FaithWorld

Did God stop CERN from discovering the “God particle”?

October 13, 2009

collider-1The great quantum physicist Niels Bohr once said a colleague’s new theory was crazy, but perhaps not crazy enough to be correct. Two scientists seem to have taken that approach to heart when they speculated that God may have shut down the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva to keep it from discovering the elusive “God particle.”

(Photo: Part of the Large Hadron Collider, 22 March 2007/Denis Balibouse)

According to an essay in the New York Times, the scientists are trying to explain why the collider, the world’s largest particle accelerator turned on with great fanfare in September 2008 by the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN), was closed down for major repairs just over a week later. The 3 billion-euro collider was supposed to track down the Higgs boson, a subatomic particle believed to have given mass to the universe milliseconds after the Big Bang created it some 15 billion years ago.

Physicists think this minuscule speck of matter, if ever found, could explain the mysterious code at the origin of the physical world. To know this would be to “know the mind of God”, as Einstein put it. The Nobel Prize winning physicist Leon Lederman dubbed the Higgs boson the “God particle” in a book of the same name 15 years ago.

Now, Holger Bech Nielsen of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen has reached back to the God symbolism to explain what went wrong at CERN. He and Masao Ninomiya of the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics in Kyoto have suggested, as Times science writer Dennis Overbye put it, that “the hypothesized Higgs boson, which physicists hope to produce with the collider, might be so abhorrent to nature that its creation would ripple backward through time and stop the collider before it could make one, like a time traveller who goes back in time to kill his grandfather”.

This is heavy stuff, and it gets heavier.

collider-2“It must be our prediction that all Higgs producing machines shall have bad luck,” Dr. Nielsen said in an e-mail to Overbye. In an unpublished essay, Overbye relates, Dr. Nielson said of the theory, “Well, one could even almost say that we have a model for God.” It is their guess, he went on, “that He rather hates Higgs particles, and attempts to avoid them.”

(Photo: Part of the Large Hadron Collider, 29 Nov 2006/Denis Balibouse)

We usually report about scientists who say there is no God and ridicule those who believe in Him (like the biologist and “neo-atheist” Richard Dawkins). But at the cutting edge of physics, some kind of faith seems to reappear (as in the case of Templeton Prize winner Bernard d’Espagnat). Isn’t it strange that these scientists turn so often to a “God option” to explain what they’re investigating?

Follow FaithWorld on Twitter at RTRFaithWorld

Comments
99 comments so far | RSS Comments RSS

Nonsense. Look at the picture. The LHC is a supremely complex piece of machinery. Like an F1 race car, the collider seeks to function at the forward edge of technology. It’s not just flipping on a light, mate. God speculation is off topic and misleading. Einstein began this unfortunate overlap of the sacred and the profane, but many other physicists were secular humanists: Feynman, Bohr himself and Oppenheimer. The real question is which contractor buggered the collider?

 

At the “cutting edge” is and always has been where supernaturalism lives. That’s by definition, because the purpose of gods is to provide comforting (albeit demonstrably bogus) explanations for that which can’t yet be explained. Once domething is explained, the gods disappear — only to be found again at whatever new “cutting edge” attracts humans’ interest.

If you want to win a Templeton Prize, the way to do it is to excel in some scientific endeavor and then give off hints that you might be willing to provide some credibility to those who cling to this sort of stuff because of the way it makes them feel good inside. There never has been a shortage of money to pay for “feel-good”, and that will probably never change.

Posted by Paul Davis | Report as abusive
 

There is nothing wrong with a scientist accepting the possibility that science doesn’t know enough to prove whether there is or is not a God.

There is something terribly wrong with any scientist who claims he can show that God doesn’t exist on the basis of human behavior.

If God exists he is completely natural. We just haven’t defined a branch of science that would allow us to study God. Lacking any science on the subject, all scientists can do is place their faith in their beliefs (that he does or does not exist).

 

They say that, but they probably built the thing totally wrong and it broke and they don’t want to take the blame for it. Look what god did to us man!!

Posted by person | Report as abusive
 

The possibility of the whole thing being built wrong is eminent but I don’t think that it all should be blamed on a human’s stupidity. Perhaps a higher power doesn’t want our race to figure this out…yet.

Posted by Jobis | Report as abusive
 

It cannot be speculated that a god somehow interfered with the supercollider. Because this requires us to assume a god exists. And a god has not yet been proven to exist.

Whatever the reason for the failure of CERN, there is no evidence to suggest that this reason is supernatural.

Why these scientists said this, who can say? But they were certainly not speaking in their capacity as scientists.

Most likely the failure was either:
-Poor construction.
-Construction error.
-Unanticipated component failure.
-A principle of Physics.
-Sabotage.
-Moisture
-ect.

Further investigation will reveal the actual cause. It is most likely to be something regarding engineering, construction or physics.

In the list of possible reasons, “supernatural interference” is right at the bottom of possibilities worth considering.

And those two scientists were either talking in snide, or were being quite careless in what they say. They know very well that their words will be taken at face value by theists. Perhaps they simply didn’t care?

Posted by Anon | Report as abusive
 

Reasons for the failure of CERN, in order of evidence and probability:

1. Human error.
2. Engineering factor.
3. Physics issue.
4. Sabotage.
5. Barrack Obama.
6. Voodoo.
7. Aliens.
8. Cosmic radiation.
9. String theory.
10. God.

Posted by Haha | Report as abusive
 

You obviously don’t understand their sense of humor if you think they’re “turning to god”.. hilarious!
Awesome title though, I had to have a look after that!

I don’t know.. but just maybe the collider is malfunctioning because it is the single most complicated machine on the face of the earth…?
Just a thought =)

Posted by brian | Report as abusive
 

Is this God vs God?

Posted by Phewton | Report as abusive
 

Haha… you left one out:

11. Satan

Posted by SerpentDove | Report as abusive
 

I rather wish the collider experiments will help determine precisely when an unstable nuclide decays.

Read more here: http://brainmindinst.blogspot.com/2009/0 3/schrodingers-cat-probability-science.h tml

 

Many people of Faith, just as do His detractors, place Him in the box of their creation. The Faithful define Him and then seek to control Him through religion. Atheists define Him and seek to dismiss Him as irrelevant. There appears ample evidence of the existence of an Intelligent Designer all around us, from irreducible complexity in nature to the exponentially obscure odds of a planet like ours ideally suited to life.

