Re: What if the Higgs boson is not found?
Y.Porat
> Yousuf Khan wrote:
> > If after all of the tests in the LHC, they don't find the Higgs boson?
> > How will that affect the existing theories like the Standard Model. How
> > will it affect the successor models, like Superstings or Quantum Gravity?
>
> > Yousuf Khan
>
> Some Background
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
> http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=what-exactly-is-the-higgs
>
> PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE
> The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News
> Number 861 April 15, 2008 www.aip.org/pnu
> by Phillip F. Schewe and Jason S. Bardi
>
> FINDING THE HIGGS BOSON is the imperative of the two most powerful
> particle accelerators ever built---the Tevatron at Fermilab, now
> reaching the peak of its decades-long performance, and the Large
> Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN, where beams will circulate for the
> first time around a 27-km track within the next few months. The
> Higgs has not yet been discovered, but at this week*s meeting of the
> American Physical Society (APS) in St. Louis dozens of talks
> referred to the status of the Higgs search. Why is the Higgs so
> important? Because it is thought to pervade the universal vacuum;
> not, as with the old aether, to provide a material substrate for the
> propagation of electromagnetic waves, but rather to interact with
> particles and confer mass upon them. The Higgs* ministrations are
> usually hidden away in the vacuum, but if enough energy is brought
> to bear in a tiny volume of space---at the point where two energetic
> particles collide---then the Higgs can be turned into an actual
> particle whose existence can be detected. Theoretical calculations
> made using the standard model of particle physics combined with
> previous experiments serve to limit the possible range of masses for
> the Higgs particle. Right now that mass is thought to be larger
> than 114 GeV but smaller than about 190 GeV.
> The Tevatron delivers more than enough energy to create a particle
> in that energy range. The main issue, then, is luminosity, or the
> density of beam particles crashed together per second. The Tevatron
> recently established a record high luminosity: 3.1 x 10^32 per cm^2
> per second.
>
> What would a Higgs event look like? One speaker at the meeting,
> Brian Winer (Ohio State), said that the *most Higgs-like Higgs
> event* seen so far was on in which (it is surmised) the
> proton-antiproton collision at the Tevatron had created a fireball
> which then decayed into a W boson (one of the carriers of the weak
> nuclear force) and a Higgs particle. The Higgs in turn quickly
> decayed into a bottom-antibottom quark pair whose combined mass
> amounted to 120 GeV. By itself such an event does not constitute a
> discovery. Successfully observing the Higgs involves finding an
> inventory of candidate events substantially larger than the number
> of expected background events from collisions which to not produce a
> Higgs particle but which mimic some features of the Higgs.
> Time (and luminosity) will tell whether the Tevatron accumulates
> enough Higgs candidate events to establish a
> statistically-satisfactory *discovery.* One Tevatron physicist,
> Dmitri Denisov (denis...@fnal.gov) summarized the likely status of
> things when the experiments (the CDF and D0 detector groups) start
> to wrap up in the year 2010. The luminosity, he said, would
> probably be twice what it is now and that 4 to 8 times more data
> would be analyzed than is available today.
>
> The Higgs, if it exists, is expected to show up in abundance at the
> LHC, where the collision energy is much higher than at the
> Tevatron. Abraham Seiden (a...@scipp.ucsc.edu) of UC Santa Cruz
> summarized the current status of the LHC. In the CERN lab
> scientists and engineers are now chilling down the magnets which
> steer protons around their proper trajectory to the
> near-absolute-zero temperatures needed for operating in a
> superconducting mode. Although designed to produce proton beams at
> 7 TeV, the accelerator will at first hold to a more conservative 5
> TeV. As for the present schedule, Seiden quoted a recent CERN
> report specifying mid June as the time when the machine would be
> cooled and ready to circulate beams around the ring and August as
> the time when actual particle collisions will commence. However,
> several scientists at the meeting, when asked, were somewhat
> skeptical that this timeline would be met.
