CERN collides heavy nuclei at new record high energy

November 25, 2015
One of the very first collisions recorded between two lead ions at the LHC's top energy. The energy in the center-of-mass system is approximately 1000 TeV. Todays events bring collisions physics into a new energy scale, that of PeV (Peta-electron-volts). The ALICE detector registered tens of thousands of particles. In this live display the tracks of the particles from the collision point and through the detector are shown in colors corresponding to their mass and type. Credit: CERN

The world's most powerful accelerator, the 27 km long Large Hadron Collider (LHC) operating at CERN in Geneva established collisions between lead nuclei, this morning, at the highest energies ever. The LHC has been colliding protons at record high energy since the summer, but now the time has now come to collide large nuclei (nuclei of lead, Pb, consist of 208 neutrons and protons). The experiments aim at understanding and studying the properties of strongly interacting systems at high densities and thus the state of matter of the Universe shortly after the Big Bang.

In the very beginning, just a few billionths of a second after the Big Bang, the Universe was made up of an extremely hot and dense 'primordial soup' consisting of the fundamental particles, especially quarks and gluons. This state is called the quark-gluon-plasma (QGP). Approximately one millionth of a second after the Big Bang, quarks and gluons became confined inside the protons and the neutrons, which are the present day constituents of the atomic nuclei.

The so-called strong force, mediated by the gluons, binds the quarks to each other and - under normal circumstances, trap them inside the nuclear particles. It is however, possible to recreate a state of matter consisting of quarks and gluons, and which behaves as a liquid, in close imitation of the state of matter prevailing in the very early universe. It is this state that has now been realised at the highest temperatures ever attained in collisions using lead ions from the LHC accelerator at CERN.

"The collision energy between two nuclei reaches 1000 TeV. This energy is that of a bumblebee hitting us on the cheek on a summer day. But the energy is concentrated in a volume that is approximately 10-27 (a billion-billion-billion) times smaller. The energy concentration (density) is therefore tremendous and has never been realised before under terrestrial conditions," explains Jens Jørgen Gaardhøje, professor at the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen and head of the Danish research group within the ALICE experiment at CERN.

The state of the universe

Jens Jørgen Gaardhøje explains that the purpose of the collisions is to transform most of the enormous kinetic energy of the colliding into matter, in the form of a host of new particles (quarks) and their antiparticles (antiquarks) in compliance with Einstein's famous equation E=Mc2. This creates - for a fleeting moment, a small volume of matter consisting of quarks, antiquarks and gluons that has a temperature of over 4000 billion degrees.

Data generated Nov. 25 by the Compact Muon Solenoid during the new round of heavy ion collisions at the Large Hadron Collider. A Rice University team is onsite for the duration of the month-long run. Credit: CERN

The first collisions were recorded by the LHC detectors, including the dedicated heavy-ion detector ALICE, which has significant Danish participation, immediately after the LHC's two counter-circulating beams were aimed at each other this morning at 11:15 AM.

"While it is still too early for a full analysis to have been carried out, the first collisions already tell us that more than 30,000 particles can be created in every central collision between two . This corresponds to an unprecedented of around 20 GeV/fm3. This is more than 40 times the energy density of a proton," says Jens Jørgen Gaardhøje.

The extreme energy density will enable researchers to develop new and detailed models of the quark-gluon-plasma and of the strong interaction, which binds the and nuclear matter together and thus understand the conditions prevailing in the early universe all the way back to a billionth of a second after the Big Bang.

Explore further: Quark matter's connection with the Higgs

More information: CERN: home.cern/about/updates/2015/11/lhc-collides-ions-new-record-energy

Related Stories

Quark matter's connection with the Higgs

August 27, 2012

(Phys.org)—You may think you've heard everything you need to know about the origin of mass. After all, scientists colliding protons at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Europe recently presented stunning evidence strongly ...

LHC completes proton run for 2015, preps for lead

November 4, 2015

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has successfully completed its planned proton run for 2015, delivering the equivalent of about 400 trillion (1012) proton-proton collisions – some 4 inverse femtobarns of data – to both ...

Recommended for you

Understanding nature's patterns with plasmas

August 23, 2016

Patterns abound in nature, from zebra stripes and leopard spots to honeycombs and bands of clouds. Somehow, these patterns form and organize all by themselves. To better understand how, researchers have now created a new ...

Measuring tiny forces with light

August 25, 2016

Photons are bizarre: They have no mass, but they do have momentum. And that allows researchers to do counterintuitive things with photons, such as using light to push matter around.

Light and matter merge in quantum coupling

August 22, 2016

Where light and matter intersect, the world illuminates. Where light and matter interact so strongly that they become one, they illuminate a world of new physics, according to Rice University scientists.

Stretchy supercapacitors power wearable electronics

August 23, 2016

A future of soft robots that wash your dishes or smart T-shirts that power your cell phone may depend on the development of stretchy power sources. But traditional batteries are thick and rigid—not ideal properties for ...

Spherical tokamak as model for next steps in fusion energy

August 24, 2016

Among the top puzzles in the development of fusion energy is the best shape for the magnetic facility—or "bottle"—that will provide the next steps in the development of fusion reactors. Leading candidates include spherical ...

133 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

DavidW
2.2 / 5 (20) Nov 26, 2015
Building machines to help life. Very nice.

Using the the machine after to help life kill and harm life such as animals, for the sole purpose of personal gratification (fun, taste, convenience, unneeded nutrition, glamor, sport, fashion, etc.) is complete hypocrisy.

Therefore, anyone promoting such technology must also hold the view the that vegan lifestyle is 100% correct, or they shouldn't be touching any of this, because they don't value the truth that life is most important in life (the only truthful reason to build this stuff anyway). It is clear evidence of a broken mind.
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (12) Nov 26, 2015
Using the the machine after to help life kill and harm life such as animals
@david
WTF? this is CERN, or did you miss that in the title, or the 13 other times it was on this page?
taste
this is NOT a personal gratification thing unless you have a choice
anyone promoting such technology must also hold the view the that vegan lifestyle is 100% correct
there is NO such thing as a vegan
http://weknowmeme...egan.jpg

... if "life is most important in life", why do you slaughter flora LIFE?
vegans kill far more "life" than omnivores b/c they need more flora for nutrition

& meat gives you proteins & controls overpopulation
you want to completely upset the balance of nature for...what, exactly?
humans are predators
because they don't value the truth that life is most important in life
OOoops... and down the rabbit hole he goes!

ok, now tell us all we're horrible b/c (repeat above ad nauseum)
DavidW
2.5 / 5 (19) Nov 26, 2015
Actually, you tell lies. I have only said you are most important. You just want to argue with the truth.
TechnoCreed
4.8 / 5 (16) Nov 26, 2015
Building machines to help life. Very nice.

Using the the machine after to help life kill and harm life such as animals, for the sole purpose of personal gratification (fun, taste, convenience, unneeded nutrition, glamor, sport, fashion, etc.) is complete hypocrisy.
The LHC is not about life nor death; it is fundamental research IOW aquisition of knowledge.
my2cts
3.3 / 5 (16) Nov 26, 2015
DavidW sees an image of something green and concludes it must be a vegetable.
The first picture contains tomato's, carrots and broccoli.
The second one is almost entirely broccoli.
Do you even know what physics is , DavidW?
my2cts
3.5 / 5 (16) Nov 26, 2015
Anyway, if you don't there are several people here to explain a bit more.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (10) Nov 26, 2015
You just want to argue with the truth
@david
i can't argue about something you can't define, only what you actually say
you said
they don't value the truth that life is most important in life
and yet you, specifically you, are willing to annihilate "life" routinely and repeatedly

you do this by consuming it, be it through a [your?] delusional vegan lifestyle or some other...

Now, because you state that "life is most important in life" while lying about your own lifestyle and committing mass murder regularly to local flora or fauna (including insect, bug etc) then by definition you are not only LYING about "life is most important in life", but you are also being a hypocrite promoting a delusion

therefore, you are not only a hypocrite, but proven to be a chronic liar and serious delusional nutcase

(PS- your words, not mine, princess... perhaps you should tell the doc to up the meds?)

BoatRocker
2.4 / 5 (19) Nov 27, 2015
This article starts:
"The... Large Hadron Collider... established collisions between lead nuclei... at the highest energies ever."

And ended with:
"The extreme energy density will enable researchers to develop new and detailed models... and thus understand the conditions prevailing in the early universe all the way back to a billionth of a second after the Big Bang."