Science, running up against the limits of its knowledge routinely evoke His name and He rewards it by revealing more of His will to it. Physics appears to be a favourite playground for Him in doing so. He reveals Himself to us subtly and discreetly to strengthen us, rather than all at once, as with Moses and the Red Sea because He does not wish us to fall into helpless despair by witnessing His power.

Perhaps He has decided that the time is not quite yet for the Higgs Boson. Perhaps a few more particle physicists on the fringes, acknowledging Him publicly, will bring that time to the present.

God be with us all. Remember. Even if Mr. Dawkins doesn’t believe in God, he believes in Mr. Dawkins.

Posted by Jack Flynn | Report as abusive
 

Engineering feats dont always work the first time round. It may take many failures and trials before the enigneering is set right, and then we will have to deal with the Physics of it. After the technical matters have been resolved, we may still have to come to grips with the physics of the device, it may throw up some new theories altogether !!

Posted by Mukesh | Report as abusive
 

There were those who worried that the Hadron Collider, in recreating the circumstances at the time of the “big bang,” would in fact cause another big bang…effectively ending the universe. Do you think maybe it did? And this is a dream?

Posted by Claiborne Clark | Report as abusive
 

Yes this is a very complex piece of machinery, and more than likely one of the reasons given above were the actual reasons behind the failure (although I will throw a spanner into the works and say how if any of these reasons is true does this not then denote that God wasn’t involved? – very similar to that fact that we now have the ability to cure ourselves of many different illnesses and diseases, but this still doesn’t denote nor disprove that a god exists to provide us with that knowledge in the first place.)

As the article points out that the Times science writer Dennis Overbye put it, that “the hypothesized Higgs boson, which physicists hope to produce with the collider, might be so abhorrent to nature that its creation would ripple backward through time and stop the collider before it could make one, like a time traveller who goes back in time to kill his grandfather”.

Similar to the whole question of which came first the Chicken or the Egg. On a little side not while Science has yet to prove that God exists, it has also yet to prove that he does not exist either.

Personally I look forward to if and when this so called ‘god’ particle is discovered. I like science and what it proves (even though I do believe in God). Why? Becuase I like to know how thinks work, and I think it is general human nature to want to know how things work, but I don’t think that this disproves God existing as everything has to have a reason behind it happening in the first place – it’s just that some things are a lot more complex to explain than others.

Posted by Matt | Report as abusive
 

Hmm, the quotes from the same scientists in the NY Times coverage of this theory managed to avoid God altogether – your take on it appears to be broadly equivalent to saying that it’s God that makes the apple fall. All they’re saying is that a naked Higgs particle, like a naked singularity, is unobservable.

It’s a fun theory though, and I’m definitely in favour of conducting the “luck” experiment they propose.

There is of course an equally entertaining alternative theory which is that in a parallel universe the experiment did work and did create a black hole – but nobody lives there anymore….

Posted by Ian Kemmish | Report as abusive
 

I’m pretty skeptical of their claim too, but if you take the time to read the scientists’ blog post linked at the top of the article, you will see that they have devised an experiment to determine over time whether “incidents” can be attributed to chance or not. They are emphatically *not* just saying that God must have done it and stopping there. As scientists, they have a hypothesis and are trying to find empirical ways to support or refute it with evidence.

Posted by Gemelli | Report as abusive
 

“In the begining God created”

Enjoy your day

Posted by Iain | Report as abusive
 

Oh please!!!!! Find the real problem, fix the CERN and continue with this 3 BILLION-EURO project!!!!!!

Posted by Vero | Report as abusive
 

i wish people would stop referring to the higgs boson as ‘the god particle’. this particle, if it exists, would not be more or less special than a photon. in fact discovering the higgs and nothing else at cern would be a boring scenario indeed, leaving us with just as many questions as we had before. the idea of a god sabotaging cern is simply silly and i am shocked it made it to what i consider a decent news outlet, such as reuters.

Posted by marcos | Report as abusive
 

If the prospect of creating a Higgs boson now is entailing the beginning of the Universe to be such as would cause as many glitches as necessary to keep it from happening, there’s no need for a god for this to be happening.

One glitch doesn’t exactly prove this!!!

I don’t think these guys are talking about your god. You don’t “have a model for” an infinite being.

Posted by Pete Cann | Report as abusive
 

On Topic:
That anyone supposes that an God is the cause for failures at CERN is the same as blaming “Murphy”. It’s anthropomorphizing a frustrating, currently unexplained event.

Tangential:
Science, if you consider Archeology a science, does support the Biblical, Christian God, by validating most of the New Testament and much of the Old Testament of the Bible. Additionally, consider that dozens of people in the first century died, because they claimed to have witnessed the risen Jesus Christ. It’s one thing to die for what you have been told and believe and quite another to die for what you believe because you are a direct witness.

Posted by galilean | Report as abusive
 

God tells me that he’s cool with the Higgs boson, would have preferred that the collider work without much additional governmental expenditure. He’s much more concerned that we accidentally create a black hole that sucks the whole solar system into oblivion.

Posted by GBT | Report as abusive
 

Does anyone think this looks an awful lot like the machine that Tony Stark built in the Iron Man movie?>LOL

 

Based on the article I don’t see any reason to believe these scientists are describing a personal, sentient God as described in Christian, and other, theology. Rather, they seem to be using God as a metaphor for nature itself — as in mother nature. The speculation seems to be that the Higgs boson particle may be so elusive within nature that mankind will never posses the correct machinery, no matter how powerful or complicated, to create the circumstances that allows the particle to be observed. Of course, it could also be the theory has hidden flaws or that these scientists are demonstrating lack of faith in human ingenuity to figure out ways of observing the Higgs boson particle. Basically, having the hubris to say “If I can’t figure it out, no one can figure it out.”

Posted by mpthompson | Report as abusive
 

Everyone is missing the obvious: these aren’t genuine physicists, they’ve been paid off by CERN’s insurance company to claim that the damage to the collider is in fact a vis major!

Occam’s Corollary: when several equally simple explanations present themselves, the most cynical explanation is probably correct…

Posted by The Obvious | Report as abusive
 

A “model for God?” I’d rather think of it as an attempt to understand what He was doing and how His creation works, although perhaps that’s just my odd thought process. Even then, I have to laugh at the idea of divine sabotage.

