Superstring Theory proven wrong by LHC - Supersymmetry debunked, String Theory wrong

[77GSlinger]

Erm, why do you let all of these shit head remarks from he quackademic psyence lovers muck up your page? Douche these mind controlled slaves of TPTB. They are oblivious to reality. You explained all of this very clearly yet these mindless lemmings don't get any of it. They cling to their false psyence like babies to their pacifiers. Truly pathetic! I have met many of these flag waving trolls over the years and you will never be able to teach them anything, they are brainwashed to the core!

[kyaume21]

(Super)string theory and the standard model are not one and the same thing. The standard model is the SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) gauge model describing the strong, weak and electromagnetic forces. That theory requires the Higgs boson to account for the masses of the particles. This is quite a different thing from trying to verify (or rule out) string theory, which could only be done (more likely by a successor of the LHC) by specific experiments that would point to the (non)existence of supersymmetry.

[UncleKennybobs]

What is this fucking clown so upset about? Dry your eyes, mate, you might understand science one day.

[77GSlinger]

@UncleKennybobs He is upset about the fake psyence taught in quackademia. Get it? Do you always call people who are smarter than you clowns?

[Tomlinggggg]

CERN have not excluded the theory of the Higgs Boson at all...

[hznfrst]

It's amazing how you can make such sweeping assertions within days of some preliminary findings from the LHC. You obviously don't realize how science works: early results have to be verified before they are accepted, and scientists must accept these results - they don't form dogmatic cults insisting that certain pet theories must be true despite evidence against them; that's reserved for religion.

Also, your profile is so badly designed that it's impossible to read, and it's Kryptonite, troll.

[suzukix5owner]

Will you be quiet you theist ignorant moron

[cravencx]

ummm. Why does the guy use the same site to argue his point haha. A good argument consists of multiple sources of information. Must have been taught the best way to learn everything is to believe one source right? Grow up.

[jzeerod]

I love this guy. He reminds me of a modern day Jimmy Swaggart of quantum physics.

[TheZenoEffect]

@jzeerod I Never mentioned the term 'quantum mechanics' once

in this vid. Moreover, 'string theory' is a 'derivative' of QM.

QM, is {thus far} the most reliable, repeatedly tested theory w/

practical implications for the masses science has ever produced.

Leave 'religion' & 'evangelism' {I don't get "paid"} out of it...

They built LHC to PROVE string theory, Thus far, it has

only gone to disprove it!

Just because you're Old & Overweight doesn't make you 'Wise'.

Be OBJECTIVE!

[heroindog]

@TheZenoEffect its super-SYM-metry, not super-'cemetery'. the latter would be where superheroes are buried

[TheZenoEffect]

@heroindog Heh..... I guess Superman's tombstone would be made of

Cryptonite to keep him in the dirt...

[hznfrst]

@TheZenoEffect You mentioned quantum mechanics at 3:05, idiot.

[SpritMatterMan]

Good work Zeno!!!! You are taking a lot of heat from a lot of brainwashed michio cock-koo suckers!!! You are a brave soul and I wish you many, many blessings!!!!! Peace

[gastarbeiter1]

And the author of that article is able to interpret results because of what expertise?As a journalist or engineer?You seem to be a fast shooter in coming to conclusions.

[TheZenoEffect]

@gastarbeiter1 "fast shooter in coming to conclusions."

Tell that to the IDIOTs that brought you Higgs Boson,

sUperstring 'theory', or the Big bang to begin with...

You're baring up the the wrong tree.. seems the laymen

have more 'logical' grounding than the so-called 'experts'

[gastarbeiter1]

@TheZenoEffect "have more 'logical' grounding than the so-called 'experts'" then show me your logic.Until now you were just ranting nothing more.I don't say I am an expert but you seem just to be upset but you don't come up with logical OR empirical evidence supporting your claims.What's wrong with the big bang,why is it impossible/ not backed up by evidence.If you just could be a bit specific that would be fine.