I'm under the impression that lead (Pb) did not exist until the big blue stars collapsed, supernova-ed, and spewed the heavier-than-heliums about. And that this happened long after the Bang.

Yes the energies are great, I get that. And, it seems, to be able to achieve those energies in the LHC requires a big ion. But how does this describe the effect of these energies upon H ions (essentially protons?) or less (quarks & co) that exclusively existed in those first few nSecs?

Simply put - How does watching big ones fly into little ones explain the little ones getting together in the first place?
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Nov 27, 2015
Simply put - How does watching big ones fly into little ones explain the little ones getting together in the first place?
@BoatRocker
actually, that's a good question. you can start getting some answers by going here:
https://en.wikipe...elerator

and here:
http://home.cern/about/physics

one way is because the standard model (SM) has models of how things work, and so, when A breaks down into B-D, it should look like (x-z), so they look for those images
when something happens that isn't predicted, time to reexamine (but remember, that doesn't negate what we DO know works, just like SR/GR didn't negate Newtonian physics, which we still use today)
then there is the reverse engineering angle
also, read this:
https://en.wikipe...elerator#High-energy_physics

(copy and paste it into your address bar if it doesn't autolink)
DavidW
2.8 / 5 (16) Nov 27, 2015
Building machines to help life. Very nice.

Using the the machine after to help life kill and harm life such as animals, for the sole purpose of personal gratification (fun, taste, convenience, unneeded nutrition, glamor, sport, fashion, etc.) is complete hypocrisy.
The LHC is not about life nor death; it is fundamental research IOW aquisition of knowledge.


For what purpose? Duh!

Stumpt, you just keep making up lies and telling them.

I tell you you lie, which you constantly do here. You say I call you a liar. Which is not what I said.
I tell you you we are not our, actions. those are things we do, and we are life, a truth that which is most important in life, and that you are most important because the truth says so.

You say I don't not define the truth, but I say life is a truth.
You just want to kill because your brain is sick. You lie laughing with the blood of the innocent between your teeth. Anyone siding with you has brain damage.
DavidW
2.6 / 5 (15) Nov 27, 2015
So, now is TechnoCreed, are you going to comment back using life to tell us all how the reason for acquiring and/or the acquisition of said "knowledge" is for a purpose other than life itself?

TechnoCreed? What might you say now that would not be a lie?
This would do it, "I said the wrong thing." I tried to defend those that were attempting to subvert the use of scientific discovery for a purpose other than the benefit of life, the only reason to have science in the first place. I apologize. I behaved completely out of line and said something very, very stupid on a public forum."

THAT WOULD BE A GOOD START!
DavidW
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 27, 2015

Simply put - How does watching big ones fly into little ones explain the little ones getting together in the first place?


"This creates - for a fleeting moment, a small volume of matter consisting of quarks, antiquarks and gluons that has a temperature of over 4000 billion degrees."

And the last paragraph.
DavidW
2.6 / 5 (15) Nov 27, 2015



Do you even know what physics is , DavidW?


http://www.jpl.na...-600.jpg

Let's see now. The first time the human race scoops up dirt on mars and sees water ice it does so with a machine that was manufactured using technology created by me. I understand about the practical application of said physics. That nothing of importance should be left to you, stumpt and your lot of people trying to develop technology with no regard for the truth.
SuperThunder
2.8 / 5 (18) Nov 27, 2015
No one is supercolliding animals (my god, what an image) and animal supremacy is morally dubious. You're saying because plants don't have faces like we do, or emotions like we do, we can prey on them and devour them. Because they're "alien" to us, they are fair game.

I hope aliens don't hear you.
my2cts
3.4 / 5 (17) Nov 27, 2015


lead (Pb) did not exist until the big blue stars collapsed, supernova-ed, and spewed the heavier-than-heliums about. And that this happened long after the Bang.

Yes the energies are great, I get that. And, it seems, to be able to achieve those energies in the LHC requires a big ion. But how does this describe the effect of these energies upon H ions (essentially protons?) or less (quarks & co) that exclusively existed in those first few nSecs?

Simply put - How does watching big ones fly into little ones explain the little ones getting together in the first place?

Good point that should have been explained in the article.
The conditions that it refers to are those of a quark-gluon plasma.
This is a state of matter where individual nucleons, let alone nuclei, do not exist.
It does not matter form what type of nuclei such a plasma is created.
https://en.wikipe...n_plasma
my2cts
3.1 / 5 (15) Nov 27, 2015
For what purpose? Duh!

It that you talking, Bart Simpson? Homer perhaps?

making up lies and telling them ... you lie, which you constantly do here. ... a liar ... we are life, a truth that which is most important in life, and that you are most important because the truth says so.

This is hopeless, you should request a brain transplant.
truth ... life ... truth ... kill ... sick ... blood ... teeth ... brain damage.

DavidW is suffering from delusions, not just one but several. In short, he is insane.
DavidW
2.6 / 5 (15) Nov 27, 2015
No one is supercolliding animals (my god, what an image) and animal supremacy is morally dubious. You're saying because plants don't have faces like we do, or emotions like we do, we can prey on them and devour them. Because they're "alien" to us, they are fair game.
.


First of all I have never said that. Speak the truth or stay out of it.

What I have said is anyone still killing animals for taste, fun, etc., should not work in science at all. Because they have brain damage ATM. They need to stop their killing first and uphold the truth. Then work on science.

This issue is in no way dubious. This issue has been truthfully solved and proven. It's up us to accept the truth.

Take what you need t do the most good for life in general, but tell me that everyone needs to kill animals for fun, taste and unneeded nutrition when they don't.
DavidW
2.4 / 5 (14) Nov 27, 2015
I am still waiting for the first person arguing with me to do it without life to prove to that life is not most important in life. Lie, after lie after lie. That's what they do to these comments.

As you all can see that read this, they feel very angry. Now come on, you know that the truth is violently rejected. Just like how the ones calling themselves doctors for years didn't believe in hygiene.
SuperThunder
2.9 / 5 (19) Nov 27, 2015
Speak the truth or stay out of it.

Practice what you preach.
vegan lifestyle is 100% correct

If you're Vegetable Hitler.
you know that the truth is violently rejected

The only thing you've offered evidence for, so I will give you that.
BoatRocker
2.2 / 5 (16) Nov 27, 2015
@DavidW

Quick question: Where did humans come from?
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Nov 27, 2015
You say I call you a liar
@david-the-ILLITERATE
nope: i said
therefore, you are not only a hypocrite, but proven to be a chronic liar and serious delusional nutcase
IOW- you are the liar: your words proved it above!
... you did it again when you posted a reply
I say life is a truth
except that you also mass murder your "truth", which is "life" (- that's on you, not i)

again, that makes you a & a chronic liar
You just want to kill because your brain is sick
who said i wanted to kill?
Anyone siding with you has brain damage
AH! THE ULTIMATE COMEBACK!

... so, you can't make any sense, you cant actually make a case, you can't provide evidence for your argument... so everyone ELSE is the nut job with brain damage!
now THAT is troll logic 101! LFMAO

Truly, you are a scholar of epic proportions and notoriety in your fanatical cult, eh?
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (10) Nov 27, 2015
Speak the truth or stay out of it
@daveyGRAVEYbrain
so, if we preface everything with "truthislifeistruth" will you shut up? or are you going to need cash too?
What I have said is anyone still killing animals for taste, fun, etc
what if you just want to eat and live? is it ok then, or do we need your permission first?

what about plants?
plants are LIFE, therefore plants must be TRUTH as well, right?
if we are vegetarian then we are also mass murderers of plants, so we can't say TRUTHISLIFEISTRUTH if we kill plants...
so that means it is strictly IV & man-made products... except of course, we still need to kill animals/plants for that too...so what now?
This issue has been truthfully solved and proven
how can that be if you can't explain it?

all you do is repeat the same sh*t over and over... that isn't proof, that is brainwashing
proof constitutes EVIDENCE, and you've not given anything but rhetoric, false claims and BS
DavidW
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 27, 2015
@DavidW

Quick question: Where did humans come from?


Life
My turn. Is life is most important in life the most important truth in life?
If no, please answer without ever using life to make a valid point without committing hypocrisy...lying.
If yes, then you understand the issue here with these people and their comments of constant lies and insults in the name of science that exists only to serve a purpose that they have to to state. They have, however, ruled out that science is for life from their perspective. They have also ruled out that truth matters. They look for excuses to not uphold the truth. Life is a truth. Yet they say I must define it. That's insane. It really is. They refuse to agree life is a truth.