Let’s face it, the LHC is an unprecedented work of technology. We’ve certainly had success with smaller particle accelerators, but did we really think one of this size would work perfectly as soon as the button was pushed? Given a few more years or so to work out more kinks, I’m sure it will work splendidly. Whether or not the Higgs boson will be discovered is another matter entirely. =)

Posted by Scarlett M | Report as abusive
 

religious fruitcakes always grab the word God when it comes from the mouth of a scientist as some sort of proof that all men are actually believers, just some don’t want to believe it for some peculiar, perverted reason(s). Einstein often used the word God. Einstein did not “believe in God” in the religious sense nor do these scientists. Religion is anti-science: it seekes to annul investigation in favor of particular assertions. This thing will work – or not – because men figure it out – or don’t. Period. My bet is on success.

Posted by wildmangreen | Report as abusive
 

PPPPPFFFFFTTTtt!

Posted by Tyrone | Report as abusive
 

I HATE THIS LAZY WAY OF THINKING ,TO SUPPOSE A GOD IN EVERYTHING SOMEBODY CAN’T UNDERSTAND RIGHT NOW ! ESPECIALLY IF THIS ‘SOMEBODY’ IS A SCIENTIST .

SCIENTISTS ,BETTER USE YOUR MIND ,SKILL AND LOGIC !! OR IF YOU ARE NOT CAPABLE OR TOO LAZY TO DO SO ,BETTER GO BACK TO THE CAVES ,WHERE IS ENOUGH SPACE FOR GOD[S] !

OTHERWISE NO NEED TO REPEAT ALL THE GOOD ARGUMENTS ALREADY IN THIS BLOG

Posted by ludwig | Report as abusive
 

If any of that talk of god and time travel, on the part of those two physicists is ought but figurative analogy, whatever degrees they have, whatever keys to labs they have, i.e., any right to call themselves scientists, should be removed.

It is true that a minority of scientists are believers in some sort of fantasy they call god, but it is clear when they get down to sub-atomic physics where \”particles\” are actually nothing more than a miniscule moment, an energy bump, in the ongoing process of material reality such thinking or expression contributes to the ongoing confusion of a large part of humanity who still believe the god nonsense; nonsense because there is absolutely (Non-sequitors like \”The wonder of it all\” aside) no concrete, material, evidence that such ever existed.

From the NY Times article it is not possible to understand if the two \”scientists\” actually believe that nonsense or if it is tongue in cheek. Likewise it is not possible to understand if the writer of the article believes or is just churning out garbage because that is what he gets paid for.

At any rate the thesis of a future act turning off today\’s Collider is itself flawed insofar as if the Collider was turned off the Higgs was never produced so the future could not possibly find out it did not like Higgs.

This last of course in the best traditions of science fiction writing not the material reality of high resistance electrical connections in the Collider where nonesuch ought to be.

Jack Jersawitz

Posted by Jack Jersawitz | Report as abusive
 

It works just fine, it is the outcome that is not “just fine”

Posted by Kadius | Report as abusive
 

Brian,

complicated, yes, most complicated, no.

instructions on how to find the most complicated machine on earth:

A) Find a mirror
B) look in it

Posted by Kadius | Report as abusive
 

I thought George Bush was the reason for all failures in the world?

Posted by jeff | Report as abusive
 

Brian’s got it right. I think some people may be unprepared for the dry humour of a physicist. Remember these are the people whose name for the utterly colossal explosion at the beginning of the universe is “The Big Bang”. Understatement, perhaps?

The existence of God and how this fits in with science is an excellent debate but it’s never had a worse launchpad than this.

Posted by Thom | Report as abusive
 

since the scientist in charge cant figure out reason there theory is not manifested in success we do what most do about god “it must be gods will not to reveal these secrets at this time” pat says this “utter bull” roll up your sleaves again and get to work you wont find answers in science in the bible the “good book” has never been a technical manual for the hadron collider.why would the rules of science change for metal and material construction.as a child i was told we would never go to the moon this is gods teritory and he wont let us there. more bull

Posted by pat | Report as abusive
 

I think the malfunction is due to sabotage. Someone did not feel comfortable for one reason or another.

Posted by Larissa | Report as abusive
 

cryogenics was what whent wrong. They’ll repare it and successfuly run it. If they find Mr Higs on a blackhole is something that may worry me

Posted by Anton Malaq | Report as abusive
 

I think the scientist was using God as an analogy. The scientists who posed the theory in the first place were referring to “nature” abhorring the particle and described an extremely hypothetical, but conceivable and NATURAL mechanism for it. Just like people used to say that nature abhors a vacuum. Scientists have used the word “God” to stand in for nature, the universe, etc. for a very long time. I really don’t think that they are picturing the personal Christian God sitting up there feeling cross about us building the collider. It is more about a deeper, underlying understanding of the laws that govern the universe than about a supernatural being who can break those laws.

Posted by Hope | Report as abusive
 

“It cannot be speculated that a god somehow interfered with the supercollider. Because this requires us to assume a god exists. And a god has not yet been proven to exist.”

If you like that argument, maybe you’ll like this one too:

“It cannot be speculated that Higgs bosons will affect the supercollider, or show up in its experimental results. Because this requires us to assume that Higgs bosons exist. And they have not yet been proven to exist.”

Posted by Harry | Report as abusive
 

I’m surprised… you put Voodoo before aliens? I didn’t think of the time travel bit, I guess this thing figured out more than we thought it could.
Anyway, you can read all about the first start up last September here:
http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/News.htm
Now that things have been fixed, made better, and checked a bunch, they’re starting to cool it down again to shoot more beams around.

Posted by Douglas | Report as abusive
 

I understand the argument that science has not proved the xistence of God. However, it is improtant to look at the things science has proved the exitence of and aknowledge that they too existed prior to science proving it.

Posted by Christian | Report as abusive
 

Top 10

10: they turned it on and what they saw scared them so much they shut it down, using the old “the system crashed” excuse.
9: they fired it up and realized what they could reveal will profoundly alter the history of mankind. They needed more time to line up a publisher and movie rights to make a ton of money before hollywood gets ahold of the story.
8: They fired it up only to realize the alarmists fearing it would create a black hole singularity were right all along. Oh darn.
7: They don’t have enough in the budget for the elecric bill at least until the EU can extort more money from US companies for “anti trust”
6: The bicycle for traversing the tunnels was stolen.
5: Microsoft Vista
4: A technician spilled soda on the magnet
3: A scientist was caught with his aid under one of the magnets
2: The scientist and the technician were caught under one of the magnets
1: An angel sent by God hiself showed up to remind them that if they actually found the Higgs Boson they would indeed reveal the answer to the Universe but then there would be nothing left to do and they’d all be out of a job so keep sandbagging…

Posted by W | Report as abusive
 

Einstein also said that the evidence of God was the Laws of Thermodynamics the existence of which cannot be explained as random.

