Cosmology News

Nobel judges struggle over who to award the Prize for the God particle to, when it is unclear …

Spread the love

… that the particle even exists. Quote of the day:

The Nobel committee is famous for awarding prizes for ideas that are not only elegant and insightful, but also true. They will wait years for evidence, and decades for proof. And if there was ever an elegant unproven idea, it is the Higgs Mechanism, which Prof. Close prefers to call the Mass Mechanism.

– Joseph Brean, “Large Hadron Collider & the ‘God Particle’: Six creators, one Nobel Prize,” National Post, December 3, 2011

One problem is that people may die in the meantime, but if the Higgs never does turn up, and a Prize was awarded for it … wouldn’t making sci-fi movies be cheaper than building the Large Hadron Collider?

Note:Brean, for the National Post, is one of the few science writers you’ll find who picks up on the subtleties.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

One Reply to “Nobel judges struggle over who to award the Prize for the God particle to, when it is unclear …

  1. 1
    MrDunsapy says:

    Well I hope they don’t pick anyone connected with ‘evolution’.
    Because this is what really, are there facts for.

    1 life comes from life
    2 a human comes from humans
    3 there is design in life.
    No one has any evidence that goes against this

    also the patterns that many ‘evolutionists see, are really creative patterns
    The Patterns of Creation

    This is an idea that one life was created,.. from that the DNA was slightly modified, then another animal was created from that. After all if your going to make millions of animals why would start from scratch every time. Computer programmer’s do that today. Since most of the DNA is building the same parts, like muscle tissue, bones, teeth, and other organs, why redo all of that. Also could a creator actually breed animals to bring out certain traits. Humans do that today, and have for years?
    But is this just an idea? It does explain why there is a pattern of decent in life.
    Is this just speculation on my part?
    Well in the creation accounts, the creator actually said he did this.
    This is the account of Adam and Eve. Eve was created from the rib of Adam, not just DNA was taken but bone tissue and muscle tissue and flesh. Using this statement by the creator, is he telling us that animals could also have been created by this method. That also means that vestiges of history in generations past would be included in that process.
    The evidence we have say that adaptations , breeding , natural selection and mutations do not make new kinds of life, but just allow for a variety of dogs , for example.
    Some scientists say common descent, some say uncommon descent, they are both wrong. It is creative descent. That is what the evidence supports.

    Have not the scientists actually showed this as correct?

    So even uncommon descent is not totally accurate.

    So in science I do hope they pick someone that actually supports reality.

Leave a Reply