While I helped others discover water on mars and see the purpose for science is to benefit life, they argue that life is not most important in life so that they have an excuse to kill and harm.

DavidW
3.2 / 5 (13) Nov 27, 2015
They refuse life and truth as valid and most important, then try to talk as if they have a part in a discussion based in truthful reality. Yet, without acknowledging that life is most important in life, in words and actions, (they do neither) in a conversation, then the conversation is not based on truthful reality. Here we have these people commenting.... names, insults, etc., at no apparent end in sight, with their linked accounts, etc., insulting others with ideas they consider to be silly. Meanwhile, they refuse to have a conversation based in truthful reality to justify their position to call others names.

These people are not above the truth. Their behavior is horrible on these forums. And the reason they behave the way that they do is because they don't value the truth and life.
Enough is enough. They speak nonsense and never back anything up without lying in their evidence.
SuperThunder
2.8 / 5 (20) Nov 27, 2015
If the Lorax had a nuclear weapon, humanity would be extinct.
http://www.global...est.html

We have committed grave actions against our vegetable brethren. It is the noble photosynthetic lifeforms that wiped out all incompatible life on earth so our kind could thrive.
https://en.wikipe...on_Event

By turning on them now we court their wrath, or worse, their absence and thus our demise. Plants are way more important than humans to lifetruthilifeyness. On a planet like this, where they are harvested en masse like in the Matrix, eating them almost seems excruciatingly insulting.

This is why CERN's work is so important, somehow, I really don't know why we're talking about this.
BoatRocker
2.3 / 5 (16) Nov 27, 2015
@DavidW: Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to reply. You're unable to answer my question and your responses to this thread are basically pointless and inane. Due to your inability to reply to a simple query, I must assume you're a monkey. This is good to know. I'm grateful.

You're welcome to correct me if I'm wrong (it happens) and as soon as you have a coherent, on-topic thought... oh, wait, I'll never know. This site has a nice feature called Ignore this User which, turns out, works pretty well.

So - Season's greetings and take care.

@2cents and My Captain: Nice. Thanks for the links. Before I badger you further I'm going to follow your trail. See ya' in a few.

In the meantime, please try not to feed the monkey. From my experience they can inflate to the point where they can't fit out the door even if they wanted to.
DavidW
3.3 / 5 (12) Nov 27, 2015
Please show how, "Plants are way more important..." That is the point you state as fact, yet, it's not true.

Take what you need to do the most for life, but not more. Plants are most important too. Their usefulness as evolving to make rocket ships to save all the life here from a natural disaster appears very limited, if not ever going to happen, before the next big event. They will be useful for other intelligent life that has a better chance of evolving before such an event if we humans fail.
Make your own choices because you are most important, and so important enough to make your own choices. Base those choices on the truth.

"I really don't know why we're talking about this"
Reading comprehension skills might help., but only if you really value the truth. If you do, you will dig as far as required to understand.
DavidW
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 27, 2015
You asked, BoatRocker, "Where did humans come from?"

I responded, life.
You asked the question using life. Your concept of humans coming from somewhere is based on you having a life.

No, I am not a monkey. I am just a person who explained to the only reason why you are most important and you called me a name. So, so smart dude. In your mind you are either not most important (mind is broken and based in truthful reality) or your reasoning is broken, because you can't state you are without using life (mind is broken and based in truthful reality). Oops, you messed up.

You didn't answer my question, when I politely and intelligibly answered yours.
Yet, my question was one with the words, "most important" and it actually is.
bkitelynn
3 / 5 (12) Nov 27, 2015
Actually you are all liars because you shouldn't eat plants or animals or anything..... only breath....
google.com breatharian institute of America...

become a breatharian. but you still have to eat a quarter pounder with cheese and drink diet coke on the propery of McDonalds for 30 days. Then you can forgo eating all together. Oh and give Wiley Books $250k and go on a trip with him in a desert.

BTW Love reading new developments from CERN. very exciting!
my2cts
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 27, 2015
I am still waiting for the first person arguing with me to do it without life to prove to that life is not most important in life. Lie, after lie after lie. That's what they do to these comments.

As you all can see that read this, they feel very angry. Now come on, you know that the truth is violently rejected. Just like how the ones calling themselves doctors for years didn't believe in hygiene.

Are you in favor of shooting doctors who practice family planning? Lets have some truth here.
Hyperfuzzy
5 / 5 (3) Nov 27, 2015
Wow! We create anti-matter from matter? Why would matter exist? Juz say'n
bkitelynn
2.6 / 5 (10) Nov 27, 2015
As Picard once said, " sometimes you must bow to the absurd"
SuperThunder
2.4 / 5 (17) Nov 27, 2015
Please show how, "Plants are way more important..." That is the point you state as fact, yet, it's not true.

I provided links, you ignored them on purpose. I can't force you to not be stupid, which is what you seem to be asking.
Their usefulness as evolving to make rocket ships to save all the life here from a natural disaster appears very limited, if not ever going to happen, before the next big event. They will be useful for other intelligent life that has a better chance of evolving before such an event if we humans fail.

You make being intelligent life sound like pure fascism. Bravo.
my2cts
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 27, 2015
As Picard once said, " sometimes you must bow to the absurd"

And then sometimes you must shoot back.
bkitelynn
2.8 / 5 (11) Nov 27, 2015
As long as you enjoy it :-) I am new to this forum but it seems to me Dave is just messing with everyone and doubt he believes the non sense that comes from his keyboard. It is entertaining though lol.
my2cts
2.9 / 5 (14) Nov 27, 2015
No, I am not a monkey.

Well, on the other hand, that could explain why you are such a bore.
By the way, monkey, I asked you a question about your religious friends.
You want to discuss truth and life.
So lets hear it.
I ask this becausesome of you are dangerous fanatics.
Vietvet
3.8 / 5 (10) Nov 27, 2015
@bkitelynn

Nope, DavidW isn't messing around. He's been post the same inane crap and worse since 29 Jan. 2012.
bkitelynn
2.6 / 5 (10) Nov 27, 2015
Ah ok, thanks vietvet. well I just like looking at science articles. David wish you the best in life then.
TechnoCreed
4.6 / 5 (11) Nov 27, 2015
DavidW is now on ignore. Why? Because I do not care about people who do not have anything interresting to say.
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (11) Nov 27, 2015
Thanks for the links... please try not to feed the monkey...
@BoatRocker
yeah, it is common here on PO. Trolls, idiots and pseudoscience cranks help the admin pad the count so that they can produce a large membership/readership to the advert companies to make money

Problem is, sometimes you need to point out logical fallacies and pseudoscience so that those who are scientifically illiterate, challenged or just plain scared to ask can follow to actual valid answers... answers that can be validated with evidence
take davey's point
Please show how, "Plants are way more important..."
obviously he is stuck in a delusion, right?
no plants means issues with: O2, food (ours as well as predator), erosion, heat/shade, reflection, ecosystem balance etc, right?

so, yeah... sometimes it is irritating, but sometimes you just gotta poke the stupid

and sometimes it gives insight to their mental state and illness
viko_mx
3.8 / 5 (10) Nov 28, 2015
The basic problem before such kind of experiment is that the main part of the energy is transfered not to accelerated particles, but to the structure of vacuum of space.
So the maximum momentum of accelerated elementary particles is m x v where v can not reach the speed of light because of exponential increasing resistance with the gradual increase of the speed of these particles when move in the structure of vacuum of space.
my2cts
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 28, 2015
The basic problem before such kind of experiment is that the main part of the energy is transfered not to accelerated particles, but to the structure of vacuum of space.
So the maximum momentum of accelerated elementary particles is m x v where v can not reach the speed of light because of exponential increasing resistance with the gradual increase of the speed of these particles when move in the structure of vacuum of space.

Perhaps you should explain to the unsuspecting reader that you are a religious fanatic and that you use otherwise meaningless phrase "the structure of vacuum of space" to hide your true views. Then, much later, you bring in the concept of a Holy Matrix through which your favourite Creator rules the universe.
What an insane bore you are.
viko_mx
3.5 / 5 (11) Nov 28, 2015
I have the faith in the living God and love the science. But the true science adequate to reality.