Posted by OhioOrrin | Report as abusive
 

It would once again appear that this small collection of scientist’s have avoided reading any bible containing Genisis. The creation took six days and God rested on the seventh. God said it, I believe it and that’s that!God does not stand in man’s way as this is not His world but rather Satan’s. Maybe Satan has crashed CERN.

Posted by Zydeco | Report as abusive
 

Maybe they can call Obama – he could always use a Nobel for Science…

Seriously? God doesn’t like the particle? It goes back in time to trash the future projects?

These guys must be smoking the hish hash….

Posted by Bill Cassidy | Report as abusive
 

Like Einstein said “God does not play dice”.
Humans are obviously NOT ready to have “high power in the palm of our hands” yet. We cannot even control our population or consumption rates and even care for our own DEAR DEAR BEAUTIFUL planet properly yet. Why should we know the “secrets of the universe” if we cannot even get along with ourselves or our own planet? I believe Angels are empowered by God to gate keep this knowledge until we are ready to handle it. Amen!
If you were God (or a parent) would you give a bunch of wacky, half trained teenagers a box of dynamite and blasting caps? hell no! Thank God it does not and probably will not work until our intent and actions are in the right place first. Forget Physics! This is a philosophical /faith issue first! give us more power now and we will destroy the planet even faster! we are NOT ready yet! That is just how God made the universe, it hides its secrets from those not ready! Thank God!

Posted by Scotty Beam | Report as abusive
 

Is it not possible that they are afraid to reproduce this particle that created existance, and thus may play a part in the elimination of existance?

Posted by alex | Report as abusive
 

There were/are questions about the collider that some were concerned about its ability to create a black hole that swollow its surroundings. Perhaps a loving God was the one who stepped in to prevent such a thing from happening.
We can’t just dismiss God because He doesn’t fit into our plans or ideas of who he is or what he would/should act like. The best way to understand God is to get to know him through reading what the Bible say’s about him. He wants to know each of us on a personal basis.
Then as we study and know him we can more fully understand the deep complexities of the universe as He designed it.

Posted by john maas | Report as abusive
 

It was an engineering factor, take a look at CERN T.V. you’ll see what caused it and that it is now fixed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA1E4USmg fo&feature=PlayList&p=AB4B2ABA98F92A7D&i ndex=4

Pretesting is now complete, the LHC will be fired up and tested in anger in a few weeks, so if you’re worried about the world ending becuase a load of scientific superbrains are hell bent on finding the the god particle, which may (or may not) inadvertently cause a black hole to open up, you better start praying now, you’ve got 12 days from today!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUMV1mAg8 oM

Posted by Rob | Report as abusive
 

the confusion man creates for himself,seeking what he already has,

Posted by john | Report as abusive
 

“Science, running up against the limits of its knowledge routinely evoke His name and He rewards it by revealing more of His will to it.”
What a pitiful creature he/she/it is. Full of inferiority complex the creature “rewards” us for being just mentioned.
So much for the infinite wisdom.

Posted by Axel Waxmann | Report as abusive
 

Religion and science do not have to clash. (well perhaps CERTAIN religions and science do but not all). God is a subjective term and means different thing to different people at different ages of humanity. I don’t agree that any book written 1000+ years ago has all the answers for all time (if that’s the case why are there so many versions and different branches based on those version)though I do believe the the concepts are eternal. I prefer to believe, as taught in Buddhism, that reality becomes what we make it. Your life and everything that happens in the “universe” is a product of thought, belief, and action. Banish the thought completely and nothing exists based on that.

To this end, if they do find THE particle, then it will just be that, a new particle. Perhaps the scientists suggesting the ripple effect through time are correct and perhaps not. Only time will tell but do not go blind with belief into the world, no matter what.

Posted by Chris | Report as abusive
 

rubbish. speculating physicists need to get back to work and eschew flights of fantasy.

Posted by beagle | Report as abusive
 

Einstein was right about the shortcomings of Quantum Mechanics and so therefore String Theory is also the incorrect approach. As an alternative to Quantum Theory there is a new theory that describes and explains the mysteries of physical reality. While not disrespecting the value of Quantum Mechanics as a tool to explain the role of quanta in our universe. This theory states that there is also a classical explanation for the paradoxes such as EPR and the Wave-Particle Duality. The Theory
is called the Theory of Super Relativity. Please check out our website.
This theory is a philosophical attempt to reconnect the physical universe to realism and deterministic concepts. It explains the mysterious.

Posted by msuprel | Report as abusive
 

God doesn’t exist. Get over it. It’s a shame that serious physicists and scientists up to this day are still talking about pseudoscience, metaphysics and mythology to justify their failures.

Posted by jreniel | Report as abusive
 

“It cannot be speculated that Higgs bosons will affect the supercollider, or show up in its experimental results. Because this requires us to assume that Higgs bosons exist. And they have not yet been proven to exist.”

Absolutely correct. This is why the supercollider is referred to as an “experiment”.

But the issue here is not whether the supercollider will be able to see the bosons or not.

The issue is that the scientists mentioned a deity. A supernatural concept that has no evidence of existing, and has no place in science.

Now, I admit that they were probably joking. Or just saying something to draw attention away from what is probably an expensive mistake or engineering breakdown.

But all the same, theism is not something that should be encouraged. Especially by scientists :)

Posted by Anon | Report as abusive
 

I was at the SSC in Waxahachie TX the day the US congress voted to shut it down. I was really puzzled as they were way into building the thing and were literally pouring money down a hole no doubt but shutting it down in front of the world, with its potential for scientific discovery, was very odd from my view. I kept wanting to hope of finding a more profound reason beyond what they were saying in public. And the thought occurred to me that perhaps God did have his hand in this. I mean I was inside one of the buildings doing a trade show and after the announcement people were singing hymms somewhere down the hall…weird…so please excuse my simple mindedness but the more I look, the more I tend to end up with the idea that there are powers, dimensions, forces and levels of intelligence far beyond a human creature’s ability to do things – say like create a Universe. So I really wanted to think God was putting his foot down in Waxahachie Texas at that time. What do I know? How else should such a creature as limited and flawed as me (five senses on a good day) explain things?

How far we’ve come and yet how little we know. The earth may indeed be flat after all, you 11th dimension believers.

