Page 2 of 3
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:20 am
by 1over137
to the always-existence of the Higgs:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/ ... sfeed=true
"The Higgs field has always existed, but the specific form of the potential energy of the field changed as the Universe cooled after the Big Bang. This change in the potential energy of the Higgs field is known as a 'phase transition'.
Before this phase transition occurred, the Higgs field had a specific potential energy which meant that none of the particles in the Universe had a mass.
After the phase transition occurred, during which the potential energy of the Higgs field changed subtly, some of the particles became massive whilst others like the photon remained massless.
So in short - the Higgs field has always existed, but the exact form of its potential energy changed as the Universe cooled. It was this change which caused some particles to become heavy whilst others remained massless."
There is a question, what caused the Higgs potential to change?
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:22 am
by Reactionary
PaulSacramento wrote:Now, IF we have a particle that seems to have always existed ( since it doesn't need anything to make it exist - self-existing) then, IF this particle can cause energy and "life" to "happen", then there is no reason to think that it would NOT have eventually caused the "big bang".
But how could we know if this particle has always existed?
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:33 am
by PaulSacramento
Reactionary wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:Now, IF we have a particle that seems to have always existed ( since it doesn't need anything to make it exist - self-existing) then, IF this particle can cause energy and "life" to "happen", then there is no reason to think that it would NOT have eventually caused the "big bang".
But how could we know if this particle has always existed?
Hence the great and all powerful "IF".
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:37 am
by PaulSacramento
1over137 wrote:to the always-existence of the Higgs:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/ ... sfeed=true
"The Higgs field has always existed, but the specific form of the potential energy of the field changed as the Universe cooled after the Big Bang. This change in the potential energy of the Higgs field is known as a 'phase transition'.
Before this phase transition occurred, the Higgs field had a specific potential energy which meant that none of the particles in the Universe had a mass.
After the phase transition occurred, during which the potential energy of the Higgs field changed subtly, some of the particles became massive whilst others like the photon remained massless.
So in short - the Higgs field has always existed, but the exact form of its potential energy changed as the Universe cooled. It was this change which caused some particles to become heavy whilst others remained massless."
There is a question, what caused the Higgs potential to change?
It's very nature, supposedly.
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:52 am
by 1over137
to the Big Bang (or rather inflation):
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... iggs-boson.
"It could be that the main target of the collider's current experiments, the Higgs boson, which is thought to endow all matter with mass, could also be this inflationary agent."
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 7:00 am
by PaulSacramento
1over137 wrote:to the Big Bang (or rather inflation):
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... iggs-boson.
"It could be that the main target of the collider's current experiments, the Higgs boson, which is thought to endow all matter with mass, could also be this inflationary agent."
Like I said, some people really WANT this to be so.
Their faith in what COULD be is very interesting, LOL !
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 7:12 am
by RickD
So basically, some will believe this "Higgs bosom" is eternal, therefore there would be no need for an eternal God?
What about the scientists who are Christian? What so they think the significance of this is?
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 7:13 am
by narnia4
Pretty interesting stuff.
I haven't really noticed people taking this as a new argument for a naturalistic origin of the universe.. Actually, I would expect guys like William Lane Craig to be pretty happy since his favorite cosmological arguments rely on the standard model.
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 7:18 am
by PaulSacramento
RickD wrote:So basically, some will believe this "Higgs bosom" is eternal, therefore there would be no need for an eternal God?
What about the scientists who are Christian? What so they think the significance of this is?
Another of God's 'Building blocks" has been discovered.
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:26 pm
by twinc
PaulSacramento wrote:Reactionary wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:Now, IF we have a particle that seems to have always existed ( since it doesn't need anything to make it exist - self-existing) then, IF this particle can cause energy and "life" to "happen", then there is no reason to think that it would NOT have eventually caused the "big bang".
But how could we know if this particle has always existed?
Hence the great and all powerful "IF".
can anything exist without someone being aware of its existence - twinc
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 8:25 pm
by RickD
twinc wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:Reactionary wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:Now, IF we have a particle that seems to have always existed ( since it doesn't need anything to make it exist - self-existing) then, IF this particle can cause energy and "life" to "happen", then there is no reason to think that it would NOT have eventually caused the "big bang".
But how could we know if this particle has always existed?
Hence the great and all powerful "IF".
can anything exist without someone being aware of its existence - twinc
Yes/no/maybe
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:15 am
by twinc
yes/no/maybe/maybe not - twinc
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:18 am
by PaulSacramento
twinc wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:Reactionary wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:Now, IF we have a particle that seems to have always existed ( since it doesn't need anything to make it exist - self-existing) then, IF this particle can cause energy and "life" to "happen", then there is no reason to think that it would NOT have eventually caused the "big bang".
But how could we know if this particle has always existed?
Hence the great and all powerful "IF".
can anything exist without someone being aware of its existence - twinc
Of course, till the first black swans were found in Australia, everyone though there were only white ones but of course those black ones DID exist and no one knew about them.
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:22 am
by RickD
PaulSacramento wrote:twinc wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:Reactionary wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:Now, IF we have a particle that seems to have always existed ( since it doesn't need anything to make it exist - self-existing) then, IF this particle can cause energy and "life" to "happen", then there is no reason to think that it would NOT have eventually caused the "big bang".
But how could we know if this particle has always existed?
Hence the great and all powerful "IF".
can anything exist without someone being aware of its existence - twinc
Of course, till the first black swans were found in Australia, everyone though there were only white ones but of course those black ones DID exist and no one knew about them.
But Paul, I'm sure the aborigines knew about them. And God. Are you saying God and the aborigines aren't someones?
Re: Physicists find new particle
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 7:01 am
by PaulSacramento
Sorry, I wasn't clear, but I was pointing out that not knowing that soemthing exists doesn't mean it DOESN'T exist, it means that YOU/WE don't know that it does.
Our knowledge of something, or lack there of, has NOTHING to do with that something.