>
> As for the prospective scenario for discoveries at LHC in coming
> years, Seiden said that finding evidence for a supersymmetric
> particle (one of a large family of hypothetical particles) might be
> possible as early as the year 2009, while finding the Higgs might be
> possible by 2010.
>
> ***********
> PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE is a digest of physics news items arising
> from physics meetings, physics journals, newspapers and
> magazines, and other news sources. It is provided free of charge
> as a way of broadly disseminating information about physics and
> physicists. For that reason, you are free to post it, if you like,
> where others can read it, providing only that you credit AIP.
> Physics News Update appears approximately once a week.
---------------------
the Higgs boson is **dead by arrival **!!
it was right from the beginning only for suckers and crooks
business
and WHAT a waist of time and human resources !!!
it is only for dumb mathematiciens
dumb crackparroters who have not the minimal basic
physics understanding !!!
Y.Porat
------------------
Y.Porat
> On Aug 18, 4:25 pm, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > If after all of the tests in the LHC, they don't find the Higgs boson?
> > How will that affect the existing theories like the Standard Model. How
> > will it affect the successor models, like Superstings or Quantum Gravity?
>
> > Yousuf Khan
>
> energy scale. If the Higgs doesn't appear, then something else
> dramatic has to happen, because the theory doesn't hold up internally
> without something happening. Either way, it will be fun.
----------------
one of the funs will be
to find the 'Circlon'
a very basic particle that moves **naturally* in closed circles !!
ATB
Y.Porat
------------------------------
PD
That would be fun indeed, because it would be the very first known
instance of any object whatsoever that violates conservation of
momentum.
We'll see.
Y.Porat
---------------------
do you insist of being an idiot ??
is Einsteins curved space movement
violate the conseravtion of momentum ???
is our earth that orbits the sun violate the conseravtion of momentum?
you ddint understand the Circlon idea
go look again for it
or get some expalnations from me
not in parot land
Y.Porat
-------------------
Jan Panteltje
<TheDrap...@gmail.com> wrote in
<db197194-0f49-4bdf...@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>:
>> one of the funs will be
>> to find the 'Circlon'
>>
>> a very basic particle that moves **naturally* in closed circles !!
>
>That would be fun indeed, because it would be the very first known
>instance of any object whatsoever that violates conservation of
>momentum.
>
>We'll see.
I would expect them to stumble across the 'duct tape particle'.
Nature invented things before us in many cases,
and the 'duct tape particle' would hold everything together nicely.
;-)
socratus
bombarding them with high energy a- particles.
This idea helped him understand the structure of atom.
But the clever Devil interfered and gave advice to physicists to
enlarge the target.
Bomb them!
And physicist created huge cannon-accelerators of particles.
And they began to bomb micro particles in the vacuum, in hoping to
understand
their inner structure. And they were surprised with the results of
this bombing.
Several hundreds of completely new strange particles appeared.
They lived a very little time and do not relate to our world.
Our Earth needs its real constants of nature. But this was
forgotten.
What God carefully created, is destroyed in accelerators.
And they are proud of that. They say: we study the inner structure of
the particles.
The clever and artful Devil is glad. He again has deceived man.
Physicist think, that an accelerator - is first of all the presence
of huge energy.
And the Devil laughs.
He knows, that an accelerator - is first of all the Vacuum.
But this, he has withheld from man.
He has not explained that the Vacuum is infinite and inexhaustible.
And in infinity there is contained an infinite variety of particles.
And by bombing the vacuum, one can find centaurs and sphinxes.
But my God, save us from their presence on Earth.
========= .. ========.
Rutherford was right.
His followers are mistaken.
Why?
Imagine, that I want to plant a small apple- tree.
For this purpose I shall dig out a hole of 1 meter width and 1,20 m
depth.
It is normal.
But if to plant a small apple- tree, I shall begin to dig
a base for a huge building (skyscraper),
or if to begin drill ground with 10 km. depth,
will you call me a normal man?
========== .. ===============.