Why you are so agresive? Fear from the truth which requires a fair and responsible behavior?
my2cts
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 28, 2015
No one cares about the details of your delusions, viko.
DavidW
3 / 5 (12) Nov 28, 2015

you are a religious fanatic


Lies, again

to hide your true views.

Now you want to use the word true, as if it has any meaning coming from you at all.

What an insane bore you are.

More lies

The word TRUE has no value coming from a person who does not uphold the truth in conversation and spews continuous lies.
DavidW
3.2 / 5 (13) Nov 28, 2015
Faith comes from hearing the Word of the True Living God. The Word is truth and life. There is nothing fanatical about believing in that which is eternally true and required by all.

Fanatical would be Goldilock's zone, etc. You know, nursery rhymes, children's stories, etc., that have no truthfully provable foundation against that which is already provable: Life is Most Important in Life.

Science is to help life. Now if you have dead animals between your teeth and think they are not important and deserve to suffer endlessly for your selfishness... that's sick and you shouldn't be in the field of science, as your mind truthfully is broken.

Case and point, if science is not for the betterment of life, then it has no value.
Go ahead, tell us without ever using life, why science has value.

This is the insanity of of the lot of them
DavidW
3.3 / 5 (12) Nov 28, 2015
The issue here is these people that call other people names, use the word true and at the very same time say truth isn't real, and that life is not a truth.

Now, if life is not a truth, then what is the value of the word true?
It doesn't matter if the car can truthfully hurt you if you are not truthfully alive.

No matter what seems to happen here, these people NEVER back their position up truthfully and honestly. As if they are somehow, yes, in a fairytale way, more important than others.

I learned the hard way. They likely would not have survived. We are equal because we are all most important.

Now, if you don't believe we are equal then take your racist ways with you and go. If you believe we are equal for a reason other than life is most important in life, please state that reason without ever having used life.

Science is for the betterment of life. If you don't get that, then don't talk as if you know science, because you don't know the first 101 of science.
my2cts
3 / 5 (14) Nov 28, 2015

you are a religious fanatic


Lies, again

to hide your true views.

Now you want to use the word true, as if it has any meaning coming from you at all.

What an insane bore you are.

More lies

The word TRUE has no value coming from a person who does not uphold the truth in conversation and spews continuous lies.

How do you know all that about viko_mx, DavidW.
Are you his sockpuppet ?
Anyway, get lost.
DavidW
3 / 5 (12) Nov 28, 2015
Because viko_mx is a person, who is truthfully defined as most important.

I keep trying to tell you, your brain is broken. Without the truth, you have nothing here to say, but lies.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (8) Nov 28, 2015
Because viko_mx is a person, who is truthfully defined as most important.

I keep trying to tell you, your brain is broken. Without the truth, you have nothing here to say, but lies.


The word TRUE has no value coming from a person who does not uphold the truth in conversation and spews continuous lies
-
you've been proven to be a liar, above
-
tell your doc you need more lithium

BYE
my2cts
3 / 5 (12) Nov 28, 2015
@DavidW
Here's my assessment of you.
You are a moron, so you lack the skills to see what you are. Other people, however, see you as the moron that you are. Unfortunately, because of your condition, you think everyone else is wrong, a liar etc. You think this is the truth and only you can see it.
Of course you will fail to see my point, call me a liar and continue to think it is the other way around. You will remain in this state unless you make a sincere effort to understand why other people see things differently. You have to start listening to other people, not only to yourself.
Good luck.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (7) Nov 28, 2015
Here's my analysis of you.
You are a moron
@My2
i'm not so sure. i think there is a severe debilitating mental illness involved. notice how (s)he focuses on certain words as well as the deranged delusional circular argument?
they don't value the truth that life is most important in life
as written, this is nonsense, but even assuming there is a thread of coherent logic... life simply IS, there is no "truth" to it
truth is subjective and cultural, not a fundamental anything, but (s)he thinks it's proven!
This issue has been truthfully solved and proven
yet can't provide evidence except for a circular regurgitation of nonsense?
then there is the attempt to validate personal decisions
anyone promoting such technology must also hold the view the that vegan lifestyle is 100% correct
even though (s)he can't actually validate this with evidence?
(plus, there are NO vegans- see graphic above)
even as a troll, you can see the mental issues, IMHO
TechnoCreed
5 / 5 (7) Nov 28, 2015
@my2cts
How do you know all that about viko_mx, DavidW.
Are you his sockpuppet ?
Anyway, get lost.

I am pretty sure that viko sees DavidW as an oddball who does not know how to relate with the general crowd here. I have interracted with viko in the past and never felt I had to put him on ignore; actualy it was fun. Viko do not talk only about his religiosity, he also talks about science... a bit.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Nov 28, 2015
Viko do not talk only about his religiosity, he also talks about science... a bit
@TechnoCreed
a bit...
and right up until you corner her with evidence

once you corner her with evidence viko drops like a rock down the "infinite well of religion", descending into a serious depth of delusion that is stunning in how fast it occurs as well as how one can accomplish it without whiplash or some other physical injury...

this has occurred many, many times WRT biology and evolution
my2cts
2.8 / 5 (11) Nov 28, 2015
@DavidW
Assessment continued.
Some people who are aware of your isolation may be using you by feeding you religious nonsense and by confirming that all the others are liars, thereby reenforcing your isolation. They probably take money for their service, too. You are just a pawn in there schemes.
Enthusiastic Fool
3.3 / 5 (12) Nov 28, 2015
@DavidW

Importance is a construct and the physical world has no need of it. If life should be wiped out tomorrow the Universe will carry on indifferently just as it has. Lives come and go: plant, fungal, bacterial, and animal. The only things that can be preserved are ideas. Ideas surpass their humble roots in the brain of a single thinking being. Don't come on physorg and sanctimoniously pronounce the "truth" while ignoring the most promising ideas about the Universe man has ever had.
I tell you you lie, which you constantly do here. You say I call you a liar. Which is not what I said. I tell you you we are not our, actions.


You are the real killer here, murdering the English language with one hand and logic the other. Next time you enjoy a salad remember the field animals that were chewed up by the farmer's combine and the pesticides in the water supply.
Enthusiastic Fool
3.5 / 5 (13) Nov 28, 2015
@SuperThunder
No one is supercolliding animals (my god, what an image)


Anatoli Bugorski intimately knows what that looks like.
TechnoCreed
5 / 5 (8) Nov 28, 2015
@Captain S
a bit...
and right up until you corner her with evidence
Of course, he is going to defend his line, but doesn't everybody?
this has occurred many, many times WRT biology and evolution
I know, religious people are very confronted by biology it makes them get very emotional so I avoid commenting there. I hate getting mad at my computer screen... it can get very expansive ;-)
Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (10) Nov 28, 2015
Because viko_mx is a person, who is truthfully defined as most important.

I keep trying to tell you, your brain is broken. Without the truth, you have nothing here to say, but lies.


The word TRUE has no value coming from a person who does not uphold the truth in conversation and spews continuous lies
-
you've been proven to be a liar, above
-
tell your doc you need more lithium

BYE


Never argue with the insane, onlookers may not be able to tell you apart, and you merely invite each other to say more.

TechnoCreed
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 28, 2015
@Noum
Never argue with the insane, onlookers may not be able to tell you apart.

Why are you constantly looking for a confrontation with Captain S? It is the second time in a short while that I see you appear just for the sake of arguing with him. The last time he was defending a comment that I made and that YOU know was right... about photon being the carrier (boson) of the electromagnetic force.
SuperThunder
2.6 / 5 (17) Nov 28, 2015
EnthusiasticFool, I looked that up and was horrified, thank you! At least it had a less than worst case scenario ending. Link for others...
https://en.wikipe...Bugorski

Never argue with the insane

Said no one having fun ever! Sane people don't argue, it's really boring.
Noumenon
3.3 / 5 (12) Nov 28, 2015
@Noum
Never argue with the insane, onlookers may not be able to tell you apart.

Why are you constantly looking for a confrontation with Captain S?


Good point, I should take my own advise. Stumpy, has a long history of trolling after me with insults and vacuous accusations about "not knowing the difference between evidence and subjective opinion" [the singular content of 98% his posts] and "anti philosophy bs",... all the while without ever engaging in actual substantive discussion.

But that's not the worst of it. He routinely doubles the length of threads by engaging cranks, not in substance, but in vacuous jerry-springer argumentation. Not good for the site.

The last time he was defending a comment that I made and that YOU know was right... about photon being the carrier (boson) of the electromagnetic force.