[TheZenoEffect]

@gastarbeiter1 Check out Plasma Cosmology, a completely

different view of the Universe. In PC the U is infinite, static, yet

constantly evolving. There's WAAAAAAAAaaaaayyyyy to much

information to cover here, just look into it yourself if you have time.

If you prefer video, there are 2 great documentaries here on YT.

"The Big bang Never Happened" & "Thunderbolts of The Gods"

should be a real eye-opener for anyone w/ discernment.

[gastarbeiter1]

@TheZenoEffect well could you explain to me where that hypothesis is better then the big bang model.(and by the way in a short reading it seems that plasma cosmology has also a lot of baggage to carry,but I'll read further into it).Can pc predict anything?How does it explain the microwave background or the observation of expanding of our universe? just to name a few questions?

[TheZenoEffect]

@gastarbeiter1 CMBR i not 'evidence' of anything.

At least 8 separate theories predicted CMBR in the late 1800's

& early 1900's, that don't require a Big Bang.

CMBR i not uniformly distributed throughout space.

Massive voids in CMBR these voids must have taken

at least 70 billion years to form, five times as long as the

theorized time since the Big Bang.

PC's predictions are far more accurate when mainline

scientist are 'stumped'.

Google "electric Universe predictions"

[gastarbeiter1]

@TheZenoEffect "CMBR i not uniformly distributed throughout space." of course not is so there wouldn't be any galxies.How does PC explain the cosmic background?

"PC's predictions are far more accurate when mainline

scientist are 'stumped'."..but as read it also has its problems with predictions where the standard theory seems to be better suited.Its not about true or untrue but about predictions.How does the CMB work in PC and an endless static universe as you claim?

[gastarbeiter1]

@TheZenoEffect "Google "electric Universe predictions"" I asked you to give me examples where it is better suited.And please don't tell me it doesn't have its baggage to carry.

[TheZenoEffect]

@gastarbeiter1 How lazy are you?

LOOK IT UP Yourself! And wtf do you keep talking about 'baggage'?

Are you taking a vacation soon?

[itsnobody]

Hey look I got an idea "My dick exists in 26 dimensions...I got the mathematics for it...but I can't test out if my mathematics correlate to reality"

I guess that's still science in the delusional atheist world lol

Imagine how far we would be if low-life atheists hadn't taken over and science was still about experimentation, empirical observations, and the scientific method

FUCK ALL atheists for holding back science

[itsnobody]

Imagine how far science would've been if atheists hadn't taken over science in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Back when Theists ran science they didn't have empirically untestable hypotheses in science lol

Science use to be all about experimentation, empirical observations, the scientific method, and using mathematics to model observations

Now that atheists have taken it over science is just a pseudoscientific joke where authority and personal incredulity are placed above everything

[idreamof2morrow]

At least they report the truth to people. Go ask Muslims and Christian which book speaks the word of God and they go on epic smear campaigns and suicide bombings so that they can impose fear and as we all know, fear is much more effective than the truth.

[altjff15]

I had to put thumbs down because you're yelling like a fag

[TheZenoEffect]

@altjff15 Fag? I didn't vote for 'obama'..

Better get Your Fact$ $traight

[AmunRa1]

@TheZenoEffect

Hello again immaturity, and hello political and scientific ignorance.

After barely managing to go through this video, I've come to the conclusion that you have no idea what you're talking about.

[TheZenoEffect]

@AmunRa1 What part about "Just ski this video and read the article in the

description below" did you not understand?

Did I stutter? Do I have an accent I'm not aware of?

Or are you that retarded?

Youtube is the 2nd biggest search engine in the world. The whole 'point'

of this vid it get people to read the article. Accuse the author of the article

that they don't know what they're talking about...

Or do you lack the ability to read???

[CrimsnTiger]

Stop being SO negative about the LHC! Observation, telescope, microscope, electron microscope and now LHC. Each was definitely a move forward. Hubble was not a waste (love looking at the images).

