2013 by theguywiththeeye
Did you hear the news? Scientist in a group called CERN announced today in Geneva that a particle that they have been studying since last year is very likely the Higgs boson or God Particle that the world has been eagerly seeking. By finding this God Particle Scientist believe that they have proven the big bang and that this particle is the Missing Link that is needed to conclude the “evidence” of the big bang.
Will anyone challenge this post? Will it be defended?
Reblogged this on Christop Clochard L and commented:
Ok, so, this is a new concept. I don’t have any takers, yet. If you have a chance to check it out, please let me know if you have any questions.
Please start by clicking “Defend Your Post” to see what I’m talking about before following the link.
I call bullshit on this one. The post ends by advising us to seek the bible when investigating new scientific information. That is to say that we should make sure it compares favorably with the 2000+ year old text to see if it makes sense.
First ‘god particle’ is a bad nickname for the Higgs Boson.It is the particle that is belived to give all matter its mass. As I understand it the Higgs field should help us understand matter better including dark matter and energy and thus the expanding universe.I’m reasonably certain that the bible doesn’t cover this stuff at all, never mind in detail. The bible can’t even help you pick out the best phone for yourself. The author of that post need to take the bucket off his head.
Congrats. You just nominated yourself as the first challenger:) Follow this blog and follow comments. Pick a charity to promote in the sidebar (or any other website besides your own).
Who knows how this will go, but I gotta get it started.
Unless you’d like to nominate someone else. But help a brotha get something going here.
I don’t understand the nominating part… follow, got that. Charity? Picking another blog… does it need to be related in any way?
Damn it, human. No, you can promote whatever you want.
Only comments from the original author and ONE challenger will be approved on each post/debate. It’s sort of like calling someone out to the parking lot (of blog world) and throwing punches with words.
So how do I promote? I take it that if the original poster doesn’t respond it’s a no go
Yes, but I will give some friendly encouragement. There will be some trial and error involved with this.
Clubschadenfreude has stepped in to take one of the other posts.
cool beans
Give me a link
http://www.heifer.org – not strictly an atheist organization, but I like them and their aims/goals/mission it is where I donate – feed someone and help them feed themselves
Awesome! Thanks for stepping up.
No, I’m not going to defend this either. There are subtle issues, like it fails to distinguish between the particle and the field. There are big issues, where the author seems to assume that the particle was necessary evidence to conclusively talk about the Big Bang (and some collision in the Big Bang… whatever that is). In fact, the author seems to have no immediate awareness of red shift and microwave background radiation or the last scattering surface etc.
There are points where I suspect English might not be the author’s first language, so I’m not going to really penalise the author for his mis-defining of the laws of entropy.
There is also a very important context point missing, and I have just checked around some publicly available articles to make sure it’s an accessible point, which is that the particle has been a hypothesis for about 50 years. It has been an essential block in our understanding, from the standard model.
My journey, following the Higgs Boson has been an interesting one. I remember when they announced a contender, then they announced a 5 sigma confidence level, and I was convinced then. But then, a few months ago now they announced two possible contenders for the position of Higgs Boson (with the possibility that they were both Higgs Bosons… which I didn’t grasp). And in all of this, there was next to no focus on the Higgs Boson with regard to the Big Bang. This is a very specialist complaint, so far that I can see.
Eventually the author reveals their religious bias, and there focus on the Big Bang and the Higgs starts to look a lot like the religious attack on abiogenesis to discredit evolution; a complete non-sequitur.
Then, as if on cue, the author points to the biggest question in physics today–”where did it all come from?”–and asserts (without a £6.2bn research device, or evidence of any other nature) that the answer must be a character out of an old book people still read.