I didn't see bschott question that fact. His first two posts were factual. Not his subsequent extended use of them.

TechnoCreed
5 / 5 (8) Nov 28, 2015
@Noum
I didn't see bschott question that fact. His first two posts were factual.
Not even,go back read the article and read his comments. He confunded the electromagnetic force with ferromagnetism.

FWIW I too find Captain S a bit obcessive in his commenting habits. But if Physorg would moderate this place there would not be any need for policing. He is just doing the best he can the way he sees it fit.
Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (11) Nov 28, 2015
I didn't see bschott question that fact. His first two posts were factual.

Not even,go back read the article and read his comments. He confunded the electromagnetic force with ferromagnetism.

He said several things wrong,....to which I replied,... however taking his first two posts as individual statements on their own, he was making factual posts. Obviously, his use of those facts was not right. I don't want to cross thread here....

But if Physorg would moderate this place there would not be any need for policing.


He is not qualified nor effective to be thought police here if he does not engage in detailed substance,... hence my point to him in the SLAC thread.



TechnoCreed
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 28, 2015
@Noum
He is not qualified nor effective to be thought police here if he does not engage in detailed substance,... hence my point to him in the SLAC thread.
Nobody qualifies for that indeed! Yet many interresting characters here engages in this behaviour. This is the backlash of the apparent lack of moderation on this website.

Captain S is often guilty of crossposting; if there were a moderator he would be called to order. Personally, when he gets to disruptive on a tread I put him on ignore then I bring him back on the next article, because he does have interresting things to say.
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (15) Nov 28, 2015
Hi my2cts. :)

As you may have noticed, I've been attempting to get viko_mx to speak on the science and leave out the 'god' thing. So it's counter-productive to that end if you keep attacking him based on past 'personal beliefs/feuds' even when he speaks only to the QM/Clasical physics, as he did in his above post sans any 'god' comments:
The basic problem before such kind of experiment is that the main part of the energy is transfered not to accelerated particles, but to the structure of vacuum of space.
So the maximum momentum of accelerated elementary particles is m x v where v can not reach the speed of light because of exponential increasing resistance with the gradual increase of the speed of these particles when move in the structure of vacuum of space.
So my2cts/everyone, let's not keep baiting/forcing viko into 'god' mode even when he comments strictly on the science. Just address the science. So if YOU keep dragging him back to 'god', don't complain! Ok? :)
my2cts
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 28, 2015
@ RC
So you ran a reality check and viko passed?
Take another look at your check procedure, it gives false positives.
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (15) Nov 28, 2015
Hi my2cts. :)
@ RC So you ran a reality check and viko passed? Take another look at your check procedure, it gives false positives.
Why come back with a non-sequitur? Here is the relevant post by viko_mx:
The basic problem before such kind of experiment is that the main part of the energy is transfered not to accelerated particles, but to the structure of vacuum of space. So the maximum momentum of accelerated elementary particles is m x v where v can not reach the speed of light because of exponential increasing resistance with the gradual increase of the speed of these particles when move in the structure of vacuum of space.
Can you give any reason for that not passing an objectively honest reality check based only on what was posted? And your reply to that post:
Perhaps you should explain to the unsuspecting reader that you are a religious fanatic and....
In that exchange, who was 'on-science' and who 'on-religion'? A reality check 'on-yourself', mate? :)
my2cts
2.6 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
Read on read on ...
Phys1
2.6 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
In that exchange, who was 'on-science' and who 'on-religion'? A reality check 'on-yourself', mate? :)

Everything viko writes is about religion. Haven't you figured that out by now ?
When you and I use the word "reality" are we talking about the same thing ?
note: Phys1==my2cts
Noumenon
3.9 / 5 (9) Nov 29, 2015
Using the the machine after to help life kill and harm life such as animals, for the sole purpose of personal gratification ....
The LHC is not about life nor death; it is fundamental research IOW aquisition of knowledge.


I read into it as a proposal to collide animals together at high speed, and then make sandwiches with the results,..... but then again, I was hungry at the time.

How does watching big ones fly into little ones explain the little ones getting together in the first place?

The first correct explanation was given by my2cts ,... I will elaborate a bit,... they're actually creating new particles using the kinetic energy of the original colliding lead atoms. This is possible on account of E = mc² .... the kinetic energy is converted directly into new subatomic particles, quarks and gluons. The original lead atom components may be there, but the vast number of particles existing post collision are created from pure energy.
Noumenon
3.9 / 5 (7) Nov 29, 2015
A breaks down into B-D, it should look like (x-z), so they look for those images
when something happens that isn't predicted, time to reexamine (but remember, that doesn't negate what we DO know works, just like SR/GR didn't negate Newtonian physics, which we still use today)
then there is the reverse engineering


That is your subjective opinion and is philosophy unsubstantiated by the facts of experimental evidence. The original B-D components are fleetingly few in comparison with the amount of particles that are Created from the kinetic energy of the collision. Reverse engineering has nothing to do with this experiment,... that one is examining existent parts to figure out the whole. They're making new parts. It is already known how lead atoms are formed, and even protons and nuetrons,.... it's the state of plasma that is being studied, and new quark combinations.

Noumenon
3.8 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
Their behavior is horrible on these forums. And the reason they behave the way that they do is because they don't value the truth and life.


They would rather hang out with jerry-springer than put an effort in to find value in ones post. If it was about your out of context posts, they would have more about science.

Some of the worst atrocities in modern human history were the direct result of devaluation of life and its intrinsic truth [Descartes'esque]. This site is infested with far-left liberals who claim interest in science, which venerates nature, but yet, who advocate for abortion, the killing of emergent life of their own kind from that nature,... life that may have likewise wished to come to know it.

However, can't it be both? Science has done immeasurably great things to promote human life and condition. It may be a threat in the wrong hands, like the social-engineering liberal-progressive, but is still beneficial for mankind generally.

Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (11) Nov 29, 2015
@bkitelynn

Nope, DavidW isn't messing around. He's been post the same inane crap and worse since 29 Jan. 2012.


His form of comedy takes commitment,... very Monty Python'esque.

yeah, it is common here on PO. Trolls, idiots and pseudoscience cranks help the admin pad the count so that they can produce a large membership/readership to the advert companies to make money

You and your girl friend vietvet help phys.org with this as much as the cranks do, by engaging them an audience ad nausea,... JVK, Zephyr, etc
my2cts
2.7 / 5 (12) Nov 29, 2015
@noumenon
I don't see any "far-left liberals who claim interest in science, which venerates nature, but yet, who advocate for abortion, the killing of emergent life of their own kind from that nature," on thi sblog.
If you are trying to appease the religious trolls, have you lost your mind? If you are one of them, please exert your free speech somewhere else.
TechnoCreed
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
@Noum
What's up with the political ranting this morning. Take a good cup of coffee before sitting at the keyboard ( personally double espresso lungo black, it put the neurons back into place in an instant ) You should be called to order by a moderator: Physorg is about science who cares where you stand ideologically.
DavidW
3.2 / 5 (11) Nov 29, 2015
@bkitelynn

Nope, DavidW isn't messing around. He's been post the same inane crap and worse since 29 Jan. 2012.


His form of comedy takes commitment,... very Monty Python'esque.


You and your girl friend vietvet help phys.org with this as much as the cranks do, by engaging them an audience ad nausea,... JVK, Zephyr, etc



Thank you

---
TechnoCreed

Physorg is about science who cares where you stand ideologically.


'Physorg is about science' - yes
'who cares where you stand ideologically' - no, because isn't about ideology. Yet, life is not an ideology. Life is the truthful purposes of science. Life make science important. It's not the other way around. People shouldn't do science if they dismiss the importance of life itself as ideology
DavidW
3 / 5 (12) Nov 29, 2015


However, can't it be both? Science has done immeasurably great things to promote human life and condition. It may be a threat in the wrong hands, like the social-engineering liberal-progressive, but is still beneficial for mankind generally.



Yes, and it currently is. Isn't a better question to ask is. "How much longer...?"
We need to do much more. The time invested in each person to surround them with commonsense from many people, might get them to stop killing animals for needless reasons, but it falls far short of what is required of us all right now. People need a proper functioning brain before tampering with dangerous stuff. We will not be able to play the cartoon again if the powder-keg blows.
So, if it happens, and anyone survives and really wants do it right, they have been told what is required. I would rather see a transformation, than an apocalypse mess. For many, it is. Something is going to have to give and the truth will still be the truth.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
@noumenonI don't see any "far-left liberals who claim interest in science, which venerates nature, but yet, who advocate for abortion, the killing of emergent life of their own kind from that nature," on thi sblog.