[CrimsnTiger]

Just pick the pieces you want to hit on...RIGHT?

On your other page "God Particle' does not exist - CERN admits" you were all about super-symmetry and now you seem to be bashing it.

Peter Pachal is PCMag's News Director and you are acting like his opinion is, excuse the term, Gods truth. And if this does prove super-string theory and super-symmetry wrong..do you still say LHC was a waste?

[CrimsnTiger]

@CrimsnTiger Also, you just made a video of you reading others work. WTS

[Xezlec]

If you read the article, which asks "does this disprove supersymmetry?" The answer it comes up with is "no". It may offer evidence against certain kinds of it, however. Also, you're wrong that dark matter doesn't exist. It is well-known to exist. We can clearly see its influence with telescopes.

[TheZenoEffect]

@Xezlec Fine, LCH WILL disprove Supersymmetry, & we're already 50%

there.

"We can clearly see its influence with telescopes."

I'm making a video on that specific subject, should be ready

in a couple of days...

[Xezlec]

@TheZenoEffect From Wikipedia: "the total parameter space of consistent supersymmetric extensions of the Standard Model is extremely diverse and can not be definitively ruled out at the LHC."

[TheZenoEffect]

@Xezlec iting Wikipedia a a $source i$ ba$ically proclaiming:

"I Have No Credibility".

Wikipedia i$ 'U$er driven' not 'FACT driven'

$o what are you? A Truth seeker, or a Wiki-u$er...?

[Xezlec]

@TheZenoEffect Ad hominem much?

[vrcraft]

there is no theory of everything, you losers :)

[TheZenoEffect]

@vrcraft Exactly! The Universe is still an unfathomable mystery,

& now they're going have to start all over from scratch...

[Xezlec]

@vrcraft "Everything" exists, and a theory is simply a collection of information about the way something is. So by saying "there is no theory of everything", you're saying basically "things aren't some way", which is kind of ridiculous.

[TheZenoEffect]

@Xezlec If there is a TOE, Humans currently don't know it.

"String Theory is a mathematical discipline" Exactly!

That doesn't mean that because a bunch of 'geniuses' conjured

doesn't mean it's going to 'magically' spring into existence.

Higgs Boson, ST, all eleven of them, M Theory, are all

bastard children of that exhalted 'discipline' you speak of.

What good is 'theoretical math' if they keep getting it wrong?

[Xezlec]

@TheZenoEffect No one claims to know a complete TOE. String theory is one of several that aspire to that goal, but no one is claiming to have reached it. You seem to think theories of physics are made by a bunch of guys in a room guessing. What they actually do is look for formulas and ideas that fit the numbers they observe as closely as possible. It doesn't matter if you're a "genius", it only matters how well the results fit. Did you also deny the Z boson and top quark before they were found?

[nibus126]

nice!!!

[itsnobody]

I don't discourage string theorists because the string theory is useful for advancing mathematics, even if it is completely pseudo-scientific or even completely wrong.

So I don't consider string theorists as physicists or even as theoretical physicists, but only as mathematicians.

The string theory belongs in mathematics journals, not physics journals.

Why would anyone consider something so unfalsifiable as scientific?

[TheZenoEffect]

@itsnobody "Why would anyone consider something so unfalsifiable as scientific?"

EXACTLY! This is not how the 'Scientific Method' works.

1) Hypothesis, 2) test the theory, 3) results prove negative or positive.

But, in the 'New Physics' Step 3) is side-stepped: More false theories

are provided to try to explain the 'negative' result of an experiment!

The End Result? Higgs, Dark Matter/Energy, 'Superstrings', 11 or 12

dimensions - all based on theoretical math, NOT the result of experimentation

[itsnobody]

I don't really understand how anyone besides delusional atheists can consider the string theory as science.

I don't consider the string theory as actual science but instead as mathematical philosophy.

I don't discourage string theorists though I just label them as mathematical philosophers rather than as physicists.