Imagine a man who breaks watches on the wall.
And then he tries to understand the mechanism of the watches
by thrown cogwheels, springs and small screws.
Does he have many chances to succeed?
As many as the scientists have who aspire to understand
the inner structure of electron by breaking them into accelerators.
=========================================
Israel Sadovnik/ Socratus.
PD
No. Those are straight line paths. This is being discussed in a
different thread.
Are you suggesting that circlons go around in circles because of
spacetime curvature?
>
> is our earth that orbits the sun violate the conseravtion of momentum?
No. The Earth does not orbit the sun because it does so *naturally*.
It does so because there is a *force* between the sun and the earth.
Is there a *force* present that makes the circlon go around in a
circle? You said it just does it by its nature.
Y.Porat
than look again my response in that thread
idefined a straigh tline movenet as the movement of the *photon*
and told you that if you watch a ship in sea
sailing further into sea
you dont see it at last
the ship is moving on a curved paln
th ephoton ismoving in a straigh tline
AND IT I SNOT THE SAME !!!
so you have to decide whether your attration agents
move in straight lines or in another way !!!
if those messengersmove in straight lines
to thier" target "
they have a momentum to push the acted object
not to pull it!!
so i guess
that it is rather ** you **
who have a conservation of momentum violation and not
my Circlon
or at least both of us have it in a similar way
the only difference between me and you
is that you dont understand what is happening there
it has ain intrinsic contardiction
andin my explations
once you accept my postulate (yes it is a postualte )
that there are
basic particles tha t move naturally in curved lines
**there is no more any self contradiction !!!**
and mind you
a postulate is judged by its ability to explian
and later predict physics
anyway
a postulate must be first logic qualitatively
and that is what i ma doing now !!
btw
it seems that we are wratting
but i think that still our dsicussion is very beneficial
and interestig !!!
and i thank you fo rthat ....
TIA
Y.Porat
--------------
Y.Porat
> On a sunny day (Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:23:46 -0700 (PDT)) it happened PD
> <db197194-0f49-4bdf-9b87-1a7ddb315...@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >> one of the funs will be
> >> to find the 'Circlon'
>
> >> a very basic particle that moves **naturally* in closed circles !!
>
> >That would be fun indeed, because it would be the very first known
> >instance of any object whatsoever that violates conservation of
> >momentum.
>
> >We'll see.
>
> I would expect them to stumble across the 'duct tape particle'.
> Nature invented things before us in many cases,
> and the 'duct tape particle' would hold everything together nicely.
>
> ;-)
please explain how
and if you dont mind see the appendix of my site:
the Circlon idea
http://sites.google.com/site/theyporatmodel/an-abstract
TIA
Y.Porat
----------------------------
Dirk Van de moortel
d87980c8-7bb7-49eb...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com
When Porat is instructed to take the shortest possible route
from city A to city B, Porat does not move. He knows that
the shortest way is through a tunnel in a "straight line", and he
knows there is no such tunnel, so he stays where he is.
If you tell him that you mean the "shortest possible route without
tunneling" or the "shortest possible route along the surface of the
planet", then Porat says: "Impossible, there is no tunnel!".
Then you ask "but don't you understand what I mean?".
Then Porat says "you don't understand what you ask, since
there is no tunnel!".
Dirk Vdm
Y.Porat
SperM.hotmail.com> wrote:
> Y.Porat <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> d87980c8-7bb7-49eb-8c29-529cdd7f5...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com
Dirk
please dont put wordsin my mouth
i say soemething different:
i say that the shortest line is a straigh t line
**as a photon moves in vacum as well**
now PD insists to drag me to walk **only** on our globe!! as if it
is the
only movement in the Univers !!
while you are right
th e sortest straigh tline is a tunel
**if you insist that everything in our Univers
is like walking on **our globe**
and in that case you need to grind a tumel
in case of insist walkink in a straight line *on our globe*
but who told you that this methaphor is presenting reality
in all other cases in our Univers??
