Was the Discovery of Higgs Boson God Particle Actually the World’s Most Successf

[Amaterasu]

Was the Discovery of Higgs Boson God Particle Actually the World's Most Successful Conscious Intention Experiment?

From: http://wakeup-world.com/2012/07/12/was-the-discovery-of-higgs-boson-god-partial-actually-the-worlds-most-successful-conscious-intention-experiment/

The recent discovery of the Higgs particle — the "God" particle — will go down in the history of science as one of the greatest discoveries ever made. But what was discovered, exactly? Was it a discovery of a "particle" that grants mass to other elements of matter, or was it the discovery that thousands of scientists focusing on a large data set of seemingly random events can successfully skew the results of the data into a 5-sigma level of apparent statistical significance?

In other words, was the Higgs discovery actually the greatest intention experiment ever conducted? This is not a casual question. It reaches into the very nature of science itself and begs the question: Can human-run science ever truly be conducted independent from an observer? The answer, of course, is no. The subsequent question then becomes critical: Do observers alter the outcomes of scientific experiments even without any intention of doing so?

More at link.

What do You think?

[COSMO]

Hi Amaterasu,
Conscious intention?  Maybe.  It does seem to me that there was some ambiguity in the announcement.  Here's a related article that question the validity of the discovery that does make sense and brings up some valid questions:

'On the other hand, a generic Higgs doublet and a triplet imposter give equally good fits to the measured event rates of the newly observed scalar resonance.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2171611/Is-God-particle-impostor-Scientists-claim-signal-Large-Hadron-Collider-Higgs-all.html

I do wonder why, if it is the particle that gives us mass, why such high energy was required to make it show itself?  Shouldn't we be awash in Higgs's since everything we can observe has mass???

COSMO

[Amaterasu]

I agree, COSMO.  And what concerns Me is the whole "standard model," which I don't think is right, with a propensity for believing Dr. LaViolette's SQK offers a better model, and the "big bang" taken on faith.  I con't think there was a "big bang."

The fact that this particle They found is "lighter than expected" leaves Me wondering just how They then can assume it IS the particle They claim it is.  If it fails to have all the properties, then it's something else.

But They (the PTB) have reasons to maintain the standard model as the prevailing view.  It prohibits free energy and hides many things that other models, like SQK, show as possible.  (SQK predicts the Biefeld-Brown Effect...)

[Littleenki]

I agree, COSMO.  And what concerns Me is the whole "standard model," which I don't think is right, with a propensity for believing Dr. LaViolette's SQK offers a better model, and the "big bang" taken on faith.  I con't think there was a "big bang."

The fact that this particle They found is "lighter than expected" leaves Me wondering just how They then can assume it IS the particle They claim it is.  If it fails to have all the properties, then it's something else.

But They (the PTB) have reasons to maintain the standard model as the prevailing view.  It prohibits free energy and hides many things that other models, like SQK, show as possible.  (SQK predicts the Biefeld-Brown Effect...)

Cosmo and you are right, Amy, it was a sort of desperation move to make the investors and scientists there feel warm and fuzzy, but anything that lasts a biilionth of a second is basically a random occurence to me, and SQK still rules, no matter what.

I also think if they found this to last so short a time, which particle will they start to search for next, and how big will that collider be?

Cern...a hole in the ground that sucks those precious euros away!

If you subscribe to the standard model, its like living in a house without electricity or running water....primitive at best..sorry einstein!:(

Protecting jobs? You bet!

Le

[Amaterasu]

Protecting jobs - AND the idea that there is no such thing as overunity.

[Cosmic4life]

Protecting jobs - AND the idea that there is no such thing as overunity.

There is no such thing as over-unity...it is a term designed to mislead.

A Waterwheel produces energy from a river..is that over-unity ?? No it is not....But once constructed it is free energy.

A Hydro-electric dam produces power from a reservoir..is that over-unity ?? No it is not....But once constructed it is free energy.

A device that taps the reservoir of energy in which we reside....is that over-unity ?? No it is not....But once constructed it is free energy.

Cosmic...