Why can't atheists just accept that the string theory isn't science because it doesn't match the definition of science?

It's just mathematical philosophy

[TheZenoEffect]

@nobody 'String Theory' has no more meaning than peering into a bowl

of rice, or crawling, seething maggots, or Top Romin

- It means exactly nothing.

The Universe (reality) is 'entangled', most definitely.

But spaghetti noodles being used to try to "CONJURE UP" dimensions that don't

even exist is a whole different bowl of pasta.

'ST' is 100% BULLSHIT elham/tucker, & the so-called 'Big Bang' was

conjured up as a PATHETIC explanation for admitting what we're close

to understanding The Truth

[CrimsnTiger]

@TheZenoEffect "is 'entangled', most definitely" and "100%"

YOU SHOULD NOT BE DISCUSSING ANYTHING and just write the book of knowledge b/c you are god and KNOW everything. (Damned the irresponsible)

[Mr123javen]

I agree that string theory was wrong. So does Theory of relativity.

[CrimsnTiger]

Theory is way they are called "THEORETICAL" physicist.

[Xezlec]

@itsnobody String Theory is a mathematical discipline. Mathematics is a science. So you're wrong. Also, "atheists"? What on Earth does that have to do with...

[itsnobody]

@Xezlec Mathematics is not science dumbass. Science has to do with empirical observations and the scientific method. I don't know what you mean by calling it "a science"...do you mean it's a science as in an art form?

You can do lots of mathematics that have absolutely no correlation to this physical reality

Throughout history atheists have always blocked human progress and threatened mankind

[Xezlec]

@itsnobody Oh yeah? Which school is the mathematics department in at your local university, smart alec? Science is not all about "physical reality" -- that's physical science. Science is a more general term referring to the acquisition of knowledge through careful study and rigorous verification processes (of which formal proof is one).

You've also got your history confused. I don't know what crazy alternate histories you've been fed, but you might want to try reading some books.

[itsnobody]

The string theory failing many predictions only demonstrates the un-falsifiable nature of the string theory.

None of these failed predictions falsifies the string theory because the string theory has a very very very large number of solutions meaning the mathematics can be adjusted to match virtually any observation.

So the string theory predicts nothing and cannot realistically be falsified ever.

[Xezlec]

@itsnobody You sure do like to repeat the claim that string theory is unfalsifiable. I wonder if you know what that actually means. String theory would be irredeemably false if relativity or quantum mechanics were false. Hence, it's falsifiable. The terminology you are looking for is "practically untestable" (though I doubt you care, as truth and accuracy don't seem to be among your interests).

[ItsLinkToy]

OMG another science video. There is no end to your stupidity :)

Listening to you is akin to watching an adult trying to teach a small child that two plus two equal five. Your a star.

[TheZenoEffect]

@ItsLinkToy ANOTHER TROLL who signed up for Youtube just to comment

ONLY on my videos??? I'm flattered... truly...

[amramjose]

Or the Higgs has not been found in the range of MeV they are looking in; perhaps it will never be found, perhaps it does not exist, either way the LHC was almost built with that purpose in mind. It is not the end game like someone said, it just gets more interesting...

[TheZenoEffect]

@PhysicsMajor2014 Are you fuckin illiterate or what? Can you not

'read' the article for yourself? Are you so fuckin dumb that you can't

see that THE ENTIRE POINT of this video is for ppl on YT to find

the article & 'read' it for themselves? Formulate THEIR OWN viewpoint?

Also, you keep calling me Christian, a 'Right Wing Nut'.

I'm Agnostic Shit-ball! Oh yeah, btw, Fuck your

'High School Physics teacher'. You've already demonstrated

your inability to 'read', it's a miracle you graduated at all.

[3waybar]

You're voice is kind off EPIC :D

You should be a WoW raid leader, I would start playing again.

[bulls6x]

I don't understand why you're so angry at String Theory. Einstein made his theory without any experimental evidence as well. His ideas were just as radical and "complicated" as string theory is today. He was just experimentally verified earlier, and shown to be correct (though perhaps not completely because of quantum theory).

