The $6 billion LHC Circus

[darkbeaver]

Science has become an international circus. And opening day for “The Greatest Show on Earth” has arrived. In the 27 km main circus ring we have the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) project, starting up after $6 billion dollars and thirty years of development. Before the show the clowns have warmed up the audience with fantastic stories of what we might see. But why should we take clowns seriously?
Professor Higgs, seen here at the LHC, is one of the eminent scientists responsible for perhaps the most expensive circus in science today.

The BBC Horizon program, “The $6 billion Dollar Experiment,” documents the LHC experiment. The LHC accelerates beams of protons in opposite directions around a circular 27 km underground racetrack and then smashes them together head-on. The expense comes from the need to reach particle energies seven times that of earlier particle colliders and to construct a massive particle detector ‘cathedral’ underground. The energy density reached in the experiment is thought to mimic the earliest moments of the big bang – the origin of the universe.
Most of the experimenters involved are looking for the ‘God particle’. The Times Online reported on April 8:

“The mysterious boson postulated by Professor Higgs, of the University of Edinburgh, has become so fundamental to physics that it is often nicknamed the ‘God particle’. After more than 40 years of research, and billions of pounds, scientists have yet to prove that it is real. But Professor Higgs, 78, now believes the search is nearly over.”
​

The “God Particle” or Higgs boson was invented by Peter Higgs to explain why other particles exhibit mass. He starts with assuming the existence of a particle that has only mass and no other characteristics, such as charge.

















The irony of the experiment is that the LHC uses 120 megawatts of electrical power to recreate in a tiny space the presumed conditions that existed shortly after the big bang. But astrophysicists do not recognize the obvious signs of electrical power in space today. It signals a profound disconnect between the ‘specialism’ of theoretical physics and straightforward electrical engineering principles. The eminent historian of ideas, Jacques Barzun, wrote:

“The rampant specialism, an arbitrary and purely social evil, is not recognized for the crabbed guild spirit that it is, and few are bold enough to say that carving out a small domain and exhausting its soil affords as much chance for protected irresponsibility as for scientific thoroughness.”
—Science: the glorious entertainment.
​

Meanwhile, other circus ‘Big Tops’ have been erected over Gravity Wave Telescopes, built to see waves that don’t exist, and over research establishments of astrophysics and particle physics where it is supposed that 95% of the universe is made of invisible “dark matter” and is powered by undetectable “dark energy.”The $6 billion LHC Circus | holoscience.com | The Electric Universe

”To Hannes Alfvén, the Big Bang was a fable – a fable devised to explain creation. “I was there when Abbé Georges Lemaitre first proposed this theory,” he recalled. Lemaitre was, at the time, both a member of the Catholic hierarchy and an accomplished scientist. He said in private that this theory was a way to reconcile science with St. Thomas Aquinas’ theological dictum of creatio ex nihilo or creation out of nothing.”
— Anthony L. Peratt, ‘Dean of the Plasma Dissidents’, The World & I, May 1988, pp. 190-197.
​

sciencecartoonsplus.com


DB(creation out of nothing.”) This is the big problem with big bang today, they literally can't find nothing. DB hahahahahahahahahha

 

[L Gilbert]

Theory vs. hypothesis (and a silly one at that). Pop another hallucinogenic, Beav.

 

[darkbeaver]

Theory vs. hypothesis (and a silly one at that). Pop another hallucinogenic, Beav.

Les , don't quit yer day job, yer never going to be a professional skeptic.

The most amazing feature of this $6 billion experiment is the confused and illogical thinking behind it. At the heart of the thinking behind the Higgs boson is quantum mechanics, which has a fundamental flaw — it allows effects without a cause. For example, radioactive decay is unpredictable. We do not know what causes an atom to ‘spontaneously’ decay. Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman wrote, “…I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.” [The Character of Physical Law, 1965] Quantum mechanics is not physics, whose aim is understanding.

