Jesus, I trust in You.

[dellery]

Since academic journals are too... Well, academic, for Joshua and GP, here is an article based on the article I posted.

The researchers found that while scientists agree that the experiments with the CERN particle accelerator resulted in the discovery of a new particle and that the calculations indicate this newly found particle is the Higgs Boson, there was no conclusive evidence that proves the particle was indeed the God particle.

Although it is possible that scientists at CERN have indeed detected the Higgs particle, Frandsen said that there can be other possible explanations for the data since these can also be gathered from other particles.

"The current data is not precise enough to determine exactly what the particle is. It could be a number of other known particles," Frandsen said.

Frandsen explained that what may have been discovered was the so-called techni-higgs particle. The techni-higgs particle has some similarities with the Higgs particle and the two can be easing confused in experiments but these two particles are very different from each other.[/qoute]

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/19832/20141110/did-or-did-not-cern-discover-higgs-boson-particle-we-deserve-to-know.htm


This is why I suggested you re-read the abstract, Joshua.

[Joshua119]

wow, just keep digging the hole. The quote you posted, and the article that you took it from, quite clearly state scientists agree that the experiments with the CERN particle accelerator resulted in the discovery of a new particle and that the calculations indicate this newly found particle is the Higgs Boson

All that article says is that further testing will be done to prove that it was indeed the higgs-boson. This is radically different from the "not discovered" agenda that you keep pushing.

[dellery]

It has not been found with a certainty, which is what I've been saying.

Why couldn't you gather this from the journalal article I posted?? Because you don't know what you're talking about and have never studied this topic. And you accuse me of pride...

[Joshua119]

It has not been found with a certainty, which is what I've been saying.

Why couldn't you gather this from the journalal article I posted?? Because you don't know what you're talking about and have never studied this topic. And you accuse me of pride...

ah, insults again. I couldn't gather it from the articles that you posted because they didn't support your claim. Also, you claimed that it had not been discovered at all, and now your changing the story.

As for my qualifications, I've never claimed to be a scientist, yet the two scientists posting on this thread seem to back up what I say, so tell me dellery, what are your qualifications?

[dellery]

I haven't insulted you at all, and the articles I've posted are both directly related, and support my claim that the HB has not been found with a certainty. Don't start lying, because everything I've written can be verified.

[Joshua119]

I haven't insulted you at all, and the articles I've posted are both directly related, and support my claim that the HB has not been found with a certainty. Don't start lying, because everything I've written can be verified.

hmmmm, interesting how you avoided my question about your qualifications while simultaneously accusing me of lying.

See, when I asked GP and Q for evidence, they provided it to me in plain english articles that I could understand. You, on the other hand, tried to confuse the non scientists here with highly technical articles.

Of course, it backfired for you because, while I am not a scientist, I am an scholar of english literature, and so was able to read the articles clearly, despite their technical language, and so was not swayed by the fact that they did not support your claims regarding the higgs-boson.

Pax has provided absolutely no evidence for anything that he has said. It's interesting to me that the two people who are actually qualified to talk about this subject were also the only two to provide clear evidence for what they said.

So, unless you can prove that you are more qualified than Q, who is a research scientist with (if my memory is correct) a PhD in physics, then I have no further interest in your false claims.

[GloriaPatri]

The certainty with which the discovered particle is believed to be the HB is in the 5sigma to 6sigma range. The chance of it not being the HB is a 1/2,000,000 to 1/500,000,000. Face it, Dellery, particle physicists universally believe that the discovered particle is the Higgs. It behaves exactly as the Higgs should, decays as the Higgs should, and has the same fundamental properties that the Higgs should have. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and lays eggs like a duck, it's a duck.

[pax]

Every picture taken by the hubble shows us to be smack dab in the middle of the universe.

[dellery]

The certainty with which the discovered particle is believed to be the HB is in the 5sigma to 6sigma range. The chance of it not being the HB is a 1/2,000,000 to 1/500,000,000. Face it, Dellery, particle physicists universally believe that the discovered particle is the Higgs. It behaves exactly as the Higgs should, decays as the Higgs should, and has the same fundamental properties that the Higgs should have. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and lays eggs like a duck, it's a duck.

I posted an article from an academic journal and you weren't even able to understand it. Forgive me if I discard your pontifications in favor of the research done by the scientists at the University of Denmark.

[GloriaPatri]

The certainty with which the discovered particle is believed to be the HB is in the 5sigma to 6sigma range. The chance of it not being the HB is a 1/2,000,000 to 1/500,000,000. Face it, Dellery, particle physicists universally believe that the discovered particle is the Higgs. It behaves exactly as the Higgs should, decays as the Higgs should, and has the same fundamental properties that the Higgs should have. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and lays eggs like a duck, it's a duck.

I posted an article from an academic journal and you weren't even able to understand it. Forgive me if I discard your pontifications in favor of the research done by the scientists at the University of Denmark.

The same article that admits, in its own abstract , that the Higgs Boson was discovered at the LHC? That article? Because that final sentence, "This indicates that the discovered Higgs boson is consistent with the TC Higgs hypothesis for several TC theories." contradicts everything you've been saying about the Higgs not being discovered. Or are you incapable of reading basic English?

[GloriaPatri]

Every picture taken by the hubble shows us to be smack dab in the middle of the universe.

No it doesn't. Stop spouting off nonsense. If you're going to continue posting, at least attempt to provide evidence for your inane assertions.

[pax]

The LQG is what gives us our bearings in space. It also is direct observational evidence that the CP is wrong. We always see ourselves in the middle of the universe, and the LQG shows us that we really are in the middle.

[dellery]

The certainty with which the discovered particle is believed to be the HB is in the 5sigma to 6sigma range. The chance of it not being the HB is a 1/2,000,000 to 1/500,000,000. Face it, Dellery, particle physicists universally believe that the discovered particle is the Higgs. It behaves exactly as the Higgs should, decays as the Higgs should, and has the same fundamental properties that the Higgs should have. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and lays eggs like a duck, it's a duck.

I posted an article from an academic journal and you weren't even able to understand it. Forgive me if I discard your pontifications in favor of the research done by the scientists at the University of Denmark.

The same article that admits, in its own abstract , that the Higgs Boson was discovered at the LHC? That article? Because that final sentence, "This indicates that the discovered Higgs boson is consistent with the TC Higgs hypothesis for several TC theories." contradicts everything you've been saying about the Higgs not being discovered. Or are you incapable of reading basic English?

You have to read the whole thing, and not dissect favorable pieces of calloquialism to prove your point. In which case if you understood the abstract, you'd realize there is a problem declaring the matter settled, when findings of a hypothesis are consistent with several different theories!  The techtimes article further affirms this fact. If further testing needs to be done, then the matter has not been settled, and the fabled Higgs-Boson hasn't been found with a certainty. To quote the tech times article, again -- since the study's abstract has caused so much confusion.

The current data is not precise enough to determine exactly what the particle is. It could be a number of other known particles," Frandsen said.

Frandsen explained that what may have been discovered was the so-called techni-higgs particle. The techni-higgs particle has some similarities with the Higgs particle and the two can be easily confused in experiments but these two particles are very different from each other.