[itsnobody]

@bulls6x lol...comparing General Relativity to the String Theory is a mistake.

General Relativity was actually testable right after the mathematics for General Relativity were figured out.

On the other hand it's been more than 30 years and the string theory has already failed many supposed predictions like black hole predictions, accelerated expansion of the universe prediction, and now perhaps supersymmetry as well.

Atheists are subhumans so they really believe the string theory is science

[ManGarbageThe]

Physics is one of the few places where failure of this magnitude is actual more beneficial than detrimental. Forces new thought processes and exploration of new ideas. Relax man, it's all about the end game.

[TheZenoEffect]

@ManGarbageThe I actually agree. What's crazy is the

fact that this massive upheaval seems to be happening all at once.

I was reading a theory about how gravitational waves are distorting

our view of the Universe, & as the U may 'appear' to be expanding,

it actually isn't. This idea renders Dark Energy mute, & brings into

question whether Inflation is happening, huge paradigm shift

away from the Big Bang

- Ancient Chinese Proverb "May You Live in Interesting Times"

Interesting times Indeed!

[wordzly]

As I understand it, a definitive test for supersymmetry vs. the standard model that doesn't involve finding new particles is to measure the coupling constants of forces at higher energies. The standard model predicts that E.M. radiation will merge with the weak nuclear force, & then at a higher energy, merge with strong nuclear. Supersymmetry predicts all 3 forces will merge at the same energy. Has this test been done?

[tberrardy]

I agree with you about Dawkins he is a 'ravenous atheist' and a vile person in my opinion, even though I am agnostic myself. All those that I mentioned can be arrogant, I agree, but I don't hear any other theory that is competing with 'big bang'! We have the red shift and microwave background radiation, etc. What is your theory about where all this stuff came from?

[TheZenoEffect]

@tberrardy Dawkins comes across as a contemptuous fool much

like his 'cult-like' fellow atheist. Their not even aware that they have fashioned

THEIR OWN religion' in the 'denial' of 'God'. What a bunch of narrow minded Fools!

I'm agnostic, but optimistic.

I don't claim to have answers, only valid questions. The Truth is Humans will

NEVER truly know! Any 'rational' human being would admit as much.

The Universe has probably always existed, & always will. Very

murky to contemplate Indeed! O_O

[Rytzch]

@tberrardy ""I am agnostic myself"" The very fact that you wrote this shows that you have no idea what agnosticism is. You're obviously uneducated on the subject, so why would you comment on it? Same with zeno - how can you be taken seriously when you don't even understand what you're saying?

[tberrardy]

With all due respect with the exception of John Pokingham all 'big bang' proponents that I have listened to or read are atheists. Leonard Susskind, Richard Dawkins, Neil Tyson, Stephen Hawking, etc. True, some clergy are jumping on the 'big bang' band wagon, but only because they have to maintain some credibility in light of the overwhelming evidence for it. 

[TheZenoEffect]

@tberrardy No, I mean the 'concept' that at one point the Universe

was created, whether by 'God' of by the primordial fireball.

It's just a basic template shared by both sides of the debate, a

way to placate the arguers. I'm no fan of any of these clowns you

mention btw, specifically ravenous Atheist Dawkins

- Obviously, I lean towards the opposing argument: There was no

'Big Bang' & there's literally no evidence to support it. The evidence

that they supplant is woefully 'underwhelming' imo.

[tberrardy]

Thanks for the response. They may have gotten it wrong, this time (re susy, etc), but it sure beats religion's attempt at explaining the universe!

[TheZenoEffect]

@tberrardy But the 'Big Bang' theory is exactly that: An 'attempt' to interweave

Science [theoretical math] w/ Creationism, or 'Religion'.

Humans are linear beings. We're born, We live, We die - This is fundamental

to our experience of what we perceive as 'reality'. Everything that has a beginning,

has an end... Right?