[Amaterasu]

Perhaps it is semantics, but I define "unity" as the point at which usable energy input equals usable energy output.  If usable energy output exceeds usable energy input, the result is overunity.  So extracting unusable energy and converting it to usable energy IS overunity.  As I define it and as I understood unity to be defined...

So technically, the unusable energy in flowing water, extracted and converted into usable energy by a hydro-electric dam IS overunity.  By that definition.

[zorgon]

So technically, the unusable energy in flowing water, extracted and converted into usable energy by a hydro-electric dam IS overunity.  By that definition.

Flowing water that runs over a turbine at a dam (a turbine is simply a waterwheel transferring energy from one form to another)

Electricity is not generated/created/collected from the water.  It is the act of water falling from what we call gravity that turns that water wheel... which in turn spins a magnet within a core of copper wires that produce that electricity

At each step of the way there is loss in friction... so the original potential energy in that falling water is higher than the usable energy output

Overunity is defined as getting MORE usable energy than the POTENTIAL you started out with

You cannot change the definition to suit a premise, without confusing the issue

Gravitational potential energy
"Gravitational energy is the potential energy associated with gravitational force, as work is required to elevate objects against Earth's gravity. The potential energy due to elevated positions is called gravitational potential energy, and is evidenced by water in an elevated reservoir or kept behind a dam. If an object falls from one point to another point inside a gravitational field, the force of gravity will do positive work on the object, and the gravitational potential energy will decrease by the same amount."

Kinetic energy
"The kinetic energy of an object is the energy which it possesses due to its motion.[1] It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its stated velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes. The same amount of work is done by the body in decelerating from its current speed to a state of rest."

Electricity generation
'Electricity generation is the process of generating electric energy from other forms of energy.
The fundamental principles of electricity generation were discovered during the 1820s and early 1830s by the British scientist Michael Faraday. His basic method is still used today: electricity is generated by the movement of a loop of wire, or disc of copper between the poles of a magnet."

Not ALL the potential energy flowing over a dam is harnessed Only a small portion passes through the turbines

Not only that but if you put 10 more dams downstream you can utilize even more of the potential energy but no ALL that is available

So what you are doing is CONVERTING Potential Energy to Kinetic Energy to Electrical Energy

The end produce is a lot less that what you started with

[Amaterasu]

Fair enough, z.  So I guess there is no such thing as overunity then.  [shrug]  Fine by Me.  Semantics, right.

[zorgon]

In Northern Canada they have a river that they could build 10 such tiered dams without major damage to the eco system. It would merely create a series of lakes along the same river for wildlife, fishing and recreation. The location is deep in the wilds

Well they offered this to power hungry USA  all they needed to do was pay for the transmission lines

They built one dam... 50% of that power is discharged into the ground because there is no where to send it   

If they would build a hydrolysis plant on site, they could use all that FREE and EXTRA electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen, which would REALLY tap that POTENTIAL energy in water itself

Hydrogen and Oxygen is what the Shuttle uses to launch... lots of energy there  all FREE once the plant is built

And the polution? Well when Hydrogen 'burns' it merely recombines with oxygen to form water... it doesn't actually BURN the oxygen or the hydrogen It just combines them back to water, releasing (violently) that stored POTENTIAL energy provided by that FREE and EXTRA electricity that split that water

Yes the 'smoke' on Shuttle liftoff is WATER VAPOR

And thus a closed cycle.. no loss no waste

As to protecting jobs? All the free energy in the world will be USELESS if you don't have a job to pay for the devices that use it, or a home to put those devices in

And I don't trust no stinking ROBOT to do everything for me... ya can't trust them

And humans being what they are if everything was free and robots did all the work, humans would become apathetic... no drive, no incentive to create, no need to get up off the couch because that robot maid will get your beer and pizza for you

[zorgon]

Fair enough, z.  So I guess there is no such thing as overunity then.

Well jury is out on that

But if there is by that definition, it is more likely that extra energy is coming from SOMEWHERE  be it the aether or even another dimension

Your right semantics   Its a common problem when dealing with the terms 'free energy' and 'anti gravity'

But it is a HUGE problem... because the misuse of those term by the CT community and the impression of the public, is WHY mainstream science runs away from anything associated with those terms

If we ever hope to have success, it needs to be CLEARLY defined

My wood stove provides FREE energy... My trees grows without needing me to water it (deep roots to water table) Three 30 foot mulberries that grow like weeds. POTENTIAL energy stored in that wood

I have to add a little energy.. in the form of work ie cutting the wood, by hand or chain saw
But after a few hours I have a years supply of FREE energy for heating and cooking outside on the firepit and for camping

It IS all semantics and it is all relative

[zorgon]

I have plans for  make it yourself solar panels

Thinking of making a thread in PWM's area  now that I have time again....

my I think I can here a pin drop



Now I need to cut that grass... maybe a robot for that I would consider

Lawnbot
Robot Mower Clips Grass On Its Own

iRobot may own the market for autonomous indoor cleaning devices, but when it comes to taming that wild jungle you call a backyard, the new king of the hill may well be the LawnBott LB3500. This fourth-generation LawnBott from Kyodo America improves upon its predecessors in nearly every category: even though it weighs ten pounds less than the entry-level LB2000, it offers up a greater coverage area, increased cutting width, greatly improved incline climbing capability, longer runtime, and best of all, a Bluetooth radio for programming or direct control by cellphone. Of course, all these high-end features don't come cheap, and when the LB3500 does come to market (date: unknown), we imagine that it's gonna cost a good deal more than the current high-end, $2,500 LB3200. Check out the gallery below for some more angles.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/25/lawnbott-lb3500-offers-bluetooth-control-stylin-rims/

So cheer up

The BOTS ARE ALREADY HERE 

[Amaterasu]

As to protecting jobs? All the free energy in the world will be USELESS if you don't have a job to pay for the devices that use it, or a home to put those devices in

And when the need for money dissipates...You can have all the devices and homes You want - and with EG, even a flying home or two.  [grin]

And I don't trust no stinking ROBOT to do everything for me... ya can't trust them

Hey, You won't have to have any robots if'n You don't want them...  You can scrub Yer toilet Yersef.  [grin]

And humans being what they are if everything was free and robots did all the work, humans would become apathetic... no drive, no incentive to create, no need to get up off the couch because that robot maid will get your beer and pizza for you

I disagree.  I know MANY who would build robots, create music, get People together to create movies, research, do archaeology, travel, paint pictures, throw parties, learn, teach, go to parties, go fishing...  Would YOU really sit on Your butt and do nothing if You could do anything You wanted?  The only reason virtually ALL the couch potatoes are couch potatoes is because They can't afford to do what They WANT to do.  Can't afford education, can't afford to go camping, can't afford to make sculptures, can't afford to build a prototype of the invention sitting in Their heads and can't afford to pay for a patent...

Geez.  Really, z.  Guaranteed People would be doing things that delight Them and NOT be couch potatoes. 

But...  We have veered radically off topic here.  What do You think of the idea that the "Higgs boson" is seen in the data because of the affect of expectation on the quantum level?

[Littleenki]

Bingo, Amy...they were expecting it and got it...the same example of when they look for the particle on the panel behind the two slit experiment, and then see that particle as they expected it...and when they dont look, it goes haywire!

I wonder if they have thought that the Higgs that appeared in the data really ever went away?

Could it still be right where it occured, and waiting to be found?

Do they even know what it might look like, as they cant observe it anyways? I dont care how great the data is, these particles will always be ahead of our instruments. A billionth of a second isnt enough to convince me.

Or could it have become subquantum, and split into more particles which arent even measurable with the equipment they have?

Also the event they measured could have been a blink into a black hole, which opened and swallowed, then closed around the Higgs before it could even become itself.

Does that sound nuts?

And yes, my Roomba 560's love to clean my hardwood floors for me everyday, but I still have to empty clean and maintain them...something i actually enjoy! Those Bots rock! 

Cheers!

[Guardian Angel]

But...  We have veered radically off topic here.

Off topic? Due you require our services?