Posted by W | Report as abusive
 

Believing in a being more powerful than humans does not make one a fruitcake. Are humans the most powerful creatures in the universe? To think so is arrogant and ignorant. It amazes me that everyone acknowledges that someone intelligent designed and built the LHC and all the amazing machines we have on this planet. Yet no one designed us? This amazing universe just happened by a complete accident, and billions of other accidents just made us out of nothing? It takes more faith to believe in that than it does to believe in a god.

Posted by Rod | Report as abusive
 

In 2009, collision was beginning.

Scientist: What happen?
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the Collider…
Technician: We get signal!
Scientist: What?
Technician: Main screen turn on.
Scientist: It’s you!!!
GODS: How are you gentlemen!!
GODS: All your bosons are belong to us.
GODS: You are on the way to destruction, make your time.
Scientist: What you say?
GODS: HA, HA, HA, HA.
Technician: Professor?
Scientist: Launch CERN.
Scientist: For great justice!
(CERN Launch)
Scientist: OH SHI—

Posted by OhBoy | Report as abusive
 

You poor, poor souls. Those of you that are in denial that there’s a God, need to come from behind the cubical, or lab, and just strt walking east or west til you come upon an ocean. leave the cell phone, and the car keys. just start walking. Sometime, we need to get out of our “eggheads” so we can see.

Posted by firerx | Report as abusive
 

Absurd! There are so many more things that science cannot explain.
Assuming that Higgs particle is the ultimate holy grail and that these scientists were about to stumble on to it, is stupid and plain arrogance.
The machine will work someday because the world has invested so much in these scientists to make it work. Let us hope that we will know a little more about our universe when it works!

Posted by Triveni | Report as abusive
 

The scientists messed up, and they’re blaming it on God…

Maybe they realized that the system really needs to do more than what it was designed for…so they need SOME sort of excuse…just blame the one who won’t answer back…

I think we have an example of politics and religion mixing. Engineers and scientists understand how this can happen.

Posted by Jeff | Report as abusive
 

So we have learn that we can. But have not learn what we must. Either this is a known conclusion,or trail and error.

Posted by e bar2 | Report as abusive
 

“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy[or science].” Hamlet – Act 1, Sc. V

This was penned almost 400 years ago.

It’s irresponsible to believe that one being controls all and just as ignorant and irresponsible to believe science can and does explain everything that has ever or will ever come to be. Someone mentioned that god doesn’t exist? Then where’s the proof to counter it? God is a loose term that can be applied to any type of belief. One could call nature god (and many scientists do) or call the belief in the non-existence of god to be god. It’s a relative notion (hmm..Einstein rings a bell as mentioning that and would you NOT call him a scientist?)

Posted by Chris | Report as abusive
 

Everything is a miracle when we don’t know what to expect. Marketing agents make a career our of making the mundane enticing.

Posted by Trus | Report as abusive
 

The scientists were unsure of what happened. So they said it was “God’s fault” as a little joke.

Because they didn’t know what went wrong, and knew they were speaking from a position of complete ignorance as to what actually happened.

Much like theism, amirite? And there’s the joke. Blame god for everything you don’t understand.

It’s just that it was just a dry joke, as with most scientists. Not something people want to take too seriously.

Posted by Hmmm | Report as abusive
 

Rod, et al: Who designed the Universe? God. Who designed God? Nobody. Fine, then nobody designed the Universe and we have no need of any god in our understanding.

Posted by Pete Cann | Report as abusive
 

“God’ how ignorant! Organized religion has brainwashed peoples throughout history, most often those among us with less knowledge or of lower intelligence to “believe” anything that was/is unexplainable or incomprehensible was/is the work of “God” and they (Organized religion) were/are the “the way” to truth and salvation. Do the words “Snake salesman” come to mind?

“God” how powerful! The irony is this imaginary power was created out of thin air by those pretending to be god’s representatives so they, not god, would have the power to control the masses and enrich themselves and the church in the process. By any definition, the vision of history is 20/20 and the vision of the future is uncertain and uncertainty causes fear which organized religion uses to comfort existing and potential followers with false promises of safe harbor and collecting an anchorage fee for their imaginary services. Can you imagine where we’d be today if we, the people of the world relied on the safe harbor and wisdom of organized religion to answer the tough and difficult questions of life and science?

Fortunately, you don’t have to have an imagination at all due to the clarity of history’s vision and organized religion’s role of obstructionist, at every turn, to humanity’s efforts to unlock the mysteries of the universe and life through science. Every aspect of our lives would be controlled by the “church state”, what we think, where we live, what we do both professionally and at home and, as history has proven, anyone who threatened the wisdom of the church state would at best be branded a “Pagan” and at worst “Devil worshiper” and burned at the stake for heresy. Our founding fathers used the vision of history to insure “Church” and “State” were separate and apart from one another for a reason. When the Large Hadron Collider problems get worked out, and they will, and when this great scientific experiment is completed, and it will be, I hope it does find the elusive Higgs boson. Chances are however that the results will more likely lead to other questions which is how science should work. As there seems to be no room for science in the house of god, neither should there be room for god in the house of science. Thank God!

Posted by Tony | Report as abusive
 

Perhaps a blessing in disguise.

Posted by TommyW | Report as abusive
 

I don’t believe that “GOD” broke the machine etc etc….
The shutdown was caused by a overheated section, due to poor cooling. After looking at pictures of the magnets out in the “LOOP” and reading some of the engineers intial reports. If the magnets arent cooled or flow is restricted, it wont work. And what makes it difficult is the fact that the damaged section of track is opposite the actual target area. It’s an extremely complex scientific “machine”, not Jules Verne.

Posted by Mike O'Connell | Report as abusive
 

These are the kind of fools which give science a bad name. If you have any understanding of quantum mechanics or even evolution. This is the kind of God that rules the universe. If there is one!

1. At the Micro scale ie electrons and atoms God hasn’t got a clue what’s happening—-everything is random and based on statistical probability. No event is determined.
God doesn’t know what is going to happen!

2. In the beginning God created millions of creatures that lived in the ocean, he then wiped them out and what arose was an ape like creature very similar to the chimpanzee and other primates. This creature over millions of years through mutation and natural selection evolved into human beings with his cousin being the chimpanzee. There DNA is 99% identical. God is probably hairy and likes to swing from the tree tops.