- The Universe doesn't care (or maybe central too) about Humanity's concept of

time. It is infinite, WE are not. Very disturbing to fathom that possibility, for

Humans at least

[tberrardy]

Science's job is to get at the truth of nature. If supersymmetry is wrong than CERN has done it's job by getting at that truth, whatever it may be! So what's the problem?

[TheZenoEffect]

@tberrardy The problem is how did they come up with Supersymmetry in the

1st place. Completely over complicated & unnecessary. The Universe

doesn't need 11 or 10 dimensions. It doesn't require Dark Matter/Energy

or 'elusive' God Particles.

SS is always referred to as a 'Beautiful Theory', but science's function is not

to tout unprovable, theoretical mathematical constructs

or find 'beauty' in nature because it happens to be the popular

theory of the day.

Science's 'job' is to find the truth.

[vengefuldiety]

Furthermore, String theory is an attempt at Quantum Gravity, which the Standard Model DOES NOT INCLUDE.

[vengefuldiety]

BTW, you do realize that Superstring Theory =/= Standard Model, right? String theory is a mathmatical model that describes the particles and forces through filiments of energy that vibrate in 11 dimensions of space and time, it is an attempt to explain WHY the particles have their masses and charges. The Standard Model is a completely different mathmatical model where the masses and charges of the particles are inputs. Debunking string theory does nothing to the Standard Model.

[TheZenoEffect]

@vengefuldiety Right. There are at least 1/2 a dozen different String Theories,

give or take a dimension, some w/ 10, some w/ 12.

But this video is in context to this vid /watch?v=yeVuQXrK4Ww

- The failure to find the 'elusive' Higgs Boson, which is VERY DAMAGING,

if not outright destructive to the Standard Model.

There's a 'confluence of collapse' here. 40 yrs of unproven,

untested (until now) scientific dogma is collapsing, you'll have

to excuse me if I understand the ramifications of that

[vengefuldiety]

@TheZenoEffect A few things: There ARE higgless models. And mind you the bounds for the Higgs are 112 GeV and 800 GeV, they've only excluded 112 Gev to 600 GeV so far. You say that this has been "untested scientific dogma". What about all of the other particles that were predicted by the Standard Model that were then found? They've been testing the theory for decades. Not finding the Higgs just means they've slightly missed the mark on their math. It doesn't wipe out the existing evidence.

[vengefuldiety]

Sorry, they've excluded 145 Gev to 466 GeV with a 95% CL

[TheZenoEffect]

@vengefuldiety And your point? Is Higgs Boson 'hiding', darting around

in that miniscule 5% range?

Answer - NO!

There's game in Vegas that offers 5% odds, 95% advantage on the House.

Nobody Would Play! Or bet money, or their reputation. We're running

out of room here.

The Standard Model is WRONG! And ST is based on the 'assumption'

that ST is even remotely correct, which it's not.

[vengefuldiety]

@TheZenoEffect Dude, they expec the Higgs to be from 112 GeV to 800 GeV. They've excluded 145 GeV to 466 GeV with a 95% certainty. They have yet to even test from 112 GeV to 145 GeV nor have they tested from 466 GeV to 800 GeV.

The thing about reality is that even if chances are 95% against based on the information you have, what is true, that is to say real, is 100% certain. This isn't Vegas. But even if they were 100% certain it wasn't in those ranges, they still have testing to do.

[TheZenoEffect]

@vengefuldiety Right. But a Boson is a 'heavier' hypothetical particle only

within a certain expected range. .They're already looking for a 'lighter Higgs'

My guess is they won't find that either.

[TheZenoEffect]

@vengefuldiety Google:

"Fermilab Sets End-of-Moth Deadline to Establish Whether or Not the

Higgs Boson Exists"

So, when you computate your 5% "clinging to chalk on a chalkboard Higgs",

combined with the remainder of the days in September (business days

only), you're really running out of options here. And LCH is only

re-affirming what Fermilab has already 'excluded'

It's over,... it's done...

