Comments for "Scientists Attempt to Recreate The Big Bang" Video at VideoSift.com

By Zonbie

Zonbie (http://zonbie.videosift.com) — Wed, 14 May 2008 09:43:03 -0700

wow, going back 6000 years ago! the ID community must be VERY excited!

This is brilliant, its Black Mesa all over again...

By blutruth

blutruth (http://science.videosift.com/member/blutruth) — Wed, 14 May 2008 10:45:23 -0700

accel, not excel.

By Irishman

Irishman (http://science.videosift.com/member/Irishman) — Wed, 14 May 2008 10:59:30 -0700

Either they are going to detect the Higgs boson, or the last 30 years of contemporary physics has been a complete waste of time, and all the physicists who have made a career out string theory will be beaten with sticks.

My money is on them not finding it, and once again the string theorists will fiddle the equations to keep themselves in funding.

By bcglorf

bcglorf (http://science.videosift.com/member/bcglorf) — Wed, 14 May 2008 11:04:15 -0700

Upvote for CERN and the fundamental research it will provide. The next big breakthrough in physics is going to come from this kind of research and the more the public is informed the better. That said, boo on the reporter for saying
"While it's considered unlikely that a catastrophic explosion could result..."
and right after it was explained to him that these reactions already happen in nature all the time. The only trick is that they are so small we need a device like this to make them happen in a very precise location we can build detectors around to observe the results. The reaction isn't novel, the ability to observe it with the required precision to learn anything is.

By deathcow

deathcow (http://science.videosift.com/member/deathcow) — Wed, 14 May 2008 11:58:15 -0700

I think they will find what they are after, or they will find things which are equally profound.

> theorists will fiddle the equations to keep themselves in funding.

If they didn't waste all our money on war, we could definitely build a machine big enough to destroy the universe.

By Fade

Fade (http://science.videosift.com/member/Fade) — Wed, 14 May 2008 12:56:57 -0700

Correct me if I'm wrong here but I believe you are mistaken Irishman, it's not string theory but the standard model that predicts the higgs boson.

By ashes2flames

ashes2flames (http://science.videosift.com/member/ashes2flames) — Wed, 14 May 2008 15:57:33 -0700

See, this is the problem I have with all of this:

"... while it's considered unlikely that a catastrophic explosion could come ..."

I'm sorry but that's just not good enough for me. I want to hear "there is a 100% certainty based on irrefutable evidence unanimously agreed upon" etc .. that we aren't going to unleash hell on earth .. the end times .. and so on.

http://www.lhcconcerns.com/

By Zeph

Zeph (http://zeph.videosift.com) — Wed, 14 May 2008 20:54:20 -0700

>> ^deathcow:
If they didn't waste all our money on war, we could definitely build a machine big enough to destroy the universe.

You're assuming the two are mutually exclusive.

By Majortomyorke

Majortomyorke (http://science.videosift.com/member/Majortomyorke) — Wed, 14 May 2008 22:51:29 -0700

@ Fade, you're correct. The Higgs Boson is predicted by the standard model, not String Theory.
@ ashes2flames, that level of certainty doesn't exist, especially in the realm of quantum physics.

By ashes2flames

ashes2flames (http://science.videosift.com/member/ashes2flames) — Thu, 15 May 2008 00:34:46 -0700

Good news for me .. I live in the realm of reality.
errm .. maybe that's bad news.