So there’s a thing called mass – and what?

The more global left the press, the more hysterical and cut and dried they report it. Notice the more moderate language at the Telegraph:

# Scientists say they believe they have found they much sought-after Higgs boson particle

# Higgs boson ‘discovery’ a hugely important day for British physics

# Higgs Boson rumours strengthened by new data

Now watch the “rationalist” bloggers jump on this, calling it a “god particle” and claiming it disproves God. Some comments on the sane side of the ledger:

# If the same level of scrutiny had been devoted to killing the myth of AGW we would have saved the cost of the LHC a dozen times over.

# We can travel faster than the speed of light … oh no sorry, a screw was loose.

# I’ve just seen the greatest mutual masturbation session in recorded history.

# In real world terms that translates into they think they might possibly have detected something that matches their hypothesis of how they surmise the particle may behave. Which is a good bit different to “we have it”!

On this last one, one hysterical reporter was writing that it “matched” the Big Bang theory. I wanted to stop her and ask if she’d just used the word “theory”? Big Bang is a surmise, unmeasurable, the Standard Model is as well. Hell, I too could begin with an a priori and then construct a 40 year case around it and it wouldn’t cost billions.

And so what anyway? If mass exists, it has to exist somehow. What’s so momentous about it? Gravity exists too. So what?

The greatest problem with this is the political mileage CERN will make out of it, lapped up by those who’ve been just dying to disprove God “scientifically” for decades.

Finally, we could do worse than look at this sobering post by an actual scientist on the way the Scientific Establishment operates today and has done for some time, never forgetting the vast amounts of lucre that need to be justified for this R&D. Nothing against R&D in principle – just the way it’s gone in the hands of Them.

8 comments for “So there’s a thing called mass – and what?

  1. Chuckles
    July 4, 2012 at 2:34 pm

    ‘So there’s a thing called mass – and what?’

    That means it’s Catholic?

    • July 4, 2012 at 6:18 pm

      Snort. 😈

    • Mudplugger
      July 5, 2012 at 8:44 pm

      That explains it….

      A Higgs Boson walked into a Catholic church.
      The priest said, “What are you doing here ?”
      Higgs B replied, “You can’t have Mass without me.”

  2. Monty
    July 4, 2012 at 8:53 pm

    It has been particularly galling to watch TV presenters and subtitles announcing that they have found Higgs bosom, and Higgs bosun, as if it were a drunken sailor. Not to mention the Higgs bozone, Higgs bassoon….

    • July 4, 2012 at 9:54 pm

      “Higgs bosom” 😀

    • July 7, 2012 at 7:03 am

      Whereas the Higgs Boyzone was found to be readily split into five smaller particles: a persistent particle known as a Ronone, a smaller particle known as a Stephone that has since decayed, and three virtual particles provisionally labelled “who”, “what” and “for feck’s sake, why”.

      Too soon?

  3. Greg Tingey
    July 5, 2012 at 7:50 am

    As you well know – you can’t disprove any BigSkyFairy, so stop talking even more rubbish than usual.
    What you CAN do is posit that, even if BigSkyFairy (in any form) exists, or not, then he/she/it/they are NOT DETECTABLE.
    And therefore irrelevant.
    Now, that, of course, CAN be falsified.
    Get on with it.
    Put up – or – shut up.
    In the meantime, the proposition stands.

    As for the reporters, you know as well as I that they are idiots.

    The depth of your ignorance, stupidity and crassnes is expressed best in your own words:
    “Gravity exists too. So what?”
    You really mean that?
    Did you?
    Gravity holds the planets together, it holds the Solar syatem and the Galaxies together, all operating under a very simple rule (until very large masses are involved)
    Use of Newton’s gravity equations, coupled with modern observational and rocket technology enables us to realise that (it seems) almost ALL stars have planets/
    I suggest you look up the Planck project.
    Or even this:

    So ignore them.

  4. July 7, 2012 at 7:08 am

    James, mate, the fact that the term ‘God particle’ has nothing to do with whether or not there are any gods is something that journos have mostly failed to grasp.

    Lederman said he gave it the nickname “the God particle” because the particle is “so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our understanding of the structure of matter, yet so elusive,” but jokingly added that a second reason was because “the publisher wouldn’t let us call it the Goddamn Particle, though that might be a more appropriate title, given its villainous nature and the expense it is causing.”

    My advice is laugh at their ignorance and/or beat them about the head with a cricket bat with that quote written down it.

Comments are closed.