Liberals are liberals. I registered in 2007. Infested.

If you are trying to appease the religious trolls, have you lost your mind? If you are one of them, please exert your free speech somewhere else.

If by "one of them" you mean an adult, then yes. If you mean, religious, then no, an agnostic,.. and no.

What's up with the political ranting this morning. [...] Physorg is about science who cares where you stand ideologically.

Phys.org itself, posts studies designed to obscure the value of the political-rights ideology often enough that I can justify a counter opinion on occasion. As long as i'm bashing religious commenters and cranks, and am politically agreeable, it's acceptable to post such, evidently.

Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
And here I thought I was gonna come to this article and see spirited debate on the results of heavy particle collision emissions...

my2cts
2.6 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
"How much longer...?"
We need to do much more. The time invested in each person to surround them with commonsense from many people, might get them to stop killing animals for needless reasons, but it falls far short of what is required of us all right now. People need a proper functioning brain before tampering with dangerous stuff. We will not be able to play the cartoon again if the powder-keg blows.
So, ...

And you Noumenon, are encouraging this dangerous antiscientific person.
Are you with Sarah Palin or what ?
TechnoCreed
5 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
And here I thought I was gonna come to this article and see spirited debate on the results of heavy particle collision emissions...


And here we are smashing cats and dogs.
Noumenon
3.2 / 5 (9) Nov 29, 2015
And you Noumenon, are encouraging this dangerous antiscientific person.
Are you with Sarah Palin or what ?


Is it because I didn't engage in childish insults and name calling, but rather in respectful dialog, that you didn't notice my questioning of his apparent stance on science?

Had I attacked him with jerry-springer ad hominems, I would have received a bucket of 5's here. What quality of person do you think I'd rather converse with, despite being an agnostic?

my2cts
2.8 / 5 (11) Nov 29, 2015
And here I thought I was gonna come to this article and see spirited debate on the results of heavy particle collision emissions...


And here we are smashing cats and dogs.

I hope you are joking? :-)
RealityCheck
1.7 / 5 (11) Nov 29, 2015
Hi Phys1/my2cts. :)

Again, I've been slowly weaning viko_mx away from religious posts/beliefs and towards science content/discourse. That he has a 'background' of religious posts/beliefs is precisely *why* I am trying to encourage only science posts/comments from him without any overt/irrelevant religious assertions/perspectives mixed in with them. Which is why I take such posts as the one you/I quoted above from him s signs of *progress* towards eventual religion-free posts all the time, irrespective of what you/I may remember about his past/personal religious background/motivations/perspectives re *reality*. You will recall that many of the scientific greats were covert/overt religionists to varying degrees. I don't ask/care about personal beliefs/motives/agendas as long as the *science* is center-stage; I only comment on and discourage such if their posts are anti-logic, anti-science, anti-humanity due to *overt* religious reality-denialism. :)
my2cts
2.6 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015

Is it because I didn't engage in childish insults and name calling,

But you did didn't you with the sentence "far-left liberals etc.".
Plus, you encourage a religious troll who aims to put an end to science.
RealityCheck
1.7 / 5 (12) Nov 29, 2015
Hi DavidW, everyone. :)

@DavidW, I would just observe that your muddled/convoluted expression of your perspective on science/humanity comes across (to me) as your own contribution to the longstanding question of which takes priority in the scheme of things insofar as human existence/endeavor is concerned (leaving aside 'religious overtones' at all times).

@Everyone, I respect your right, applaud your recognition/execution of your duty as a human intellect to be part of that particular conversation for its own sake, and for your personal need to try to come to grips with whatever conundrums reality is presenting you with as you navigate the human condition and the science-discovered reality about the universe as a whole (even if 'life' had never arisen). That reality does exist for its own sake, before 'life' arose; and came to be what it is via its own natural manifestation, so we now use *both* science *and* humanity to make sense of it all. Synergy in *both*. Cheers. :)
TechnoCreed
4.6 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
And here I thought I was gonna come to this article and see spirited debate on the results of heavy particle collision emissions...


And here we are smashing cats and dogs.

I hope you are joking? :-)

Are you kidding everybody know that we, liberals from north of the border, even put unborn babies in our cats and dogs smashers. What's more, if you come up here, you can't even bring your firearms to make shure that you are safe.
Noumenon
3.2 / 5 (11) Nov 29, 2015

Is it because I didn't engage in childish insults and name calling, but rather in respectful dialog, that you didn't notice my questioning of his apparent stance on science?

But you did didn't you with the sentence "far-left liberals etc.".
Plus, you encourage a religious troll who aims to put an end to science.

Evidently I encouraged more thought-police, which is worse.

- I stated a fact about a political ideology, and then my assessment of the dangerous nature of that ideology. "far left liberals" and "progressive liberals" are not name calling nor insults,... they are defined terms in political philosophy.

- I questioned David's stance on science. Did you not notice that?
my2cts
2.8 / 5 (13) Nov 29, 2015
To me "far left liberal" sounds like a hell of a contradiction. You suddenly brought this qualification into the discussion probably to please your religious bigot friend. Don't be sanctimonious.
The right and the Christocracy need each other for the next presidential elections, so that they can continue the destructive, work of GW Bush who set the Middle East on fire and caused the worst financial and humanitarian crises in recent history. And keep selling arms and oil.
Noumenon
3.4 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
GW Bush who set the Middle East on fire and caused the worst financial and humanitarian crises in recent history. And keep selling arms and oil.


The middle east needed to be set on fire to enter the 21st century. Saddam, Gaddafi, Mubarak,.. and maybe Al-Assad if Obama wasn't a coward.

By the time Obama leaves office, he will have doubled the national debt. What caused the middle east crisis was Obama pulling US troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan leaving a vacuum for terrorists,.. his empty "syrian red line" and failure to support anti-al-Assad rebellion,... failure to support Kurdish in Iraq,... allowed ISIS to convoy across Iraq,.. basically his foreign policy of do-nothing.

40% democrats voted to use force in Iraq.

Bush made mistakes,.. didn't set a USA military base in Iraq right next to Iran,.. didn't fight democrats enough on what they did to the housing market, didn't use 9/11 to secure the border, gave Robertson supreme court position, etc

Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (8) Nov 29, 2015
Of course, nearly every democrat voted to use force in Afghanistan.

The majority of senate democrats authorized force in Iraq, and nearly 40% overall,... with some very prominent and even present Obama administration personal,.... Hillary Clinton, former Obama Secretary of State; Joe Biden, Obama Vice President; Tom Daschle, Obama's Secretary of Health and Human Services; John Kerry, present Secretary of state, and Harry Reid majority/ minority leader.

Why would Obama give them such high-end jobs if they contributed by enabling the "disastrous" Bush's foreign policy?

To me "far left liberal" sounds like a hell of a contradiction.


Why? Political science investigates the political spectrum, and recognizes left of liberal ideology.

DavidW
3.4 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
Noumenon,

It's people of liberal mind, people of...
What you said was wrong because it was a lie.

We need truthful science. Not the stuff you guys talk about for a cause other than to serve life.

Seriously, your position, and theirs, is insane, given the widespread bloodshed in the world today. Grow up! Your terminology address people as if we are not equal, and we are. it's our choices that need improving, not us.

If you really have a point to make, then address what has been written here again and again. Either it is correct that life is most important in life and EVERYTHING they have said against it is wrong, or ??? You have no where to go with this. The truth itself stands on its own.
DavidW
3.4 / 5 (10) Nov 29, 2015
You know the Gardsil is leaving women dead everywhere. SAD's and STDS. Perfectly healthy, then dead.
They are cloning animals now for slaughter.
The world is at war.
The environment is deteriorating at an alarming rate...

Why the cowardice?
What do a few people who make many points based on ignoring the most important point of all, which in doing so invalidates any cause they have, have on you? Pictures of you doing something bad?

You sold out every person that suffered due to neglect in the proper use of science. People that behave exactly like the ones you attempt to defend, that cannot even validate the cause to why they even talk. It must be too scary to publicly say for them. They sold out to the lie and cannot look their own shame in the eye.