[vengefuldiety]

@TheZenoEffect You really have no clue as to what you're talking about do you? The middle range is easier for them to detect, so they went for that first. Now they'll be working on the lower and heavier ranges of the expected GeV range. but even if the higgs is at the lightest it could possibly be, it is still HEAVY AS SHIT.

Fermilab said that they're on track to determine whether or not it is possible for the Higgs to exist in the specified range. Not the same as finding it.

[vengefuldiety]

@TheZenoEffect None of this matters anyway. You're posing all this bullshit as if to say "Haha, take that science." THIS IS HOW SCIENCE WORKS. We take the best we can come up with, make predictions based on those models and test them. If the tests invalidate the model THAT IS A GOOD THING. It means we're one step closer to finding the truth. Not finding the Higgs would be the most exciting thing in Physics since Einstein rewrote Newtonian physics.

[vengefuldiety]

@TheZenoEffect Also, stop talking about the 95% thing. You sound like an idiot. The 95% thing only refers to the middle range, the only range that has been tested thus far.

[vengefuldiety]

you seem mad. u mad bro?

[MarditoYutube]

I don't think you (or the writer of the article) understand what these findings mean...

It does not mean that Supersymmetry and String Theory don't have any use anymore. These theories are the best to explain our universe, even if there are parts we don't understand.

By the way...

Do you really think that Dark Matter does not exist simply because Supersymmetry failed? (The Gravity of Dark Matter can be measured) Or are you telling me that Gravity is now debunked too???

[TheZenoEffect]

@MarditoYutube I'll raise you one - I don't think these idiots that came

up w/ String Theory understand how the Universe works at all.

No Higgs Boson, Supersymmetry leveled in the same week.

Bad Week for the 'Standard Model'! AND, it's going to get worse...

2nd, 'Dark Matter' has NEVER been directly detected - Ever!

So how exactly can something completely hypothetical be measured?

Dark Matter/Energy are laughable misadventures into theoretical math.

Don't believe me NOW, just mark my words

[MarditoYutube]

@TheZenoEffect

Did you read about Gravity????? We detect the Gravity of dark matter... Not only does its gravity affect the rotation of stars but also distorts light.

We see the effect Dark Matter has on the universe... we just don't know exactly what it is.

All the theories that have been devised to explain Dark Matter could very well be wrong. Just because we cannot figure out what Dark Matter is, does not mean that it is not there.

You accept Gravity as a scientific theory? Right?

[TheZenoEffect]

@MarditoYutube Gravitational lensing & warped space over distances

easily explain the distortion of light - No Dark Matter required

2nd, gravity is the 'side effect' of the presence of matter - not the

'driving' or replant force of the Universe. Have you ever heard of

'leaking gravity'? This is the idea that gravity has a 'drop off'

point & is not all pervasive.

I'm saying that the entire concept of DM is unnecessary.

- How many DM particles have we detected here on Earth?

None, zero.

[MarditoYutube]

@TheZenoEffect

Yes. Gravity is the "side effect"of the presence of matter. We observe lots of gravity in the universe and we can't see what is generating it. We call that Dark Matter. We don't know what it is.

Yes. In our universe, we only feel a tiny portion of the force or Gravity.

Yes. Our current concepts of DM may be poorly understood. That is why we do experiments to confirm if we are in the right track. If we are not, we revise and keep trying.

[TheZenoEffect]

@MarditoYutube OR, we could ditch the Standard Model all together.

Gravity, as you know, is weakest of the 4 forces. The problem is that

ST & folded up dimensions are attempting to explain where

that extra gravity MUST go, when it probably doesn't go anywhere.

On a larger scale, DM is supposed 'tearing the Universe apart',

but this is based on the assumption that the 'U' is expanding,

which it's not.

We don't need new theories we need entirely new models.

* it's called Plasma Cosmology..

