Slashdot Mirror


The LHC, the Higgs Boson, and the Chicago Cubs

Following up our earlier discussion of the theory that the Higgs boson might time-travel to avoid being found, reader gpronger notes an interview with MIT (and LHC) physicist Steven Nahn, in which he comments on Nielsen and Ninomiya's unlikely-sounding theory. "The premise is fairly crazy, but many things in physics are constructed that way... The difference here is that... previous 'crazy' ideas gave consequences that were clearly testable and attestable to the new nature of the theory, in an objective manner, and involved the behavior of inanimate objects (i.e., not humans). However, in this case, the consequences seem quite contrived... Exactly in line with their argument, I could say that Nature abhors the Chicago Cubs, such that the theory which describes the evolution of our universe prescribed Steve Bartman to interfere on October 14, 2003, extending the 'bad luck' of the Cubbies."

17 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. Whoa by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 5, Informative

    Least coherent summary ever. I read it twice and I'm still not sure I understand what we're talking about.

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    1. Re:Whoa by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think he's talking about a group of people that do something out in the big blue room.

    2. Re:Whoa by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Funny

      Least coherent summary ever. I read it twice and I'm still not sure I understand what we're talking about.

      That's just because the Higgs Boson was there in the discussion before and after you read it, but not during.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    3. Re:Whoa by muzicman · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe they are like Gideons?

      Do y'all have different books of the Bible than I do? Are y'all Gideons? Who are the ******' Gideons? Ever met one? NO! Ever seen one? NO! But they're all over the ******' world puttin' Bibles in hotel rooms. Every hotel room- "This Bible was placed here by a Gideon" When?! I been here all day. I ain't seen ****! I saw the housekeeper come and go. I saw the minibar guy come and go. I never laid eyes on a ******' Gideon. What are they- ninjas? Where are they? Where're they from? Gidea? What the **** are these people?

      I'm gonna capture a Gideon. I'm gonna make that my hobby. I'm gonna call the front desk one day. "Yeah. I don't seem to have a Bible in my room."



      God bless you Bill!

      --
      -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flamebait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
  2. Time will tell by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Funny

    If the LHC gets hit by a meteor five minutes before it is next switched on we may conclude that something strange is going on.

  3. Surpisingly many respectible physists talking by physburn · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Surprisingly many respectable physicists talking, about this dumb nature abores the Higgs theory. You see there all very excited about the relaunch of the LHC, about finally finding the Higgs, super-symmetric particles, or maybe something new, that there hyping it up. They need it to, without a bit of public excitement, the enormous amounts of money needed for each big generation of collider, aren't going to get spent.

    Hope the LHC finds something, and something mysterious and exacting. If nothing governments are very unlikely to fund a 100 billion for a 100 TeV collider. (that would be very strange, the Standard model need some new physics before about 10TeV, to stablise the masses of the W,Z particles).

    ---

    LHC Feed @ Feed Distiller

    1. Re:Surpisingly many respectible physists talking by AuMatar · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not strange at all. If they spin it the right way, they can charm the governments and come out on top. Besides when you compare the cost of a new collider to their national bottom lines it just isn't that significant. Sure if they manage to pop up with a new particle or two they can get it quicker, but even without that the knowledge that these particles don't exist means it isn't just money flushed down the drain.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  4. Re:Well, duh! by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nature having it out for the Cubbies is at least plausible. The rest of pseudo-science is not.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  5. Oblig. link by FooAtWFU · · Score: 3, Funny
    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    1. Re:Oblig. link by CreamyG31337 · · Score: 4, Funny

      YES

  6. Novikov self-consistency by Ryvar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This whole 'theory' really just sounds like an application of the Novikov Self-Consistency Conjecture to particle physics. The short version is: the probability of events which could lead to a violation of causality is zero. So, according to this conjecture if the manifestation or observation of the Higgs Boson eventually lead us to develop technology with which we might otherwise violate causality, we'll never discover it.

    I can think of at least one way it might - the Higgs Boson is critical to our understanding gravity. We know from relativity that there are certain gravitric structures which might potentially lead to violations of causality. One example is a toroidal singularity, spun extremely fast, which theoretically generates stable artificial wormhole along the axis of the spin with an opening small enough to fire, say, an x-ray laser through. A signal sent through such a wormhole and then back again could lead to extremely clear-cut violations of causality.

    Thus, if the Novikov Self-Consistency Conjecture is correct, the discovery of anything capable of allowing us to engage in large scale gravity manipulation of this sort might well have zero probability of ever occurring.

    I don't really believe this is what's going onhere , but given the abject failure of every experiment that might lead us to real, large-scale gravity manipulation (I'm thinking of that experiment where extremely fine measurements of lasers fired down long tubes buried under the ground were supposed to be used to detect gravity waves), it's a neat idea.

    --Ryvar

    1. Re:Novikov self-consistency by justleavealonemmmkay · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't buy it. By your interpretation of the conjecture, the people working at CERN couldn't possibly be born.

      You make the fallacious reasoning that if A may lead to and precedes B, B to C, C to D and D to violation of causality, that A cannot possibly happen. This is faulty. Just because you can't have Y without having X and Y is impossible doesn't mean X is impossible.

  7. Re:I can't be the only one... by fractoid · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Erm, it is. He's joking that saying that some spooky future force is preventing us seeing Higgs bosons 'for our own good' is about as scientific as saying that God hates the Chicago Cubs... and that there's as much proof for the latter as for the former.

    He also says:

    Admittedly, I haven't read the whole series of papers, which means my comments should be taken with a grain of salt, but I did skim, and the authors do make an argument for why a new unknown particle (they use Higgs as their poster boy for unknown theoretical particle) can do this and not the ones we know about, based on the experimental evidence we have on the known particles and the existence of yet another theoretically possible but experimentally undetected (not without trying) phenomenon, a magnetic monopole.

    Aside from its hideous verbosity, this made me curious because there was an article a day or two about magnetic monopoles...

    --
    Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  8. Re:Analogy? by mooglez · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't get it, can you give me a cars' analogy?

    Imagine you just got your dream car.

    Everytime you try to go on a drive with it, something happens to it.
    The kids poked the wheels, a meteor fell trough the engine compartment, the steering wheel just fell of...

  9. Re:Attention Humans by AJWM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A universe which permits time travel which can change the past is inherently unstable. Sooner or later (on some meta time axis) that universe's timeline will be changed to one where such time travel never occurs, and will then stay that way. It's the most stable state.

    --
    -- Alastair
  10. Star Trek IV & The cubs by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 3, Funny

    What many people do not realize, is that the cubs that won in 1908 were a completely different team playing in a different field. Wrigely field ( then called wigman park) was built for the Chicago Whales. The whales kicked but winning two championships at the same ballpark that the Cubs suck in. So yadda yadda yadda. Federal league goes kaput, the whales owner buys the cubs, just changes the name of the whales to the cubs and presto chango they never win again.

    The obvious problem is that aliens can no longer communicate with the chicago whales. And thus are cursing them from space. Manipulating the flights of balls. Temporary blinding out fielders. Not even the Modern steroids coursing through Sosa's veins were a match for the alien interlopers.

    So we need to go back, BACK into the past and rescue the chicago whales and bring them into the modern era where they can successfully communicate with the pissed aliens and allow the Cubs to win or lose as their abilities permit.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  11. Re:Well by glwtta · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes, very good point. If something really unlikely happens, we should have a good unlikely explanation ready. It's good we are starting now, so we can be ready when something really unlikely happens.

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi