I suppose that once the dust is settled it appears like an extension of the existing models is the reason for the immediate acceptance of a new concept. In the case of the Higgs, I have great reservations about where it truly fits into the operation of the universe. Here I am referring to the particle that apparently was recently discovered since no one can show that it has anything at all to do with the mass of other particles. Just because a few decays were detected does not prove anything about other more important interactions of the particle. I have already read articles that wonder if this one is indeed the real Higgs.
Most of the important discoveries have come about by serendipity instead of by plan. The background microwave radiation is a fine example. The list is far longer of discoveries that occur by accident rather than by intent. Perhaps true science is advanced by luck, or by using instruments that can see further into the murk. Once something new is found, it becomes applied science or engineering from that point forth. No one knew about ionizing radiation until is was accidentally discovered as excess heating or clouding of a film. Apparently LENR effects had been observed for years without explanation before P&F performed their pioneering work. If you think about it, the Wright Brothers were not the first to use heavier than air flight. Birds have been flying for a very long time and we have seen them in action. Who would have thought that it would be impossible to mirror that activity to some degree? Why could the standard physics community not see that power systems might one day reach a point where they could allow flight? This reminds me of an actual time that I heard something equally short sighted. I went to a laser introduction meeting years ago where the inventor of the device spoke of how he came up with the working model. During the meeting he spoke of the limitations to output power that they had so we did not have to worry about them becoming the death rays that were being shown in movies about bad aliens. He was convinced that it would never happen...wonder what he thinks about that now? I am always in favor of the development of new instruments that can see further, or observe things that are smaller, or look at different spectrums, and etc. because they almost always lead to new unknown discoveries that might offer great opportunities for the world. Who can guess as to how many really amazing discoveries remain to uncover? The answer to that question is one that I would love to have. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, Mar 20, 2015 2:10 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Am I the only one Most if not all of the well accepted science prediction/discoveries were initially predicted by mathematical extensions of existing theory. The Higgs had to be real to make the standard model work. Its all about connecting the dots. The same was true for the neutrino. Now, science predicts supersymmetry(SS). SS predicts how the 3 forces of nature(weak, strong, EMF) must come together at extremely high temperatures and energies. To the shock and chagrin of science, supersymmetry will not be found by the LHC. LENR provides the real way, an alternative way, that the 3 forces come together at low energies. LENR is a reality the science must eventually deal with in order to move forward to complete the standard model. On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 12:03 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: That is probably exactly how it works! But I am left wondering why the scientific community accepts the discovery of the Higgs particle so readily? This is just one of many claims that have less proof than LENR. I suspect that there is a major element of "Not Invented Here" occurring as well. Do you think that most people are not capable of thinking with a truly open mind? I have seen plenty of evidence that this is true. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Hauke Hein < [email protected]> To: vortex-l < [email protected]> Sent: Fri, Mar 20, 2015 11:54 am Subject: [Vo]:Am I the only one Hi Dave, Max Planck once said: a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. Hauke