(just because PD said so ??)
unless
you take it APRIORY ! as a global law (universal law )
ie the only case that rules every were ??
2
see later all absurdities that PD will take us
actually tit is not his absurdities
he is just parroting others
so it is not his 'copyright'
the only thing i will blame him later
is being a parrot
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------
Dirk Van de moortel
[snip porc]
>> When Porat is instructed to take the shortest possible route
>> from city A to city B, Porat does not move. He knows that
>> the shortest way is through a tunnel in a "straight line", and he
>> knows there is no such tunnel, so he stays where he is.
>> If you tell him that you mean the "shortest possible route without
>> tunneling" or the "shortest possible route along the surface of the
>> planet", then Porat says: "Impossible, there is no tunnel!".
>> Then you ask "but don't you understand what I mean?".
>> Then Porat says "you don't understand what you ask, since
>> there is no tunnel!".
>>
>> Dirk Vdm
> ---------------
> Dirk
> please dont put wordsin my mouth
I rather had put something else in that orifice of yours,
but alas, that is not possible trhough Usenet.
Ah well.
Dirk Vdm
Y.Porat
> On Aug 19, 6:03 pm, "Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
>
> SperM.hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Y.Porat <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > d87980c8-7bb7-49eb-8c29-529cdd7f5...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com
>
> > > On Aug 19, 4:43 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Aug 19, 8:33 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> On Aug 19, 4:23 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
and another question to PD and the psychopath Van Der Shmate
lets take th e first case (case No 1):
a ship is traveling away from us standing on the shore
we see it as sinking down while moving on our curved globe
with curvature No 1 that is a different movement from the straight
line
(which is presented by the photons that enable us to see the ship)
now
suppose that our globe was the same volume size
**but half its mass as today **
(let it be case No 2)
and a ship travels away from you further and further away
you see it as sinking into the horizon while
still moving on the ** same surface and orriginal radius of
curvature ) of our curved globe
and you see it 'sinking'
ie moving different from the straight line
with the same curvature as in case No 1
now
how is it that **space is curving the movement of our ship**
**the same way and magnitude as
in case no 1 as well as in case No 2??
while the mass our globe was decreased 50 percent ??
(or may be you think that in case No 2 it will start flying
above the water ?? with a different curvature ?? )
TIA
Y.Porat
------------------------
Y.Porat
-----------------------------
lets examine PD s logic ::
while i claimed that a particle that moves naturally in a closed
circle
should be found n the LHC
he saied:
'it is violationg conservation of momentum
so i said:
what about he earths orbiting around the sun?
is it not violating the conseravation of momentum
and PD reply above is:
it is not a natural movement it is done by force agents
so my question now is
if our orbiting around sun is due to force agents
and not **naturally* by the CURVATURE OF SPACE
but by
FORCE AGENTS
WAHT IS THE NEED OR USE OF 'CURVATURE OF SPACE'
in our case of orbiting the sun ???
and we are not done yet
if it is done by **force agents*
why is this case
(with your force agents )
not*** a violation of conservation of momentum??!!
iow
how do those force agents work
without violation of momentum law
do they move in straight lines?
if they move in straight lines they have momentum
to push our earth outside not inside!!
do they move in curved lines??
may be that is closer to the Circlon idea ??
but you said that the curved motion idea is violating
mometum laws
or may be our orbiting around the sun is not a curved motion??
it is actually according to PD &CO actually
a straigh t line movement and we are actually drunk
not to notice it
and if it is really a straight line **natural **movement
**what is th e need in force messengers ??!!
do we deal with people
who really know what are they talking about ??
bottom line
better look for a basic particle that moves naturally
in curved lines
it will make things much simpler and less confused
and less contradictory
unless
PD &CO. that disappeared
will come in and settle things **reasonable **
TIA
Y.Porat
----------------------------------
Y
I hope they find the Hippaseon. . .
zzbu...@netscape.net
Why, for the same reason people started that Madam Curie was right
and her were followers. Since it was the people who understand
logic, machines,
and evolution that disocvered lasers, masers, digital compression,
adaptive A.I.
and robots, rather than atoms or x-rays.
