Not sure what you are being sceptical about Marsha. The LHC will be a failure if it fails to find the Higgs "God" Particle - even significant probability evidence. (If it manages to somehow prove it's non-existence that would be welcome news - a success in some eyes - but I can't imagine how it could do that). It can never be a "complete failure" we will always learn somthing - even if it is how not to prioritize science project funding. Of course if it just opens up some hole in the fabric of space-time and we all disappear through it into oblivion - that might count as a disaster ;-)
Are you sceptical of my opinion or sceptical of the value of any LHC findings ? Ian On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:56 PM, MarshaV<[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Ian, > > But it is a question of what constitutes failure? I admit my knowledge base > is puny, but from what I understand it was from 15,000,000 trials that > success was claimed from 6 events. I don't know much about probability > either, but that would be an error probability of plus or minus what? The > fact that the LHD has been built to find the Higgs boson may have a great > influence on its being successfully found. > > > Cynically and skeptically yours, > > Marsha > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ian Glendinning > Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 9:21 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [MD] principle of complimentarity > > Marsha, I think I love you ... > "there is much too much invested in the Standard Model" > ... is a very shrewd summing up - that's why we have to wait for LHD to > fail. > > Dark Matter - not seen yet, but on my list to check out. > Ian > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:33 PM, MarshaV<[email protected]> wrote: >> Ian, >> >> The zeros are there and cannot be ignored (one would think), but from what > I >> heard of the Top Quark discovery at Fermilab it doesn't take much for them >> to cry Victory, there is much too much invested in the Standard Model. > Did >> you happen to see the movie 'Dark Matter'? I know it's just a movie, but >> it's making legitimate claims about the ??? Well, if you get a chance see >> the movie. >> >> >> Marsha >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ian > Glendinning >> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 8:21 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [MD] principle of complimentarity >> >> Hi Ron, Marsha, >> >> I like that >> "Objectivly speaking, reality is a dream within a dream within a >> dream...et infinum" >> >> I have used >> "The dreams that stuff are made from" to bastardize the bard - though >> I didn't coin that version. >> >> Just for the record the limitations are not within the "measuring >> devices" - but with the very concept of measurement, given current >> received wisdom of fundamental physics. >> >> FYI - my current view is one level lower than either particles or >> waves - quantum information - where wave-particle complemenarity are >> just two views of the same information. We'll have to wait for that >> expensive piece of kit in Switzerland to be a complete failure (or >> disaster) before much of the world notices though. The guys with the >> funding have the wrong maths - Einstein corrected his error, but still >> very few have noticed post-Copenhagen. >> >> Ian. >> >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:09 PM, X Acto<[email protected]> wrote: >>> Marsha, >>> >>> I believe it seems to exclude a particles momentum or trajectory simply >> because >>> of the limits of the measuring devices and the gravitational effects it >> has on them. >>> >>> For starters, mainly because particles are not really entities or >> substances but an intersection >>> of fields of force. >>> As I understand it, particles are layers apon layers of said > intersections >> built up from a backround >>> of these fields of "force" for lack of a better word, manifesting in >> strong and weak atomic forces. >>> >>> The popular theory at the moment, which the super collider hoped to >> verify, was that all of this >>> is a manifestation of the field of space, or string theory, that space is >> composed of fluctuating >>> quantum rings. >>> Objectivly speaking, reality is a dream within a dream within a > dream...et >> infinum >>> >>> so measuring is a bit of a problem, objectivly. Complimentrarity, says >> that these particles >>> and forces only exist in relation to eachother. to isolate them and >> calculte their trajectory >>> is misunderstanding them, it creates paradox. like the particle/wave >> duality, the duality >>> lies in how the phenomena is measured not in the phenomena itself. >>> >>> So to conclude, the problem is in how physicists understand particles and >> the limits of the >>> methods of measurement. >>> >>> -Ron >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: MarshaV <[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 6:27:27 AM >>> Subject: [MD] principle of complimentarity >>> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> >>> >>> Why is it that if we perform an experiment to determine a quantum >> particle's >>> position, it excludes knowing only the particle's momentum and not >>> everything else? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Marsha >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _____________ >>> >>> >>> >>> "He who neglects the present moment throws away all he has." >>> (Friedrich von Schiller) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list >>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >>> Archives: >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list >>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >>> Archives: >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ >>> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ >> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org >> Archives: >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ >> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ >> > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