3. God likes to Joke that there is such a thing as a heaven and a hell—–And humans believe it.

Posted by Mark | Report as abusive
 

In reference to the religious lesson below by FireRx: Should you walk the distance north or south, you will eventually come upon an ocean as well. Because some take the paths less travelled by, does not make them more right or wrong than yours. The difference, though, is often times these roads are not paved in stone like yours and have room to change accordingly to the people and things they experience. Think about it, long and hard.

Posted by TommyW | Report as abusive
 

Ok Mr. Physicist, time for Skepticism 101: Just because you can’t explain a phenomenon doesn’t mean it was caused by a god or the supernatural.

People used to not be able to explain how volcanoes worked, so they thought there must be volcano gods (and so they threw virgins into them to appease the gods). Now we know that’s nonsense and that virgins have better things to do with their time.

Likewise, just because your machine has broken down doesn’t mean there’s a supernatural malevolence hell-bent on stopping you. Possibly it might have something to do with the fact that this is, hands down, the most complicated machine EVER built by humans. Pure reliability probabilities say that there some things bound to go wrong. That’s just the nature of complexity.

And, as an aside, the Higgs boson is not a “god particle.” The other bosons (photons, gluons, and W and Z bosons) aren’t “god particles” either. They’re primarily force carrier particles.

The Higgs boson is a boson that the current Standard Model says should be there, but we haven’t observed yet. The theory says that the Higgs boson is responsible for larger particles (like quarks and leptons) having mass. So this would be the particle that carries the mass/inertia interactions, just lilke the photon is the electromagnetic interaction boson and the W and Z bosons are the electroweak interaction bosons. So there’s nothing “god” about the Higgs boson unless “god” is mass (ha, a Catholic pun!).

However, this explains why we should be so excited about the LHC and understanding the Higgs boson and the Higgs field. Most engineers and scientists understand what a huge leap forward Maxwell’s equations were to humanity. All of our electronics: from telecommunications, to dishwashers, to TVs, to mp3 players are possible because of our deep understanding of the elecromagnetic field. Now just imagine if we were able to come up with the “Maxwell’s equations” governing the Higg’s field – the field that everything uses for mass interactions (from gravity to inertia). What amazing advances could we make? On other hand, what if the LHC shows that there’s no Higgs particle and no Higgs field? Then the exciting process of determining a better theory to explain the observed fundamental particles and interactions would begin. Either way, it will be a step forward for humanity.

So, yes, maybe “god” is reaching back from the future and putting gremlins in the magnectic coils. Or, more likely, this is one more hurtle to overcome before we make a great advancement as a species

Posted by shadowTAG | Report as abusive
 

Alternatively, an interesting (and more constructive approach) dynamic in the life-cycle for components and complex systems states a higher likelihood of failure very near activation, which decreases to a uniform likelihood estimate of random failure and in turn, a gradual increase as the estimated life-limit is approached. Act of ‘God’ or not, the failure at CERN was a clear-cut case of infant mortality -not at all surprising in reliability engineering circles.

Posted by L.Anderson | Report as abusive
 

It’s amusing to see the effort some undergo to understand one tiny particle of a mind they claim does not exist.

Posted by jason | Report as abusive
 

There are two tenets of atheism. One, there is no God. Two, I hate him.

Posted by Bob | Report as abusive
 

Serve an atheist dinner and then ask him(or her) who made it.

Posted by Bob | Report as abusive
 

Finding the \”God particle\”(lol)-if it even exists-would not \”prove that God exists or doesn\’t exist. All it would do is show us that the earth,the universe,etc. is even more mysterious and fantastic than we ever imagined. Atheists (and I am a Christian by the way) are becoming more puzzled and dumbfounded by the latest findings in science that show that \”something\” or \”someone\” made the universe and designed it in a very special and unique fashion.

Posted by Bob | Report as abusive
 

ShadowTag,

Funny how scientists(and other people) who don’t believe in God, get so upset and expend so much time,effort and money to try to “disprove” Someone who doesn’t exist in the first place. Also, funny how every discovery science is making(if you interpret the evidence in an honest and impartial way) all seem to keep pointing to a grand Designer (i.e. God).

Posted by Bob | Report as abusive
 

And let me guess, Bob.

“Fair and impartial” to you means assuming that every piece of evidence you see is designed. Even though you have no actual evidence that complexity equals design. Or for that matter, any actual evidence that a designer even exists.

The only thing Athiests are puzzled about is how a theist can base their entire argument on logical fallacies, and still think they should be taken seriously.

I find it funny how you presume to claim that Athiests are shaken to the core by recent discoveries. When the reality is that all evidence found in the universe either confirm or develop scientific theory further.

And yet even after all the decades of searching, there is still not a single piece of positive scientific proof that a deity exists. Bummer.

Posted by Anon | Report as abusive
 

One can hate a petty, spiteful, cruel, dull-witted god and still know that he’s only a myth. If one couldn’t do that, Hollywood would be in big trouble.

Posted by Pete Cann | Report as abusive
 

Even based on Theory of Relativity, if one has to observe particles traveling at a higher velocity than the velocity of light the plane of the observer changes;else he can not notice the change.He has to change his plane.This is also borne out of Quantum theory which postulates simultaneous existence of multi verses , which means an event that we see/perceive is happening Right now and also has happened and shall happen in the future(with reference to our time Frame).
As such any attempt to observe velocities of particles at speeds which we are not equipped to observe because of our limitations of Space and time,either the experiment shall not fructify or we can not understand the results.First stated has now happened.
This has been explained in Hindu philosophy in detail( Please refer my Blog on Time -Non -Linear theory).
http://ramanan50.wordpress.com/2009/10/1 5/god-particle/

 

