A vast cavern is the stage for tests to find the 'God particle'

The Times ^

[Semper]

Always start the movie in the middle. Go ape if anyone attempts to play the beginning, and never watch the ending!

If you believe in eternity, we are always in the middle.

[f.Christian]

Apostles (( spores )) of anarchy ... evo science - art (( oxymorons )) --- # 63 !!

[honeygrl]

"You said that much better than I did. I was trying to phrase it in a way that would prevent me from being buried under a hundred Bible quotes."

You'll likely get that on here eventually anyhow. I am interested in putting the two theories (i'm gonna get clobbered for calling creationism a theory) together and see where that goes but I'm not a science whiz. It seems to me that someone saying "a day" in the bible could also mean "an era" or any section of time so 7 days could end up meaning 7 million years or 7 billion years. Like saying "back in my day" means "back when I was young" rather than one specific day. I think the christian bible, other religions "bibles" (not sure they call them their bibles or what) and mythological stories have similar creation stories and just maybe they all are takes on the same thing by different people. Does that make sense? (i just took my medicine and am a little loopy for an hour after I take it so i may not have explained it well.)

[AndrewC]

Or never there.

[js1138]

PLEASE! Someone can be found who is offended by anything that is posted. ;-)

Apparently someone was offended by #80.

[Cyber Ninja]

God keeps making more, they are like Doretos from Heavan. Crunch all you want He'll make more. CB^)

[I got the rope]

I was referring to your homo apologist posts of the past. Were you not suggesting that there is some "Greater" logic outside what science knows through measurable natural law.
By doing this...can there really be a standard? We don't live in the 5th dimension...we live in this one. So what ever discoveries we have must be explained by the mathematics or science of where we are now.

[Cyber Ninja]

It is real easy to offend people here. I apparently offended someone once when I used a word that appeared 14 times in the posted excerpt. CB^(

[I got the rope]

I was trying to make a point about the stretched logic of Consorts comment...using her previous comments. I guess I could have been more tactful, been then again f. Christian is here again and I still can't figure out what he's saying.
I give this thread a thousand posts before JimRob pulls it.

[Physicist]

Let's say an electron, a particle we are all at least vaguely familiar with. Prasumably, all electrons must have arisen from a primordial vacuum at some point, no? And they last a hell of a long time, no?

You're confusing real and virtual particles. You can always pry real electrons out of the vacuum by providing enough energy. Since electrons weigh 511 keV, it takes 1.022 MeV to produce an electron-positron pair. (Whether we're talking about real or virtual electrons, you have to produce a matter-antimatter pair to preserve such things as angular momentum and electromagnetic charge, while a Higgs, being its own antiparticle, can be produced as a singlet.)

[Geek alert: You may have noticed that this implies that the numbers of electrons and positrons should be exactly equal. In the early universe, they were almost--but not exactly--equal. After some time, they all annihilated each other, leaving the residue of matter we see today. The difference between "exactly" and "not exactly" is due to a phenomenon called "CP violation", which among other things establishes a direction to time. (And here you thought I was going to attribute it to the number of Hertz.)]

A virtual electron-positron pair, by contrast, is here and gone in a very brief time (order of 10^-21 seconds). I know it happens, though, because for the brief time the pair exists, it constitutes an electrical dipole. Since space is full of these momentary dipoles, I can use an electric field to line them up, and get them pulling in the same direction. It is an experimental fact that the "empty" vacuum can be polarized in this fashion.

[Physicist]

That makes it continuous, zero being the briefest. That means the particles are always there.

"Always" isn't the briefest time, but the longest time. "Never" is the briefest.

[AndrewC]

Post 104, but what I was trying to determine was the limiting factor on the "existence" of all particles in all of space.

[js1138]

I give this thread a thousand posts before JimRob pulls it.

I've been on 6000 post threads. I treat them like telephone conversations. They have high and low points, then they end. I suppose someone is adding links to a superthread, so it's better if they fade away rather than get killed, but not tragic if they get deleted.

[Physicist]

I'm afraid you'll have to spell it out; I don't see where you're going with this.

[Brooklynman]

There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension ofimagination. It is an area which we call the Twilight Zone.

[TomB]

Does that make sense?

Absolutley. But don't expect to get anywhere with the Bible quote throwing crowd.

In the one Astronomy course I had in college, the professor saved the last lecture to discuss how Astronomy and the origins of the universe didn't clash with his Christian faith. I was very enlightening.

And don't feel bad, I'm loopy with or without meds.

[AndrewC]

How many different particles can I make from a "point" in space?

If it is only one, then if I can borrow zero energy for an "infinite" amount of time and I can borrow an "infinite" amount of energy for zero amount of time, it appears to me that I can borrow something close to zero which keeps other things from occurring for a very very very ... long time. I also get the feeling that small pilfering is more likely than large pilfering. So looking at space that way, why would anything happen?

On the other hand, if many different particles can arise from the same point, I would expect something to "always" occupy the point.

[Semper]

"Always" isn't the briefest time, but the longest time. "Never" is the briefest.

Clarification please. "Always" and "never" don't seem to include the limiting concept of time, while "longest" and "briefest" clearly do include the element of time. In other words, how can "never" be equated to "brief" since the former is without time and the later implies some degree of time?

[TomB]

I told you.......

[clamboat]

A virtual electron-positron pair, by contrast, is here and gone in a very brief time (order of 10-21 seconds). I know it happens, though, because for the brief time the pair exists, it constitutes an electrical dipole. Since space is full of these momentary dipoles, I can use an electric field to line them up, and get them pulling in the same direction. It is an experimental fact that the "empty" vacuum can be polarized in this fashion.

Absolutely fascinating. Thank you for the lucid explanation.