Of course, particle physicists operate by smashing atoms in violent collisions. But if normal matter is composed of subunits of charge in some resonant state of equilibrium (the simplest picture), then smashing particles together will merely generate new unstable (short lived) resonant systems of charge, which will be interpreted as members of a weird zoo of new particles. The LHC can do no more than that. No matter can be created or annihilated. And since the big bang and black holes are the result of the illogical or incorrect application of mathematics to a gravity driven model of the universe, nothing will be learned about either.

 

[L Gilbert]

Les , don't quit yer day job, yer never going to be a professional skeptic.

The most amazing feature of this $6 billion experiment is the confused and illogical thinking behind it. At the heart of the thinking behind the Higgs boson is quantum mechanics, which has a fundamental flaw — it allows effects without a cause. For example, radioactive decay is unpredictable. We do not know what causes an atom to ‘spontaneously’ decay. Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman wrote, “…I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.” [The Character of Physical Law, 1965] Quantum mechanics is not physics, whose aim is understanding.

Of course, particle physicists operate by smashing atoms in violent collisions. But if normal matter is composed of subunits of charge in some resonant state of equilibrium (the simplest picture), then smashing particles together will merely generate new unstable (short lived) resonant systems of charge, which will be interpreted as members of a weird zoo of new particles. The LHC can do no more than that. No matter can be created or annihilated. And since the big bang and black holes are the result of the illogical or incorrect application of mathematics to a gravity driven model of the universe, nothing will be learned about either.

Yes, it's a theory. Your elecrical wizardry is hypothesis. In developing this hypothesis, the developers have cherry-picked which laws to adhere to and which to ignore or contort. That is not science. Real science seeks to uncover the facts, not to diss other types of science. But you've been told that many times and still stick with the wizardry.

 

[darkbeaver]

Science Cartoons Plus -- The Cartoons of S. Harris

Yes, it's a theory. Your elecrical wizardry is hypothesis. In developing this hypothesis, the developers have cherry-picked which laws to adhere to and which to ignore or contort. That is not science. Real science seeks to uncover the facts, not to diss other types of science. But you've been told that many times and still stick with the wizardry.

Hey it makes toast coffee and runs the telly.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Yep, and it runs the telly because of quantum mechanics' understanding of how particles behave. There are quantum mechanical devices in your telly, unless it's a *very* old one, and they work because quantum mechanics provides an accurate, predictive description of how things behave. Which is not something you can say about your electric cosmos foolishness, it predicts things that are not seen, like the current of electrons moving at relativistic speeds that are required to power the sun in that model and the huge magnetic field that would generate, and flies in the face of things that ARE seen, like the electrically neutral solar wind.

 

[petros]

The science of solid maybes isn't science. It's like counting cards in blackjack with a two deck shoe. Add four more decks and the game changes.

 

[Blackleaf]

The LHC found the Higgs Boson, and British scientist Peter Higgs - who first proposed the existence of the Higgs Boson - was awarded the 2013 Nobel Prize for Physics as a result.

 

[JLM]

W.T.F. is an LHC Circus? If you're are going to use initials explain them. Oh yeah I forgot to explain W.T.F.

 

[petros]

Large Hadron Collider

 

[darkbeaver]

The “God Particle” or Higgs boson was invented by Peter Higgs to explain why other particles exhibit mass. He starts with assuming the existence of a particle that has only mass and no other characteristics, such as charge. So the Higgs particle is like no other in our experience, since all normal matter is composed of electric charges that respond to electromagnetic influences. (Dark matter falls into the same category.) However, we observe that the mass of a charged subatomic particle is altered by the application of electromagnetic forces. At its simplest (and Nature is economical in our experience) it indicates that mass is related to the storage of energy within a system of electric charges inside the particle. That’s what E = mc2 is telling us. So how can a massive particle be constructed without electric charge? It shows the problem inherent in leaving physics to mathematicians — there is a disconnect between mathematical concepts and reality

Of course, particle physicists operate by smashing atoms in violent collisions. But if normal matter is composed of subunits of charge in some resonant state of equilibrium (the simplest picture), then smashing particles together will merely generate new unstable (short lived) resonant systems of charge, which will be interpreted as members of a weird zoo of new particles. The LHC can do no more than that. No matter can be created or annihilated. And since the big bang and black holes are the result of the illogical or incorrect application of mathematics to a gravity driven model of the universe, nothing will be learned about either.The $6 billion LHC Circus | holoscience.com | The Electric Universe

 

[petros]

You can't have EM without E

 

[darkbeaver]

The LHC found the Higgs Boson, and British scientist Peter Higgs - who first proposed the existence of the Higgs Boson - was awarded the 2013 Nobel Prize for Physics as a result.