I also read astonished the media fuss for this silly paper, when the serious work of scientist warning on the corruption and dangers of CERN goes unpulbished. Unfortuantelly, it’s all simpler, as per Nambu, last year Nobel Prize, the top quark in deconfined state, does all what the higgs does, and since the Universe is efficient it never makes a redundant particle it doesn’t need, thus the top quark is the Higgs. And we won’t find the higgs. So why so much fuss about higgs and the god’s particle? It was pure marketing by leo lederman a smart jewish-american, and the main lobbysist for the industry of atomic cannons, who convinced reagan that both particles were not the same, alas! the standard model was not closed and we still needed after the cold war was over mor of them (lee smolin and zee also proved it – they are the same if we consider a strong field a strong gravitational field in the brans-dicke model). Ergo we won’t find the higgs but produce copious quantities of top quarks and all other type of quarks in deconfined state. This might result in the creation of a bose-einstein condensate of quarks, which can trigger an ice-9 type of reaction and create one of the many possible Einstein frozen stars, strangelets, top quark stars or some other combination of quark dark matter not yet well understood that will blow up the earth. Regarding CERN’s excuses, quarks are not cosmic rays, we never found deconfined quarks in cosmic rays; moons do become black holes; a moon with the mass of a black hole will produce by gravitational lensing, background radiation at 2.7k, the most common radiation of the Universe; and quark stars might be all the pulsars and the most likely candidate for dark matter, Machos, 96% of the mass of the Universe. So this might be happening in every planet where retarded, arrogant humans play to be god. Because we don’t see any intelligent signs and there are millions of planets like this (the so-called Fermi paradox, which he stated after seing the A-Bomb: do all planets disappear blow up by physicists?) … What is for sure is that 13 billion $ will be thrown to the garbage because our politicians dont know anything about physics and the industry of nuclear machiens dont understand the cold war is over and there are many other ways to explore safely the universe. Bt in the age of marketing you can sell anything. I am afraid though that God will act exactly in the opposite way as the Fermi paradox proves . Because this planet will become a frozen star and God I am afraid will not interfere. He just selects in a dualist universe the species with higher energy=force, higher information =intelligence, and the harmony of both, E x I = k, called beauty when it is observed in static space and goodness when it is caused by actions in time. Mankind shows these days an absolute lack of strenght, intelligence, beauty and goodness, and so it won’t pass.
‘two things i consider infinite, the universe and the stupidity of humans and im not sure of the latter’ mr. einstein. ‘Those who impose truth with power will be the laugh of the Gods’. This paper shows how physicists have become in an age of fiction thought and super-powerful machines dangerous children of thought, and in the Darwinian Universe, a very serious place, hatched babies die by the thousands. The physicist community, would do better revising the papers of cheng in strangelets, of wilczek in quark matter, or my papers in quark holes and mass/time theory that show how very likely is that the Fermi paradox becomes real instead of this kind of ridiculous papers. Your life and the life of the rest of mankind is at stakes, and it is your responsibility and that of the politicians and scientific press that backs them to defend it regardless of personal agendas.

 

And let me guess Anon,

According to the law of noncontradiction, A cannot be A and B at the same time. As my old schoolteacher always told me, either you’re right or I’m right, but we can’t both be right. Speaking of logic, logical fallacies,etc. , only the Christian worldview provides a rational, logical basis for an absolute and authoritative moral code. So when an atheist behaves as if he is following a moral code, he’s actually being irrational. Moreover, when an atheist behaves as if he is a random combination of chemicals,ad nauseum, he is actually starting to be consistent with his worldview.

Without God (oops! I mean a “Grand Designer”)there would be no basis for the laws of logic, the reliability of senses, the reliability of memory, the uniformity of nature, or rational analysis, all of which you use when learning things. If you disagree, then please tell me: what is the basis for uniformity of nature without God? For that matter, how could you really know that your senses and memory are reliable? Can you rationally(without “begging the question”)justify any of these assumptions without the biblical God? Ironically, if evolution were true, it wouldn’t be reasonable for you to understand it. “Understanding” implies that we have a mind and freedom of thought to consider alternatives and choose the best. But if evolution is true, then our brain is simply the result of mindless chemistry that happened to convey survival value in the past. So there would be no reason to think that we can reason in an evolutionary worldview. See the dilemma this poses? If evolution were true, then what you think and say could not be rational, but would merely be the inevitable result of chemistry over time. The atheist position is inconsistent. On the one hand, the atheist teaches that people are simply chemical “accidents”. On the other hand, the atheist treats people(to some extent) respectfully, as if they were NOT just chemical accidents. The atheist’s position is intellectually schizophrenic. I don’t doubt that atheists are moral and that they know that many things are wrong(e.g. murder,rape,etc.). But on their professed beliefs as stated, such morality would not make sense. An atheist lives in an irrational, intellectual “hell”–believing contrary things at the same time. On the one hand, people have intrinsic value;on the other hand, they are said to be simply chemical accidents. (Romans 1:18-20)

Atheists-to say that God does not exist-would have to be God in order to know that there is no God-in which case God does exist. This is another example of the fact that atheists are irrational; they just don’t think things through. Their beliefs are arbitrary(without logical justification). It all boils down to what the preponderance of the evidence(not “proof”) points to, and also-most importantly-how the evidence is interpreted. Atheists claim that the human cell, amino acids, atoms,etc. simply just formed themselves without any outside help(or “designer”) purposely putting all these thousands of things together in just the right order against astronomically huge odds. Where is the scientific evidence to support these statements? Even evolutionary and atheistic scientists(some)such as Steven Hawking are starting to acknowledge that there must have been someone(God?) who made the universe at a fixed beginning point in the past.

Posted by Bob | Report as abusive
 

First of all physicists did not build the LHC in order to discover god. Neither are they out there trying to disprove god. They are trying to discover more about how the universe works regardless of any deity from Allah to Shiva. The Higgs boson is not a ‘god particle’ and should never have been called that. The idea that a Higgs went backwards in time to continuosly break the machine is ludicrous. The very idea is a paradox since if this continuously happens the the machine would never be able to produce the Higgs in the first place because it is always broken. And if god sent it why bother? Millions of people are starving and dying everyday and all god cares about is us discovering a few tiny particles?! I think not.

Posted by Anon | Report as abusive
 

Bob, you cannot say scientists are trying to disprove god, that is not the aim of science. Science is trying to find the correct explanation to the observed and explain how things are the way they are; If this eventually leads to a proof or disproof of God then so be it, however disproving God was never an agenda for scientists.

Posted by Ed | Report as abusive
 

luis sancho said ” the Universe is efficient it never makes a redundant particle it doesn’t need”, and then went on to talk about the top quark, which is itself redundant to both the up and the strange quarks.

I think the simplist explanation for the collider breaking down is “It’s a complex machine and needs tuning.”

And it’s not strange for scientists in fields like physics and astronomy to turn to God or some kind of faith. Those who are up-to-date in the field know that the universe is suspiciously fine-tuned, with no obvious reason beyond “if it wasn’t, we wouldn’t exist to see it”

 

I’m not getting into the religion vs. science debate as the two subjects are unrelated and non-clashing. There are Christian scientists, Islamic scientists, Atheist scientists; people have different views get over it.

