Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

More Large Hardon Collider stuff...

0 views
Skip to first unread message

bonfils

unread,
Nov 11, 2009, 6:01:20 AM11/11/09
to
Wacky Danish scientist suggest the LHC is sabotaged by its own future:

"One could even almost say that we have a model for God [...] that He
rather hates Higgs particles, and attempts to avoid them."

This is Holger Bech Nielsen. I rest my case:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qRmva1DdXU

--
bonfils
http://kim.bonfils.com

bonfils

unread,
Nov 11, 2009, 6:02:14 AM11/11/09
to
bonfils <k...@bonfils.my.underwear.com> wrote in news:hde5i0$pll$1...@aioe.org:

> Wacky Danish scientist suggest the LHC is sabotaged by its own future:
>
> "One could even almost say that we have a model for God [...] that He
> rather hates Higgs particles, and attempts to avoid them."
>
> This is Holger Bech Nielsen. I rest my case:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qRmva1DdXU

Oh, and the article I meant to link to:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/science/space/13lhc.html

--
bonfils
http://kim.bonfils.com

Kitty P

unread,
Nov 11, 2009, 9:54:45 AM11/11/09
to

"bonfils" <k...@bonfils.my.underwear.com> wrote in message
news:hde5jl$pll$2...@aioe.org...

But But....if something came from the future to stop the Collider and were
successful, wouldn't they do it before it was developed and surrounded by
security? And if someone did manage to stop it at that kind of point where
it could be stopped, would we even know at this time that the Hardon was
ever developed? That last part sounds a bit like dating after 50 actually.

Kitty


bonfils

unread,
Nov 11, 2009, 11:16:23 AM11/11/09
to
"Kitty P" <pain...@charter.net> wrote in
news:sfAKm.11180$gi1....@newsfe19.iad:

>
> "bonfils" <k...@bonfils.my.underwear.com> wrote in message
> news:hde5jl$pll$2...@aioe.org...
>> bonfils <k...@bonfils.my.underwear.com> wrote in
>> news:hde5i0$pll$1...@aioe.org:
>>
>>> Wacky Danish scientist suggest the LHC is sabotaged by its own
>>> future:
>>>
>>> "One could even almost say that we have a model for God [...] that
>>> He rather hates Higgs particles, and attempts to avoid them."
>>>
>>> This is Holger Bech Nielsen. I rest my case:
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qRmva1DdXU
>>
>> Oh, and the article I meant to link to:
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/science/space/13lhc.html
>>
>> --
>> bonfils
>> http://kim.bonfils.com
>
> But But....if something came from the future to stop the Collider and
> were successful, wouldn't they do it before it was developed and
> surrounded by security?

Even if the theory is correct, it only applies to the quantum level, where
the rules of physics are radically different from what we know on the
macro-scale. It's just subatomic particles interacting - not a scene from
"The Terminator". Yet.

> And if someone did manage to stop it at that
> kind of point where it could be stopped, would we even know at this
> time that the Hardon was ever developed? That last part sounds a bit
> like dating after 50 actually.

Heh.

--
bonfils
http://kim.bonfils.com

Keynes

unread,
Nov 11, 2009, 11:54:12 AM11/11/09
to

The science of producing hardons has been perfected.
Even warnings of blindness and sudden death can't
keep the men away from it. It's like the warrior
culture where the best death is to die in battle.


Kitty P

unread,
Nov 11, 2009, 1:03:02 PM11/11/09
to

"Keynes" <Key...@earthlinkspam.net> wrote in message
news:utqlf59jcebnos9pc...@4ax.com...
Let's not even touch the black hole theories.


Lee Rudolph

unread,
Nov 11, 2009, 1:57:17 PM11/11/09
to
"Kitty P" <pain...@charter.net> writes:

Oh, Calcutta!

Lee Rudolph

Déjà Flu

unread,
Nov 11, 2009, 4:31:37 PM11/11/09
to

The main reason I like other people is the
"Damn! Why didn't I think of that?" effect.
Solves the "problem of other minds" and TV,
all in one swell foop.

--
Ubi dubium ibi libertas

Love

unread,
Nov 12, 2009, 1:56:03 AM11/12/09
to
In article <r%CKm.14488$We2....@newsfe09.iad>, pain...@charter.net says...

Well someone here might feel excluded by that so let's not
make that a firm policy so much as an understanding that
none of us are required to go there if it isn't productive
for us individually.

--
Love

May Shai-Hulud clear the path before you.

Beerlet Dhiblang

unread,
Nov 12, 2009, 7:58:01 AM11/12/09
to
On Nov 12, 1:56 am, pho...@address.for.spam (Love) wrote:
> In article <r%CKm.14488$We2.10...@newsfe09.iad>, paino2...@charter.net says...

>
>
>
>
>
> >"Keynes" <Key...@earthlinkspam.net> wrote in message
> >news:utqlf59jcebnos9pc...@4ax.com...
> >> On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 06:54:45 -0800, "Kitty P" <paino2...@charter.net>

I thought hardon colliders can make black holes.

/l

Keynes

unread,
Nov 12, 2009, 9:12:53 AM11/12/09
to

Probability around 50%.


Wally Chapman

unread,
Nov 12, 2009, 9:23:33 AM11/12/09
to

Of course, in order to determine whether or not it is productive, one
must do a certain amount of examination and experimentation. In this
sort of endeavor, teamwork is essential.

Wally

Beerlet Dhiblang

unread,
Nov 13, 2009, 8:48:00 AM11/13/09
to

Define "Probability."

/l

Wilson

unread,
Nov 13, 2009, 11:53:36 AM11/13/09
to

You know. "Maybe".

--
Wilson

Wally Chapman

unread,
Nov 13, 2009, 12:04:37 PM11/13/09
to

I like SWAG, myself - scientific wild assed guess.


Wally

Beerlet Dhiblang

unread,
Nov 14, 2009, 9:33:36 AM11/14/09
to

Yep. But *is it* swaggish to contemplate inversive procedures?

/l ( SWAG sits on my shelf next to FUBAR & WOMBAT .... )

0 new messages