Evidence for God from Science

Physics is really hard for me to understand, so most of the articles I've been reading have made very little sense. But, from what I can gather, it appears that this particle- IF proven to exist- just explains that matter has mass, and forces of nature keep everything together. If anything to me, it only points to complete organization of life and creation; that life is not random. It seems to just explain the 'why' instead of the 'how'.
But, as I said already, most of the stuff I'm reading up on is going over my head.

mwaltman wrote:Physics is really hard for me to understand, so most of the articles I've been reading have made very little sense. But, from what I can gather, it appears that this particle- IF proven to exist- just explains that matter has mass, and forces of nature keep everything together. If anything to me, it only points to complete organization of life and creation; that life is not random. It seems to just explain the 'why' instead of the 'how'.
But, as I said already, most of the stuff I'm reading up on is going over my head.

If it is indeed the boson proposed by Higgs then it solidifies the standard big bang model and that can only be a positive thing for theism.

If it is indeed the boson proposed by Higgs then it solidifies the standard big bank model and that can only be a positive thing for theism.

Byblos, what does Bank of America have to do with Higgin's bosom?

Inflaton field and the Higgs field does not have to be the same thing. And now I learned that the inflaton field (responsible for inflation) cannot be the Higgs field.

"In the early proposal of Guth, it was thought that the inflaton was the Higgs field, the field which explains the mass of the elementary particles.[36] It is now known that the inflaton cannot be the Higgs field." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology))

Anyway, if Higgs boson exists as an uncomposed particle, it means that scalar particles (bosons) with spin 0 exists in the universe. So then also inflaton can exists. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflaton for inflaton)

RickD wrote:

If it is indeed the boson proposed by Higgs then it solidifies the standard big bang model and that can only be a positive thing for theism.

Byblos, what does Bank of America have to do with Higgin's bosom?

Why I don't know what you're talking about Rick.

Byblos wrote:

RickD wrote:

If it is indeed the boson proposed by Higgs then it solidifies the standard big bang model and that can only be a positive thing for theism.

Byblos, what does Bank of America have to do with Higgin's bosom?

Why I don't know what you're talking about Rick.

Sly as a fox, cunning as a serpent.

Nope, in fact God has absolutely no relation at all to the Higgs Boson.

Something I hadn't realized that is pretty cool, In September of '09 Jeff Zweerink at reasons to believe actually predicted that "within the next three years, the LHC data will reveal the elusive Higg's boson."

http://www.reasons.org/articles/lhc-in-the-news-again

That's an impressive prediction, apparently he knows his stuff.

Yeah, Jeff Zweerink is a very cool and extremely nice guy. He's interacted with me on facebook many times and has answered many questions that I've posed to him as well. Extremely great guy!

"Usually this nickname for the Higgs boson is attributed to Leon Lederman, the author of the book The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?, but the name is the result of the insistence of Lederman's publisher: Lederman had originally intended to refer to it as the "goddamn particle"." (ref.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Higg ... ious_views)

DRDS wrote:Yeah, Jeff Zweerink is a very cool and extremely nice guy. He's interacted with me on facebook many times and has answered many questions that I've posed to him as well. Extremely great guy!

Have you learned something interesting from him, you can share?

Let's see, it's been a long time since I last talked with him. The last thing I asked him was about his take on Lawrence Krauss's book and views on the origin of the universe.

I guess this was right around the time Krauss's book came out and he told me that his views are similar to Stephen Hawking's in such that they are both comfortable with some version of a "self-existent" laws of physics that brings the universe into existence. As long as the "cause" is not personal, they are both satisfied.

But then Jeff added that none of them have an explanation for why the laws of physics exist and have the capacity to cause other things to exist. So roughly that was the last time I interacted with Zweerink. Again, he's a super nice guy!

Yeah, why the laws exist...

I checked http://www.reasons.org/about/who-we-are/jeff-zweerink, impressive. I might ask him some of my questions in future.