The Higgs-Boson, was Aristotle right?

by BurnTheShips 8 Replies latest jw friends

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    Pretty interesting thoughts. I am sure some physics geeks will have something to say:

    Was Aristotle right about "ether"? LHC may tell us.

    With all the recent buzz about the LHC and its awsomeness and/or ability to destroy the galaxy, or at least put a stop to the damn replicators, what is one of the things that might come out of it?

    In a nutshell, Aristotle's notion about "ether" posited that there existed this "stuff" that permeated everywhere and everything. IOW, empty space really wasn't empty. It was full of stuff we couldn't see or detect cuz we were too stupid at the time to see or detect it.

    The Michelson-Morley Experiment was used to discredit the notion of "ether". However, M-M's results would really only hold if the "ether" were stationary fixed stuff, sort of like a 3-D Newtonian space, with the whole of the universe moving around inside this stationary fixed stuff. Essentially, the ether itself was a reference point. That M-M observed no difference in the speed of light in their experiment was deemed proof that this stationary fixed ether didn't exist. Lorentz and some other heavyweights viewed the results differently claiming the ether imposed a contraction effect on the M-M apparatus, but they lost the argument and Einstein's special relativity held the day.
    Enter the theoretical Higgs Boson. The simplified concept of Higgs Boson is somewhat analogous to Aristotle's old notion of Ether. There's a field of HB out there that are interacting with known particles. When a particle interacts with a HB, one of the things the theoretical HB is supposed to do is give the attribute we know as mass.

    So, one of the things the LHC will be looking to prove or disprove is the existence of the Higgs Boson. If the HB exists, Lorentz and Aristotle can be scientifically "rehabilitated" to a large degree and Einstein goes in the doghouse.

    Pretty heady stuff. Having a kickass doomsday weapon that will stop the replicators seems to be the most practical everyday result though. I'm still a bit concerned and took out some extra life insurance just in case we destroy the universe by accident.

    BTS

  • Octarine Prince
    Octarine Prince

    I have posted this about five or six times here:

    The truth is in the ether.

  • Caedes
    Caedes
    If the HB exists, Lorentz and Aristotle can be scientifically "rehabilitated" to a large degree and Einstein goes in the doghouse.

    Has the scientific community been informed?

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    Has the scientific community been informed?

    Lets take a light-hearted approach, shall we? This is just speculation. But interesting nonetheless.

  • drwtsn32
    drwtsn32

    Certainly general relativity will not be thrown completely out the window. It works so well and has been validated by experiment after experiment.

  • Caedes
    Caedes
    Lets take a light-hearted approach, shall we? This is just speculation. But interesting nonetheless.

    You mean you were presenting this as serious?

  • Caedes
    Caedes
    I doubt it also. But who knows? Newtonian physics seemed unassailable at one time.

    Relativity didn't replace newtonian physics, newtonian physics are still used to this day. Any 'new' physics will be compatible with results obtained using the 'old' physics.

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Hahaha. Hey, ninja is back. Welcome back.

    S

  • Octarine Prince
    Octarine Prince

    "And we know relativity doesn't work at the quantum level. Maybe some day relativity will be replaced by a more advanced theory that *does* incorporate the quantum world..."


    That is the whole driving force behind the LHC.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit