The Higgs Boson Will Not Be Found (or at least not as a mechanism), Part 1

[maryamelsherif]

im glad i watched this because ive been mispronouncing Pyragram as PIE-rah-gram. .

[kelbykross1]

i read an article about next tuesday they are supposed to get something from the LHC.

I agree that physicists don't have specific reason for causation, but they are the only ones working on it.

I'm not trying to start a youtube fight or anything, but the typefont on your wayoftheliteral page is really hard to read, and poor graphic design.

Are you a fan of lei groups?

[CammieSpectrum]

@kelbykross1 I'm working on posting stuff soon. physicists have no idea what they are talking about. I know that sounds arrogant, but really science is arrogant. explanation cannot be part of what exists, let alone a hidden causal event. the higgs mechanism, fields of quanta, & hidden mediums are still intended in the image of causal events that exist. this method is circular, never explains causation, reduces new types like Nothing, & prediction does not = understanding what existence is. :)

[kelbykross1]

@CammieSpectrum So your explanation of causation?

a theistic approach of some sort?

[CammieSpectrum]

@kelbykross1Teleological is the best description. existence is directed by a teleological blueprint of sorts(which are the preexistential conditions for existence). Results, that I call Same Sum Before & After and Same Sum Here & There, for Indirect & Indirect Causal Events, are a part of this integrated blueprint. and there is also a preexistential big bang of sorts. it took me nine years so far to come this conclusion. I'd elaborate, but I am in the middle of working on it. please say tuned :)

[TheBoyChur]

@CammieSpectrum they found it ? :)

[CammieSpectrum]

@TheBoyChur I think their going to find is what I call The X Particle(spin 2). I'm going to make a video on it soon. just because they find a heavy particle, does not mean it acts like a hidden causal mechanism that causally gives mass to other particles. the higgs mechanism is what I have a problem with, for it just trades the question of why many masses to why higgs mass with many adjustable variables and it is in the image of ordinary causation, which is already unaccounted for

[CammieSpectrum]

@TheBoyChur actually I think it would need to be spin 0.

[sahrish786]

are you still thinking that higgs particles is not existed ?????????????

[Buildings1772]

@CammieSpectrum you know whats funny is that your is right. the higgs boson was not found. every one was against you but you were right all along. what a waist of 6 billion dollars or what ever like :D

[CammieSpectrum]

@Buildings1772 thanks. :) it used to bother me how nasty people can get on the internet, but now I'm used to it. I don't know how many times I've been told I have a mental illness. and to be fair, The LHC was not a complete waste. neutrinos going faster than light is pretty cool, though not worth the 6 billion dollars when half the world lives in poverty.

[TheBoyChur]

@Buildings1772 well i gues he was wrong then :) , they found it haha

[SymbolicSoliloquy]

It seems to me, that the study of representations, such as geometries and symbols, diagrams and engineering, is the intersection between our components of voice, letter with the intersection of actual values that fill up the potential. (Observation of choices.) That is to say, we need both objects greater than points, such as lines and planes, and shapes, and symbols to represent but not dictate the choices that are made. One last thing about molds, it seems transformers have flexible space :-)

[SymbolicSoliloquy]

But to take the opposite of a complicated field bigger than simply T or F, you obtain the mold of the truth, so the translation of "It's not a particle" is eqiuvalent to saying, there's space which if mass were added to, it would form a particle.

[SymbolicSoliloquy]

Essentially a mold as you know is a way to create objects that are of the same class, by creating the ~(surface) where surface is a function of distribution of values. For example there is the ~(universe). Often times people will say, that's not true! What they've done is reduce a statement or paragraph down to the smallest choice, (T vs F) without respect to the field extensions of your paragraph onto conceptual fields. In other words your complicated ideas get projected onto a tiny surface.

[SymbolicSoliloquy]

Also, I usually represent a 2D surface as a 3D structure such as (x,y,v) mainly so that if you are planning on really exhausting the number of states for the surface, you need to consider v as being from 0 to 1. Often times people will take space as the truth side of the universe, and the false side as potential. The idea is that the universe has tiny wobbles between the true and false spaces, each a fraction of Euclidean Space. Think of molds as an example.

[SymbolicSoliloquy]

When you add up all of the possible states of the paper, you essentially take 2^(n) where n is the area of the surface, usually a size that can approach infinity the smaller and smaller you make the choices, that is the smaller the width or height you make them. However despite the fact that each state of the paper is a different class, counting them treats each unique instance as the same class. Which by the way is why you can write 1,000,000 on a paper. You aren't representing 1 mill classes.

[SymbolicSoliloquy]

Hi Cammie, you mention types, I usually think of things as classes. When you take a surface, such as paper, and consider the surface as a representation made up of smaller choices (true or false), you may think of the smallest choice as being made, but the potential for the surface to express all of its possibilities generates for each state a unique class. For example a point is a class, but so is a line, however when a point is on a larger surface, where the point exists forms a new class.

[SymbolicSoliloquy]

There is a challange, which I have found intellectually in the idea of surfaces and representation, especially with regards to value distribution. Free will over all possible choices in a given surface, allow for the possibilities of the surface to be expressed, however it would seem that - unfortunate for logic, there is no reason why one state of the surface should exist versus another. A calculus of surface manufacture seems to require distinct categories and heterogenous join configurations.

[jl4e23]

Congrats! According to news this past week, it would appear that you were correct.

[jomill78]

Dont get me wrong I wanted the LHC to work I really had high hopes truly,.. so you can see why Im equaly let down, cause they wont face the facts and tell the public, that there not finding anything significant yet, they wont even say that and guess what they never will cause they dont want to edmit  the spent all that money for a pretty light show... am i wrong for saying this.....am i

[jomill78]

Your right, ....and its kind of clear....the thing has been opporational for over a year now and .... wait for it.......wait for it........ they still have nating, nota, ziltch, zero, ...I cant wait for next year to come so all the people that told us were being inpatient, can start to get on the same page, trust me it will take a year but when there still talking about the funn there having smashing lead atoms, yet still no Discovoies, lol...200 Billion dollars later...lol

[a866903]

Nerrrrrrrrrrrddddddd!

(see DBZ Abridged for reference)

[hadron94]

Wasting 6 billion $? CERN is not only looking for the higgs. They are also waiting to see other interesting results. Like: a tiny (i can't emphasize the word enough) black hole that might prove extra dimensions. The LHC has more uses than we are aware of and we will only become more and more aware by seeing interesting things that physicists weren't originally looking for, most discoveries are by accident. Although it took much money to build the LHC it has the budget of a small university.

[DickHBox]

The point of the experiment is to examine aspects of the current Standard Model which are not reconciled. If they find the HB, then it's a step closer to unifying quantum & Newtonian physics. If they don't, then it's time to re-jig the Standard Model. Whatever the outcome, it's all part of a journey to understanding the underlying mechanisms of the Universe.

[DickHBox]

The point of the experiment is to examine aspects of the current Standard Model which are not reconciled. If they find the HB, then it's a step closer to unifying quantum & Newtonian physics. If they don't, then it's time to re-jig the Standard Model. Whatever the outcome, it's all part o f a journey to understanding the underlying mechanisms of the Universe.

[tastymaxbillion]

Maybe your not going to listen, but you asked why look for the higgs then imply string thoery when Engineering physicists ( not theoretical scientists ) will say the Higgs boson is a function of Quantum Mech. Most ST guys ( brian green etc) will tell you that the LHC can't test for string or Mtheory predictions. Not being mean here but CERN has a website explaining what the LHC is and ISN"T.

[soupdragon42]

Agreed. The chances of them finding these crazy particles are close to zero. Mathematical abstractionism does not equate to real world physics! When will they ever learn this simple fact?

[ryan84160]

@soupdragon42 Therefore they should not look at all right?

[soupdragon42]

@ryan84160 No you should look at the evidence and disregard the ideology.

[ryan84160]

@soupdragon42 A mathematical theory is ideology?

And that is exactly why the built the LHC ,so they can test for these things.

[soupdragon42]

@ryan84160 How is the LHC getting on? Any luck yet?

[ryan84160]

@soupdragon42 They basically just started. It could take years and years to find evidence of these things.I heard it described as something like finding a needle in 10 thousand haystacks. Even if they don't find anything they have still learned something. You can sit at home a speculate that they don't exist all you want, but at least they are trying to solve the problems and they will come back with tangible evidence either way.

[disarmmachina]

this guy is a total crackpot with zero understanding of particle physics. What a moron!

[CammieSpectrum]

@disarmmachina how do yo know that...any evidence??

[theraptureright]

Watching your dumb videos I've seen a constant that I'm wondering about. You seem to have a lot of problems and zero solutions. You don't trust anything except your own opinions. Do you have a god complex? Are you just a depressed, angry, loser who's parents neglected him and who can't get his little sucked on? Just wondering there genius.

[Battery9876]

There is a video on the inauguration of the LHC. Numerous Nobel prize winners were present.

This guy is just a dumb ass who knows fuck all about fuck all..

[theraptureright]

This guy forgets one of the most basic principles of scientific research. You cannot prove a negative. Repeat it and shut the fuck up you crazy idiot.

[tinkyshearer]

Finding the Higgs Boson which is a massive particle from smashing up smaller particles is like trying to find a house out of smashing up house bricks.

[10mintwo]

tell your doctor to up your clozapine dosage honey.

[lonewolfintj]

The experiments at the LHC are not a "waste", even if they fail to produce expected results. The goal of science is to determine what results you get, regardless of what you were expecting to get. Discovering that the Higgs Boson does not exist would be just as ground-breaking as discovering that it does. No matter what happens, physics will be changed forever when LHC gets up to full power. Grade: F (Shows lack of understanding of scientific enquiry.)

[soundbeans]

Even if find absolutely nothing from the LHC, that is still a result. It would be as groundbreaking as finding a new particle.