I hear you all saying, 'more science without morals and valid cause'..'Let's hurt all life as much as possible' You sold out to evil. This has been witnessed.
Captain Stumpy
3.8 / 5 (10) Nov 30, 2015
vacuous accusations about "not knowing the difference between evidence and subjective opinion"
@Nou
vacuous accusation? more like proven fact
http://phys.org/n...eet.html

.

But if Physorg would moderate this place ...the best he can the way he sees it fit
@Techno
True that
in fact, if there were moderators, I would hardly post except to ask questions or specifically discuss a point

& re:thought police- i don't care what people believe... just what can be proven
but... i also don't like a pompous philosopher who regularly argues a subjective POV or an opinion as though it is a valid or proven argument, such as his arguments in the link above about climate change and the "-climatologist" argument sans evidence/source, etc

PS. on vaca-, but i rather liked what you pointed out: if he doesn't like it, just put me on ignore or ignore it like you do
my2cts
2.7 / 5 (14) Nov 30, 2015
Noumenon
So you are full of it. I thought so. Just goes to show that one does not need religion to be confused (Nou) but it sure helps (DavidW).
Now about that "thought police". You are playing the victim there.
I would rephrase that into "though garbage collection".
There is a subtle difference.
Your plan to blame Obama for everything only works for thick people. Everyone else knows that Bush stole the elections in 2000, left the US on the edge of financial disaster in 2008 and that the Iraq invasion was a HUGE mistake and a crime and the cause of what was to follow in Syria. You'd have to be a US republican not to see that. Obama received the Noble prize just for beating the Republicans, that is how relieved the world was.
my2cts
2.5 / 5 (11) Nov 30, 2015
Oh yeah , Afghanistan. It was Reagan who set up the Jihadi's and allowed Pakistan to achieve nuclear weapons. The list of blowback failures is long.
DavidW
3.4 / 5 (10) Nov 30, 2015


& re:thought police- i don't care what people believe... just what can be proven


Enough of our evil words. You don't state what you mean when you use the word truth.
You say you believe what can be proven. Life is most important in life is the most important truth in life, IS PROVEN!. Yet, you not only don't believe it, you fight it, and dismiss it.

All lies.... you represent evil in it's purest form, as you try to destroy healthy minds with your lies. The healthy minds that would help those that cannot help themselves. You choose evil, this is clear. Don't use a word like truth or true again, as you have no idea of its value.
Noumenon
3.2 / 5 (9) Nov 30, 2015
Your plan to blame Obama for everything only works for thick people.

That you have the nerve to say this even while concomitantly suffering from self inflicted blame-Bush syndrome, only demonstrates to me that you're not a critical thinker.

Bush stole the elections?; conspiracist gibberish. the votes were close, but recounted many tines. Even Gore conceded this.

The financial crises of 2008, was triggered by a housing bubble, primarily caused by democrats enacting policies to reduce lending standards in order that more people can own homes,.... thats the dangerous social engineering mentality of the left,.. 'its not fair' that some can't buy homes.

That Obama didn't win the Noble peace for any actually achievement, shows how bias and deranged that Noble committee was.

Wrt Iraq, there was a history of UN resolutions and authorizations and multinational agreement preceding that action. The UN never sought to condemn that [justified] action. These are facts.

Noumenon
3.2 / 5 (9) Nov 30, 2015
Stumpy, has a long history of trolling after me with insults and vacuous accusations about "not knowing the difference between evidence and subjective opinion" [the singular content of 98% his posts]


vacuous accusation? more like proven fact


I never claimed I have evidence to disprove Karl et al, as that is not possible. I was giving my skeptical OPINION of the manipulation and reanalysis OF evidence. If it's the EVIDENCE itself that is being manipulated, despite previous acceptance by AGW industry, then it is valid to be skeptical, of what is effectively an Argument. This does not in anyway imply I don't know the difference between evidence and opinion. In effect Karl gave "an argument",... they didn't produce raw data.

But, in THIS very thread [and others to which I pointed out], you stated an erroneous OPINION that did not coincide with the evidence established by the design of the experiment,... such is the value of YOUR opinion over evidence.

Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (8) Nov 30, 2015
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. .... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry, current Obama secretary of state

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .... Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton, former Obama secretary of state, currently vying for my2cts vote.
Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (8) Nov 30, 2015
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002, former Vice President, and likely received my2cts vote.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi

and on and on....

Of course they were all correct that Saddam factually had WMD's at one time as he used them to kill 5,000 Kurdish and he acknowledged them to the UN. Bush was not obliged to find WMD's in Iraq,... rather, Saddam was obliged, given the UN resolutions imposed on him, to demonstrate the disposal of his WMD's. It was never a hide-and-seek game.

These are facts of history.

MR166
5 / 5 (3) Nov 30, 2015
I just love how people are arguing about which party is better. You might as well argue which is better Coke or Pepsi. THEY ARE BOTH COLAS. Bush vetoed less legislation from a democratically controlled congress than any other president. The Republicans under Obama made a lot of noise and promised a lot of fight but folded into a quivering mass of Jello on every important issue. BOTH PARTIES ARE CONTROLLED BY THE SAME ENTITIES. Get used to it guys and girls the winner of the 2016 election has already been determined.
Hyperfuzzy
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 30, 2015
More nonsense is not science
my2cts
2.7 / 5 (12) Nov 30, 2015
@noumenon
What are you trying to prove? That Al gore invade Iraq? We know it was Bush.
That Saddam had WMD ? In 1988, yes. In 2002 you could perhaps think he still had them. In 2004 it had been shown by the UN inspectors that he did not have WMD.
Historical facts presented in a totally misleading way.
my2cts
2.5 / 5 (11) Nov 30, 2015
@Noumenon
This is not the forum to counter all your lies, halftruths and misrepresentations.
Just this:
"There were about 700 inspections, and in no case did we find weapons of mass destruction," said Hans Blix, the Swedish diplomat called out of retirement to serve as the United Nations' chief weapons inspector from 2000 to 2003;
http://www.berkel...ix.shtml
my2cts
2.3 / 5 (12) Nov 30, 2015
@Noumenon
And here is how your thick idol stole the elections:
https://www.youtu...rkxe5uPk
And here's how George Senior fooled you:
https://www.youtu...Vs3WaE9Y
Grandpa Bush also was an interesting character:
http://www.thegua...worldwar
MR166
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 30, 2015
You Bozos!!!! Both the Republicans and Democrats wanted to depose Saddam along with Europe.

You should have figured this out when the first Bush stated that the first invasion of Iraq was the start of a "New World Order"! You are all so sad thinking that your lives and opinions matter to the 1%.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (12) Dec 01, 2015
Hi my2cts. :)

Re Bush and the Nazis, we had our own parallel type case involving Saddam Hussein and our Howard Govt/Alexander Downer et al secretly trading Wheat-for-Oil/Cash (google Australian Wheat Board Scandal) and paying secret 'commissions/bribes' to dummy companies/fronts leading back to Saddam's financing for his war against his own people AND OUR OWN SOLDIERS fighting Saddam. Just goes to show 'capitalist/religionist ethics and morals' have a 'price' in blood money and self-interest, doesn't it? And they still have the hypocrisy and gall to criticize others who want the truth told! They should have been shot for it, not let off like that only to have them stuff things up some more when Howard's protege the mad monk Abbott somehow hoodwinked the Australian electorate to be come our worst PM ever! Thank goodness he's gone. What a relief that was, for everyone on all 'sides' of politics here in OZ! Keep up the good work on behalf of truth and justice, mate.
my2cts
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2015
You Bozos!!!! Both the Republicans and Democrats wanted to depose Saddam along with Europe.

They were all tagging along. Europe wanted to avoid "economical consequences" as Paul Bremer III called it in connection to the Afghanistan mission. A trade war was the alternative. What matters is that it was the Bush administration who did it.
About the 1% you are right. We are just meat in the eyes of people like Bush and Trump. But we are 99% so we can have our share of influence if we reduce the level of misinformation.
MR166
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2015
"About the 1% you are right. We are just meat in the eyes of people like Bush and Trump. But we are 99% so we can have our share of influence if we reduce the level of misinformation."

Since you chose not to include Hillary and Obama in the above sentence it is obvious that you are just one of those useful idiot puppets that the 1% depend on.
MR166
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2015
It is just amazing that no one here sees the similarities between the deposing of Saddam and Assad. We have destabilized most of the ME through regime changes clearing the path for ISIS.