[MarditoYutube]

@MarditoYutube

The problem is that Quantum Theory, String Theory, Supersymmetry, etc... have the greatest explanatory power so far. That is why they are so "popular." These are the craziest, ass backwards, counter intuitive, illogical theories out there. Yet, they are "popular" because they work. They describe the universe better than other contenders. These LHC predictions that failed may actually help us make these theories better, or devise new ones.

[TheZenoEffect]

@MarditoYutube Quantum Theory, though there are 3 main interpretations,

(I'm a Niels Bohr man myself), is the most reliable scientific theory ever

discovered. Honestly, ST & Supersymmetry - Completely untested

& likely non-existent - don't deserve to be mentioned in the same

sentence.

If LHC allows us to break new ground & the quantum level, then

it wouldn't be a complete waste, only to it's original purposes.

[MarditoYutube]

@TheZenoEffect

But it isn't a complete waste. The LHC is testing many things at the same time. The Higgs Boson is the most known because of the spin put on it by the media by calling it a "god particle." But there are fission experiments that are actually what I am most interested about. A possible fission plant in the next 50 years (I'm speculating).

Finding out that there is no Higgs Boson would be worth the investment because we would be one step closer to understanding the universe.

[Skedarking85]

Didn't know he was just going to be reading the article back to us..

[goldeena1]

all religion is.....(oh, I'm going to swear Mr Zeno, I can't help it), horses shit!

it's because of stupid religion that science has been set back , i mean them nut cases are even stopping stem cell research now - the earth was made in 6 days, REALLY....adam and eve, REALLY.....oh yes that sounds likely in 2011 doesn't it. Religion should be abolished - medieval fairy stories to spread fear and control populations - a bit like the NWO these days, which should also be abolished.

[TheZenoEffect]

@goldeena1 1st off, never apologize for cursing, especially beforehand.

2nd, I'm not a religious man myself, though I do have my own 'slant' on the

whole ordeal. No fan of organized religion, though I believe civilization

wouldn't have evolved to this point were it not for a template of morality.

Religion is double-edged, but people have the right to believe

whatever they want - It's called 'Freedom of Religion'

So far as the Earth being 6,000 yrs old, there are some dinosaurs who

disagree...

[AvatarRoku1]

When will the atheists finally learn?

[TheZenoEffect]

@AvatarRoku1 I'm no Atheists, they actually make me sick in their Grand Assumption,

when any rational Human Being would at least have to admit they don't know for

sure.

But as we all know, God enjoys screwing w/ Us puny humans. There's no way

hes going to be 'pinned down' to an exact certainty. It is unknowable, impossible

to prove for certain.

[peacepacifist2011]

@TheZenoEffect how can you say atheists make you sick in their grand assumption when you cant prove any of the religions are real yet you cant prove any of the religions arn't, im an atheist i dont believe in the gods spoken about in all these texts with the interpretations that have been made however with all the mathematical links in life i do consider us humans as a possible experiment for a higher intelligence to get an understanding of their evolution by observing us why would 'god' put -

[peacepacifist2011]

@TheZenoEffect dinosaurs on earth before mankind if as it is wrote the earth was made in six days and then there was adam and eve how did they survive but nearly all dinosaurs died, i believe these texts to be historic refences to life as they knew it after all it must of taken a long time to learn a language and then be able to learn to read and write to create such texts so there is prior historys not spoken of in these texts. science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind

[peacepacifist2011]

@peacepacifist2011 refences=references

[eleutheromaniac]

now we're going to see which really prevails in modern science: observable facts, or mathematical dogma.

history tells us the dogmatists won't go down without a fight.

[TheZenoEffect]

@eleutheromaniac "now we're going to see which really prevails in modern science:

observable facts, or mathematical dogma.

history tells us the dogmatists won't go down without a fight."

- Couldn't have said it better myself!

Look for new revised theories still clinging

to the thoroughly discredited Big Bang model, there's NO WAY they're

just going to walk away from it w/ all that funding, all those reputations

on the line...