Science isn’t about faith, it shouldn’t clash with it if you know what you’re on about. Science is about improving our understanding of the universe, of ourselves and of what we are made of. It’s a way of finding out how we can do things we have never dreamt of, and it has already made its mark.

Thanks to our exploration of science, we can travel to the other side of the world, we can leave the earth entirely, we can communicate with strangers from all over the world.

Who said science has to be against god? The way I’d see it (I’ll say at this point that I’m agnostic) is that a god made the universe, science allows us to explores it.

The particle was never meant to disprove god, as there is no way of proving or disproving a faith (by definition). A particle disproving god is a ridiculous idea.

The particle was nicknamed the god particle by a scientist who believed, perhaps rightly so, that the discovery of the particle would be groundbreaking, massive. It’s a great opportunity for scientists to delve further into the world of the unknown, to discover new things and to make a difference.

One could say that such an opportunity would be given by god, therefore justifying the name.

Posted by Jake Arkinstall | Report as abusive
 

Bob.

Your post does not conform to the basic rules of logical argument. Your proof of god is nothing but circular reasoning. Your proof of creationism is nothing but “argument from ignorance”

So that others can see your logical failure for what it is, I have provided relevent links.
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_th e_question
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_f rom_ignorance
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_ proof

In addition, your post contains errors, possibly intentional lies.

The massive piles of scientific evidence which exist today confirm and support all major scientific theories on evolution, biology, physics and chemistry. But in all this scientific evidence, not a shred shows evidence of a designer or deity.

Your entire belief system is based on no proof at all, except for your own preconceived baseless assumptions and a book which has no evidence of even being true.

Evolutionary scientists have never claimed that a god created life. Nor has Steven Hawkings ever claimed that a deity was responsible for creating the universe.

And even if an evolutionary scientist decided to humiliate himself by making such a claim, there is no scientific evidence that either is the case.

Your statement that some “athiestic (sic) scientists” have claimed that a god created the universe is simply absurd. An Athiest, by his very definition, does not believe in a deity.

All of which leads me to conclude you don’t know what you are talking about, or are simply parroting what you read on the discovery institute website.

Posted by Anon | Report as abusive
 

This is the most stupidest science article I have ever read.

Posted by bob pielage | Report as abusive
 

There is no way that it could be god. Because there is no evidence god actually exists. Or that god was behind it.

It is far more likely that the particle was prevented by the Invisible Flying Chocolate Teapot. Because we have direct scientific evidence this is not the case.

After all, if the Invisible Flying Chocolate Teapot didn’t exist, we wouldn’t not be able to not not see it.

See? Not even creationists can claim that.

Posted by Teapot Believer | Report as abusive
 

Religious people can be pretty vicious. I’m not sure they can lay much claim to being moral. A lot of work is now being done on rational, atheist ethics. One careful and fascinating treatment is Good and Real, by Gary L. Drescher, from the MIT Press (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). He appears to have established that you should serve the interests of others for the sake of yours being served, even in secret.

Posted by Pete Cann | Report as abusive
 

It was lack of information that’s it. The experiment failed. The spirit of human to pursue the answers via science should not die. If one listened to these religious torch bearers, one will not even be able to think freely. These religious torch bearers ensure a lavish, super duper flamboyant lifestyle for themselves by fooling people. They should infact be taxed like any other profit making entity so that science can progress. Let these religious torch bearers live without output of science products. Let them run around in their ancient tools of transport like mule donkey. Why the heck these guys use products made by human efforts via science like computer. Use your book… Religious torch bearers are of twisted, evil, wicked mind, they are not even true to themselves… Religious torch bearers inspire people to commit genocides.

Posted by unknown | Report as abusive
 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGHH! God blarghy blargh Science blarghy blargh

enough already. don’t belive everything you read on the net. get outside and see the sun is still shining.

Posted by Max Power | Report as abusive
 

According to His Holiness Huzur Maharaj, the Second Most Revered Spiritual Head of Radhasoami Faith had stated : “Love or Force of attraction (i.e. the Force of Cohesion) is the Param Tattva or the chief ingredient of the creation, i.e. the entire creation has come into existence out of Love and is sustained by Love.” In scientific terminology this is known as Gravity.

 

Cern has nothing to do with anyones idea of what God is or isn’t. Cern is pandoras box. It’s a really really bad idea to try to rip holes into other dimensions; you may get something you can’t put back. Remember when you cut something up, what do you have? A disection.

Posted by mick | Report as abusive
 

Hey, don’t insult my faith, theists!

Is it not rather curious that this argument, rephrased for their side of the argument, is commonly used respectably by Christians and other theists, but when used by an atheist such as myself, it sounds ridiculous? Think for a moment: why does this disparity exist? Why is religion given a free pass for irrationality in our scientific, rational world?

Respect my belief in the non-existence of God/gods, already!

Of course, this argument really is not an argument at all. It is merely a ploy to avoid argument, often deployed by the losing side to preserve their dignity.

Oh, and Bob, your argument for the order in the world is easily dispelled by one powerful theory: evolution. Plase, don’t disparage it as “only a theory”, nothing in science is absolute, even gravity is only a theory, albeit a very well-substantiated one, as is evolution

Posted by ScienceAdvocate | Report as abusive
 

What is God Particle? According my fresh thought:
1. It is a naked singularity of mass or the smallest black hole in the Universe;
2. It has huge naked mass, gravitation and inertia;
3. It is not a material particle;
4. It is not in the Standard Model of elementary particles;
5. It is an Ultimate Particle, cannot be decay;
6. Its Mass cannot be converted into energy;
7. The lowest limit of its mass is about 10.9?g, and the upper limit is about 0.67*10^6kg, that means that its mass may be exceeded one kilogram!
8. Estimated mass of Higgs Particle is about 16 orders of magnitude smaller than lower limit of Mass of God Particle at least. So the mass of God Particle is substantially undervalued by mainstream physics
9. So Higgs particle is not God particle;
10. And so I believe that to find the God particle with LHC is an impossible mission, LHC efforts will be ended in failure, and it is destined. I think that to find God Particle with colliders (such as LHC) is an extremely extravagant wrong way.

How to find God Particle?
Based on my bran-new thread, I design several kinds of very simple and very cheap physical experimental methods to find the God particle, to make a small black hole and to create new unknown stable material particles without using any accelerator or collider such as LHC.
Maybe to find God Particle is not a hard mission for me?
Revolution in Physics will soon arrival, believe me.

Posted by zhigangzhou | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/