THIS WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT, it is all part of the plan to destabilize the western world and have it's citizens plead for a One World Government.
MR166
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2015
The 1% already have most of the money in the world so what is left to gain? Total political power, that is what! They will strip each nation of it's legal autonomy all the way down to the individual towns and villages. But don't worry, that is the only way to "save our children" and Gaia.
my2cts
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2015
"you are just one of those useful idiot puppets that the 1% depend on.

You likely do not have many friends. If you can show that these people are robbers at least three generations back like the Bush dynasty , then you have a point.
MR166
5 / 5 (4) Dec 01, 2015
"If you can show that these people are robbers at least three generations back like the Bush dynasty , then you have a point."

Your instance that the Democrats/Liberals/Progressives are in no way connected to the problems of the 99% borders on lunacy. Our educational system has programmed you well.
Noumenon
3.5 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2015
In 2004 it had been shown by the UN inspectors that he did not have WMD.


Logical fallacy. At best, all the inspectors could ever show is that THEY didn't find them. Not good, enough when dealing with a dictator who had previously outright gassed 5,000 innocent people.

The UN resolutions required Saddam to demonstrate the destruction of the WMD's he admitted to having.

There were about 700 inspections, and in no case did we find weapons of mass destruction

If you lose your keys, do you claim they must not then exist? It could be that they do exist, since they existed at one time, and that you are not looking in the right place or are being guided in the wrong place,....

There was a context to the decision...

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and

.....he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Nancy Pelosi (D)
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2015
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore (D), Sept. 23, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D), Oct. 9, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do." - Rep. Henry Waxman (D), Oct. 10, 2002.

"…And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ... - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

my2cts
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2015
So the Democrats invaded Iraq according to Noumenon.
Finally the truth has been revealed.
my2cts
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2015
In 2004 it had been shown by the UN inspectors that he did not have WMD.


Logical fallacy.

No one, including you, will ever be able to show that Noumenon does not have WMD.
Logical fallacy, yourself.
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2015
So the Democrats invaded Iraq according to Noumenon.
Finally the truth has been revealed.


Bush sought and received congressional authorization for funding the Iraq operation. The majority of senate democrats and 40% overall authorized it, including several presently in the Obama administration. These are facts.

Another fact; Over 75% of deaths and 90% of casualties of US military occurred while Obama was commander in chief.

Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2015
.... [in Afghanistan] that is.

In 2004 it had been shown by the UN inspectors that he did not have WMD.


Logical fallacy.

No one, including you, will ever be able to show that Noumenon does not have WMD.
Logical fallacy, yourself.


You could be certain that Saddam does not possess WMD's only by invading the country and pulling him out of a hole in the ground, then putting him back in.

Read the quote from the democrat Waxman again. Saddam was laughing at the UN inspectors.
my2cts
2.5 / 5 (11) Dec 01, 2015
Fact: Bush was in power. Bush invaded Iraq.
Fact: Often correlation is used to SUGGEST causation but this is based on a logical fallacy. https://en.wikipe...ausation

my2cts
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2015
@Noumenon.
The number of US casualties in Afghanistan was already on a steep rise during the last years of the Bush administration. Opponents regroup, reorganise, get funding from global players, "shock and awe effect" runs out.
Do you really think the readers here are fooled that easily?
https://en.wikipe...hanistan
my2cts
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2015

Read the quote from the democrat Waxman again. Saddam was laughing at the UN inspectors.

Now why was he laughing. It could not be because, as you seem to suggest, he had WMD. He did not, had you forgotten? Although we can never be 99.999 % sure, I give you that.
my2cts
2.5 / 5 (11) Dec 01, 2015

You could be certain that Saddam does not possess WMD's only by invading the country and pulling him out of a hole in the ground, then putting him back in.

Nice pretext to pillage a sovereign country as well.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Dec 03, 2015
If it's the EVIDENCE itself that is being manipulated, despite previous acceptance by AGW industry, then it is valid to be skeptical, of what is effectively an Argument
@nou
1- but you never proved that the "EVIDENCE itself that is being manipulated", and your justification was opinion which is not evidence, and you didn't actually link evidence... etc etc etc
2- you did try to justify your opinion with more opinion & dr. roy (not fact OR evidence), which is like trying to justify a belief in faeries because the leprechauns told you to believe
they didn't produce raw data
- http://phys.org/n...eet.html

you stated an erroneous OPINION
and you've not demonstrated that yet... only made this claim (false claim, because you didn't read the above, BTW)

this is why philosophers (& you) can't discuss science...subjectivity/subjective argument is NOT the same as evidence
Hyperfuzzy
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 03, 2015
Looks like we've proven that fusion does not exist at high energy and that comments have nothing to add. Or, is it that nonsense, begets nonsense! Please, drown this comment with more nonsense. Yea!, the fools have won!
Noumenon
3.8 / 5 (10) Dec 07, 2015
A breaks down into B-D, it should look like (x-z), so they look for those images
when something happens that isn't predicted, time to reexamine (but remember, that doesn't negate what we DO know works, just like SR/GR didn't negate Newtonian physics, which we still use today)
then there is the reverse engineering - CaptainStumpy


Your description is factually incorrect.

The original B-D components are fleetingly few in comparison with the amount of particles that are Created from the kinetic energy of the collision. Reverse engineering has nothing to do with this experiment,... i.e. that one is examining existent parts to figure out the whole. They're making new parts. It is already known how lead atoms are formed, and even protons and nuetrons,.... it's the state of plasma that is being studied, and new quark combinations.

Hyperfuzzy
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 07, 2015
A breaks down into B-D, it should look like (x-z), so they look for those images
when something happens that isn't predicted, time to reexamine (but remember, that doesn't negate what we DO know works, just like SR/GR didn't negate Newtonian physics, which we still use today)
then there is the reverse engineering - CaptainStumpy


Your description is factually incorrect.

The original B-D components are fleetingly few in comparison with the amount of particles that are Created from the kinetic energy of the collision. Reverse engineering has nothing to do with this experiment,... i.e. that one is examining existent parts to figure out the whole. They're making new parts. It is already known how lead atoms are formed, and even protons and nuetrons,.... it's the state of plasma that is being studied, and new quark combinations.


Particle or imagination offering nothing to an engineer, useless.
Mike_Massen
1.4 / 5 (9) Dec 28, 2015
DavidW claims
Therefore, anyone promoting such technology must also hold the view the that vegan lifestyle is 100% correct, or they shouldn't be touching any of this, because they don't value the truth that life is most important in life..
Are you unwell (?) & No !

Humans are very similar to chimpanzees re dietary aspects, we have teeth as omnivores, we also become deficient in certain amino acids (AA) prevalent in meats, best obviously is fish though chicken/duck up to cattle also have these AA & they assist in cognitive function, actually DavidW you are showing a very odd narrow circularity

You rant repetitions which isn't mature articulation, you keep blurting about "life is important to life" - so what, its Nature's paradigm "Eat & be eaten" & ALL the time, then you claim truth but, which definition & how communicated.

Clearly simple observation isnt sufficient it works in a framework Eg maths/physics/dogma

Articulate your specific definition of Truth pls ?
viko_mx
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 02, 2016
So what? There will nothing new to discover because their concepts and methods are fundamentally mistaken. But to gloss over their failure in the eyes of the society will discover virtual particles per kilogram. The rest is the matter of popular media. With this complex machine will only heat the structure of vacuum of space. The secrets will stay secrets for those who can not use the knowledge responsibly because of lack of love.
viko_mx
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 02, 2016
The particle can not gain more moment than mxv or kinetic energy than (mxv^2)/2. The rest energy spent by this unique machine will warm the structure of the vacuum of the vacuum of space at the trajectory of the particles.
Mike_Massen
1.5 / 5 (8) Jan 02, 2016
viko_mx claims
The particle can not gain more moment than mxv or kinetic energy than (mxv^2)/2
No !
That goes against the measurements of the power required to accelerate particles at the LHC and the resulting collision energies as that relativistic mass/energy is then dissipated.

viko_mx, why are you STAYING so blissfully ignorant of special relativity, its proven for the LHC, GPS & now can even be shown to be measurable at speeds of as little as 20mph !

viko_mx claims
The rest energy spent by this unique machine will warm the structure of the vacuum of the vacuum of space at the trajectory of the particles
Since you have claimed "I know Physics well", then please supply the mathematics to support your claim ?

viko_mx, you come across as badly unaware of great deal of basic high school physics and beyond and focus on a creator BUT, you have still Failed to answer any of my direct questions to you re that creator :-(

viko_mx, how does it communicate ?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.