Skip to comments.
New Physics Complications Lend Support to Multiverse Hypothesis
Scientific American ^
| June 1, 2013
| Natalie Wolchover and Simons Science News
Posted on 06/03/2013 5:18:54 PM PDT by BenLurkin
The spectacular discovery of the Higgs boson in July 2012 confirmed a nearly 50-year-old theory of how elementary particles acquire mass, which enables them to form big structures such as galaxies and humans. The fact that it was seen more or less where we expected to find it is a triumph for experiment, its a triumph for theory, and its an indication that physics works, Arkani-Hamed told the crowd.
However, in order for the Higgs boson to make sense with the mass (or equivalent energy) it was determined to have, the LHC needed to find a swarm of other particles, too. None turned up.
(Excerpt) Read more at scientificamerican.com ...
TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: higgsboson; multiverse; physics; science; stringtheory
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-35 last
To: BenLurkin
"Decades of confounding experiments have physicists considering a startling possibility: The universe might not make sense" Or it may make sense. The entire article doesn't advocate either position, but does say that experimental results in the next few years are likely to steer us down one path or the other.
21
posted on
06/03/2013 6:55:38 PM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
To: LibWhacker
If the universe doesn't make sense, then literally anything is possible because reason (sense) can't rule it out... abracadabra magic, faster than light travel, God Himself. In trying to prove He doesn't exist, science seems to have tied itself into a knot. A lot of scientists want to know how God created the universe. The experimental results that point to a multiverse also point to fine tuning.
22
posted on
06/03/2013 7:03:31 PM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
To: BenLurkin
"Decades of confounding experiments have physicists considering a startling possibility: The universe might not make sense" Hmmm..Universe doesn't seem to be homogeneous...
No homo???
23
posted on
06/03/2013 7:51:41 PM PDT
by
SuperLuminal
(Where is another agitator for republicanism like Sam Adams when we need him?)
To: BenLurkin
I love science where there are theories, experiments to test theories, evaluations of the data, and acknowledgements of failures. It all makes science seem real again after having been inundated with trashy climate science.
24
posted on
06/03/2013 8:09:05 PM PDT
by
pallis
To: BenLurkin
I don’t recall reading before about naturalness/unnaturalness in the context of cosmology and particle creation. Maybe my memories were cancelled out?
25
posted on
06/03/2013 8:31:57 PM PDT
by
steve86
(Acerbic by Nature, not Nurture™)
To: BenLurkin
Actually, the degree to which atheist materialists have embraced “multiverse” theory is quite amusing.
They profess to be empiricists and atheists have, at least traditionally, wielded Occam’s razor against the existence of an unobservable, transcendent deity. Now, in preference to one unobservable entity, they posit a vast, perhaps infinite, array of necessarily unobservable entities (if it can be observed, it’s in our universe, not another one), thereby ceding control of Occam’s razor to us theists.
26
posted on
06/03/2013 8:34:49 PM PDT
by
The_Reader_David
(And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
>> which enables them to form big structures such as galaxies and humans egos.
27
posted on
06/03/2013 8:35:32 PM PDT
by
Gene Eric
(Don't be a statist!)
To: 6SJ7; AdmSmith; AFPhys; Arkinsaw; allmost; aristotleman; autumnraine; Beowulf; Bones75; BroJoeK; ...
28
posted on
06/03/2013 8:39:36 PM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(McCain would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
To: rwilson99
29
posted on
06/03/2013 8:42:41 PM PDT
by
Secret Agent Man
(Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
To: BenLurkin
Another thought: my favorite Einstein quote (other than “Goedel’s gone completely mad: he’s voting for Eisenhower!”) is “The mathematicians can’t tell me what I need to know,” uttered late in his life when he was trying to replace quantum mechanics with a classical “physically realistic” theory — a hopeless errand we now know thanks to the empirical violation of Bell’s inequalities.
The problem is not that the universe might not make sense, but that physicists are trying continually to hang onto the same mathematical toolbox that worked for classical physics and general relativity, when the best indications are that it doesn’t work to describe anything involving quantum phenomena — in particular, space-time won’t end up being a smooth manifold with a Minkowskian metric because the continuum model breaks down at fine scale. I suspect we mathematicians might now be able to tell them what they need to know, but most physicists aren’t asking.
30
posted on
06/03/2013 8:43:03 PM PDT
by
The_Reader_David
(And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know...)
To: Yehuda
Ten or 20 years ago, I was a firm believer in naturalness, said Nathan Seiberg, a theoretical physicist at the Institute, where Einstein taught from 1933 until his death in 1955. Now Im not so sure. My hope is theres still something we havent thought about, some other mechanism that would explain all these things. But I dont see what it could be.
31
posted on
06/03/2013 9:22:15 PM PDT
by
Ezekiel
(The Obama-nation began with the Inauguration of Desolation.)
To: The_Reader_David
Another thought: my favorite Einstein quote (other than Goedels gone completely mad: hes voting for Eisenhower!) is The mathematicians cant tell me what I need to know, uttered late in his life when he was trying to replace quantum mechanics with a classical physically realistic theory a hopeless errand we now know thanks to the empirical violation of Bells inequalities. What gets me is that some of the major founders of quantum mechanics such as Einstein and Schrodinger never accepted it as a final theory, or showed an outright dislike for it.
32
posted on
06/04/2013 5:06:57 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
To: The_Reader_David
Actually, the degree to which atheist materialists have embraced multiverse theory is quite amusing. The article states that most scientists have resisted the "multiverse" theory. I think we get a biased view of the beliefs of scientists because journalists select scientific opinion that supports their agenda.
33
posted on
06/04/2013 5:12:03 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
To: Zeneta
Don’t start somethin’, wont be nothin’.
Just sayin’
34
posted on
06/04/2013 5:20:09 AM PDT
by
SouthWall
(If we are having diversity classes, shouldn't we be having unity classes?)
To: The_Reader_David
I confess that most of what you said goes over my head, but I offer one clueless comment as to this:
we mathematicians might now be able to tell them what they need to know, but most physicists arent asking.
It seems this Soft Science guy (an Anthropology major 25 years ago) that once mathematicians have begun to address things cosmological, they have entered into a philosophical practice. Albeit one rendered sublime by the requisite discipline of mathematics.
35
posted on
06/04/2013 6:43:26 AM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-35 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson