.jpg)
I read this in my high school AP Physics class. It's apparently been referenced as the "God particle" for a long time.
Interesting read, by the way. In-depth without being ridiculously over-technical.
Posted on 04/09/2013 1:30:00 AM PDT by Olog-hai
Ha, great minds think alike. Sorry, but I didn't scroll down far enough to see your post, before I posted mine...same idea!
“A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word 'darkness' on the walls of his cell.”
-C.S. Lewis
It will now be INDELIBLY ETCHED in my conversation as the God Particle
I read this in my high school AP Physics class. It's apparently been referenced as the "God particle" for a long time.
Interesting read, by the way. In-depth without being ridiculously over-technical.
No you did not pose your statement...
...The roots of atheism are almost always moral not intellectual
from any scripture...it is not posted anywhere in them. You pulled that as a 'fact' out of the air...don't try to say it is one of the lost commandments, or possibly from the gospel of some obscure disciple or some such...it is an opinion of yours no more, no less...
It is not a quote but it is contained everywhere in there. Keep reading until you understand the whole counsel of God. He may choose to open your eyes.
I believe in a creator.
the scriptures are another matter.
The scriptures tell us the evidence for a creator is plain and can be seen by all..... we see it in the creation. Do you agree with that part of scripture?
a stopped (analog) clock is right twice a day
But it’s only right for a second. So if part of the scripture says the evidence of a creator is plain for all to see.... you agree with that part I assume? That part was written 2000 years ago. That’s a lot of seconds. I would bet there are other parts of scripture that you would agree with too.
It doesn’t fit the bill. The God particle would be THE fundamental building block that all things were made of. The Higgs boson isn’t.
Yes...I agree.
A TRUE “atheist” wouldn’t care.
Your example of “Zeus” is a very good one.
And even if there were a segment of the population who insisted upon worshiping Zeus and believing upon him for their salvation, I would probably share my Faith with them in love, but not be ‘offended” by their persistence in their “Zeusianity”. It is, after all, a free country...so far.
Of course, if Zeusianity became the State Religion, and if I were forbidden to practice MINE, there WOULD be a problem.
Whichs brings a question.
Would Biggs be offended if his boson were dubbed “The Zeus Particle”?
sripture says that is a moral issue also.
If it happened once, it could happen again. Maybe it'll happen again in the next 5 minutes and we can take notes this time.
Ask him if the names of the planets Mars or Jupiter or Venus “offends” him.
And that’s written by a one-time atheist too (although how you can “become” atheist at age 15 confuses me a bit). He got his head turned around by Tolkien . . .
Well guess what professor - people are going to call the thing what they call it regardless of what you may wish for.
Secondly is he mad because of his feelings about God or is he mad because in using the term his own name is omitted? Or could it be a little of both?
My advice to Prof. Higgs - Get over it.
Good Point!
We have Planets, Cars, Cities, Motorcycles, Diseases, comic book characters, and body parts named for Ancient Mythical Gods.
He doesn’t seem to be offended by any of THEM.
Although he MIGHT be offended by Uranus.(smirk)
I always thought the “god (small g) particle” was physicists way of saying there was no “God.”
I follow the commandments where my day to day interaction with the rest of mankind is concerned.
It is a good set of rules to live by.
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.