Could the Large Hadron Collider be held back by its own future?

The Telegraph ^ | 10/13/2009 | Richard Alleyne

[bruinbirdman]

[the anti-liberal]

Sounds like the makings of an interesting movie.

[C210N]

firing particles around a 17-mile underground tunnel near Geneva...

The endpoint of the 17-mile tunnel:

[thulldud]

If they don’t want to hunt for Higgs bosons anymore, I know where there’s a plentiful source of bogons that they can study.

[ichabod1]

Bosons? This Thread Is Worthless Without Pictures!

[Incorrigible]

Far out man!

[robomatik]

particle accelerator rap

[GourmetDan]

More likely is that the Higgs boson doesn’t even exist and they’ll have to throw out everything they currently believe to be ‘true’ and start over...

[editor-surveyor]

He said that his theories may even provide a "model for God" who "rather hates Higgs particles, and attempts to avoid them”.

This guy needs more human contact so he won't have to channel satan.

[sourcery]

Hmmm....so they’re sending Higgsy Moran to enforce the rules?

Q: When will the Hadron Collider become operational?

A: When Higgs fly...

[BipolarBob]

I don’t know who this Higgs chick is, but they’re spending a boatload of money checking out her bosom.

[sodpoodle]

(A FReeper on another thread piqued my interest)

http://www.around.com/chaos.html

Chaos poses problems that defy accepted ways of working in science. It makes strong claims about the universal behavior of complexity. The first chaos theorists, the scientists who set the discipline in motion, shared certain sensibilities. They had an eye for pattern, especially pattern that appeared on different scales at the same time. They had a taste for randomness and complexity, for jagged edges and sudden leaps. Believers in chaos—and they sometimes call themselves believers, or converts, or evangelists—speculate about determinism and free will, about evolution, about the nature of conscious intelligence. They feel that they are turning back a trend in science toward reductionism, the analysis of systems in terms of their constituent parts: quarks, chromosomes, or neurons. They believe that they are looking for the whole.

[editor-surveyor]

"More likely is that the Higgs boson doesn’t even exist and they’ll have to throw out everything they currently believe to be ‘true’ and start over"

Since the 'big bang' never happened, I'll take 20 tons of that.

[fso301]

I don’t know who this Higgs chick is, but they’re spending a boatload of money checking out her bosom.

I don't understand either. The article says it's very small. The scientists must be pedophiles or something.

[editor-surveyor]

"They believe that they are looking for the whole."

I found it, its in their heads.

[MrEdd]

Could it be that the thing has design problems, is malfunction prone, and those connected with it are too ashamed to admit this in public?

[Riley]

I don’t know who this Higgs chick is, but they’re spending a boatload of money checking out her bosom.

We're kind of stupid that way.

[Cicero]

Well, strange things happen when you enter the realm of quantum mechanics.

Perhaps Schrödinger’s Cat is responsible for this strange phenomenon.

[bruinbirdman]

"They believe that they are looking for the whole."

Like many people who claim to be athiests yet spend their lives looking for God.

yitbos

[achilles2000]

They are taking their models too seriously. In fifty years these scientists’ comments will be objects of fun - rather like the comments at the turn of the 19th Century by someone whose name eludes me now to the effect that nearly everything important had been discovered.

There will be no blackhole and no reverse causation or time travel to prevent the “dreaded Higgs Boson from being found - if it exists at all.