Right then, show us a bottle of the stuff. Budgets and politics decide Nobel Prizes. Witness the peace prize awarded to a global class murderer and warmonger, Obama the Knife.

 

[petros]

Nobel prizes are a f*cking joke.

 

[JLM]

Nobel prizes are a f*cking joke.

Sounds like you didn't get yours! -

 

[darkbeaver]

You can't have EM without E

And that is a commandment of the certainest kind. Thee #1 law of physics. Quantum physics is a sick joke.

 

[petros]

Sounds like you didn't get yours! -

I have a bag of oreos which probably have more scientific backing behind them.

 

[darkbeaver]

I have a bag of oreos which probably have more scientific backing behind them.

That's certainly the truth.


When controversy was still tolerated over Einstein’s theories, Sir Oliver Lodge, a noted Fellow of the Royal Society, wrote in Nature on Feb 17, 1921:
“..what is really wanted for a truly Natural Philosophy is a supplement to Newtonian mechanics, expressed in terms of the medium which he suspected and sought after but could not attain, and introducing the additional facts, chiefly electrical—especially the fact of variable inertia—discovered since his time…Electric Gravity in an Electric Universe | holoscience.com | The Electric Universe

In 1850, Faraday performed experiments trying to link gravity with electromagnetism that were unsuccessful. However, his conviction remained:
“The long and constant persuasion that all the forces of nature are mutually dependent, having one common origin, or rather being different manifestations of one fundamental power, has often made me think on the possibility of establishing, by experiment, a connection between gravity and electricity …no terms could exaggerate the value of the relation they would establish.” [

Matter and mass

Gravity acts in proportion to the mass of an object. What do we mean when we refer to the ‘mass’ of an object? “One of the most astonishing features of the history of physics is the confusion which surrounds the definition of the key term in dynamics, mass.” [13] Early in the 20th century numerous textbooks equated the mass of an object to its weight. That equation led to confusion because it doesn’t explain why the mass of an object we measure on a weighing machine (gravitational mass) is identical to the mass of that object when we push it (inertial mass).

This inexcusable philosophical muddle over matter and mass has given rise to violation of the fundamental physics principle of no creation or annihilation of matter. It has allowed a miraculous cosmological creation story to gain currency, known as the ‘big bang.’ [14] Notions of ‘vacuum energy’ and of particles ‘winking in and out of existence’ in the vacuum of space are similarly miraculous. The simple fact is that we have no concept of why matter manifests with mass.

Dayton Miller (left) with Irving Michelson (right). Credit: Case WRU Archives. “Miller's work on ether drift was clearly undertaken with more precision, care and diligence than any other researcher who took up the question, including Michelson, and yet, his work has basically been written out of the history of science.”

For example, plasma cosmology is officially recognized by the largest professional organization in the world, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), while big bang cosmologists ignore it. The electric universe model is an extension of plasma cosmology. It is based on concepts derived from observations as disparate as petroglyphs and quasar redshift. Big bang cosmologists have no narrative that can compete. But by the simple act of ignoring alternatives they reject them—if the public simply acquiesce and do not speak up.
Wal ThornhillElectric Gravity in an Electric Universe | holoscience.com | The Electric Universe

 

[petros]

It's baffling why they are called ELECTrons.

 

[darkbeaver]

Don't give them ideas.

Theory vs. hypothesis (and a silly one at that). Pop another hallucinogenic, Beav.

It does not seem to matter, haha, what hallucinogen I ingest I just can't get as outofit as whacked particle phizzishisscists. They're science welfare bums and that's the plain truth of it.