Y.Porat
wrote:
once you stop just empty (assertive (:-)) hand waving
then may be someone will consider you arguments
as advancing us
iow
just be more specific with physics data etc
and i
forget , for a moment of grace , that you are a politician ....
ATB
Y.Porat
---------------------------------
Y.Porat
------------
imbecile clown
i was talking about
a particle that moves naturally in closed circles
if not disturbed on its way
in order of detecting something like that
then as a beginning you have to find in that LHC
just traces of something moving in circles
moreover i directed people to my link
in which they can see a whole systematic model
and at the appendix
showed for the first time ever
how such a particle can make attraction forces
if you didint see my link
just do it
then try to operate your parrots mind
to understand at least something of it
and only then come back to us
with all your glorious wisdom !!
of curved space time etc etc
and how it works TOGETHER WITH GRAVITONS etc
and virtual particle that are 90 times bigger than their mother
etc
and aprticles that in onesecnd ahve mass
and the next do not have mass and vice versa
(you name it !! (as there is no shame in the eyes of mathematicians
that call themselves physicists !)
and then finds particles
withe the probability of one to a few billions
neglecting and forgetting all the * other discovered 'animals'
there*
that do not fit them etc etc
btw
may be you can tell us what is your real name??
because i have some hunch that someone
that comes here as an anonymous
there is something rotten about his integrity !!
and his 'bon affide' motivations !!
TIA
Y.Porat
-------------------
zzbu...@netscape.net
It's not an atgument, it's a statement of facts.
There is no possible advancemnt in the study atoms,
since there is no thinking with it either. It's a
religion.
> iow
> just be more specific with physics data etc
> and i
> forget , for a moment of grace , that you are a politician ....
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Imagine, that I want to plant a small apple- tree.
> > > For this purpose I shall dig out a hole of 1 meter width and 1,20 m
> > > depth.
> > > It is normal.
> > > But if to plant a small apple- tree, I shall begin to dig
> > > a base for a huge building (skyscraper),
> > > or if to begin drill ground with 10 km. depth,
> > > will you call me a normal man?
> > > ========== .. ===============.
> > > Imagine a man who breaks watches on the wall.
> > > And then he tries to understand the mechanism of the watches
> > > by thrown cogwheels, springs and small screws.
> > > Does he have many chances to succeed?
> > > As many as the scientists have who aspire to understand
> > > the inner structure of electron by breaking them into accelerators.
> > > =========================================
> > > Israel Sadovnik/ Socratus.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Y.Porat
presence on Earth.
> > > > ========= .. ========.
> > > > Rutherford was right.
> > > > His followers are mistaken.
> > > > Why?
>
> > > Why, for the same reason people started that Madam Curie was right
> > > and her were followers. Since it was the people who understand
> > > logic, machines,
> > > and evolution that disocvered lasers, masers, digital compression,
> > > adaptive A.I.
> > > and robots, rather than atoms or x-rays.
>
> > -------------------------
> > once you stop just empty (assertive (:-)) hand waving
> > then may be someone will consider you arguments
> > as advancing us
>
> It's not an atgument, it's a statement of facts.
> There is no possible advancemnt in the study atoms,
> since there is no thinking with it either. It's a
> religion.
do you talk about my model ??
did you ever saw it??
if not you are invited to see it
and talk about it
only after seeing it and understanding
at least ** something of it !!*
TIA
Y.Porat
---------------------------------------------
Y.Porat
> Y Porat I predict the Cern will not release the Higgs Its much to
> heavy. Think what Schwartz told us back in 1972 Bert
-----------
what was Schwartz telling us i dont remember
anyway
we dont need Schwartz
we can reffere it ourselves
i just dont understand
why all those guys of the LHC do not understand it ??
ATB
Y.Porat
---------------------------