No Nobel Prize for Higgs
Posted in the Stockholm, Sweden Forum
#1 Mar 19, 2013
Just because a large group of physicists, engineers and technicians made good money working on this project, and just because it cost billions of dollars, and just because this accelerator is the largest one yet to be constructed, does not mean these results are correct or their interpretations true. Remember nearly everyone living at the time once believed the earth to be flat, and some still do. In science the intelligence of a single mind can disprove what the mob blindly believes.
”In questions of science the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.” Galileo Galilei 1564-1642
Galileo Galilei was the world’s greatest physicist in Italy.
This article provided only speculated claims, but not facts proving those claims. Real proof is hard to come by and most physicists won't take the time to demonstrate the so called "proof" of the existence of the so called "Higgs" particle to lay members of the public. And if they did, the members of the public would see just how flimsy their case really is. The scientific method demands that these claims be demonstrated in other laboratories at different times and locations in the universe. This has not been done and likely won't be done for a long time.
The so called "standard model" is only a speculated model. The assumed particles called "quarks" on which it is based, have not only never been observed directly, no particles with fractional electric charge have ever been observed either. Moreover, no one has calculated a proton or neutron from any number of speculated quarks as the physics orthodoxy has claimed for so many years now, like one can calculate the hydrogen atom from electron, proton, Coulomb's law and the laws of quantum mechanics. No one even knows how to write down the forces assumed between the speculated quarks, let alone perform such a calculation. And by the way , what are the speculated quarks made of?
When you get right down to it, the physicists don't know very much about the fundamental laws of nature. But none of them like to live their whole lives and come up with nothing do they? So many physicists have resorted to speculations and propaganda. Most lay persons are easily fooled and who is going to disprove their speculations in their lifetimes? At least no one is being killed by the likely false assumptions of the physics orthodoxy like the millions killed by the failed and false assumptions of the cancer generals of the failed war on cancer.
Physicists had a personal stake in this game. They wanted this outcome. This attitude biases the results in their favor. Just because this is the only accelerator of this size, does not mean one throws out the rules of the scientific method and rely only on this single experiment for the exaggerated claims. But this is evidently what the ignorant members of the media seek to brainwash the general public to believe.
A good dose of skepticism about all this hype from the physics community is warranted now.
Remember about a century ago a genius level physicist by the name of Robert Millikan did a simple experiment that anyone can repeat today on a kitchen table, which proved that all electric charge exists in integral units of the charge on an electron, and no other units. No facts have been demonstrated by any experiments which contradict these results for which Millikan was awarded the Nobel Prize in physics. His results were confirmed in thousands of similar experiments at different places and times. No one has ever observed a particle with fractional electric charge as claimed by the proponents of the existence of the speculated particles called quarks. Hence they are a fantasy, a pipe dream a religion to the physicists. The physics orthodoxy has come full circle:
#2 Mar 19, 2013
Some began as athiests but now they adopted a religion that states the laws of nature are what they believe they are, not what they prove they are with experiments and facts.
And the lay persons who pay for much of this nonsense are all easily fooled and duped.
No Nobel Prize should be awarded to the physicists until they return to the time honored rules of science and the true scientific methods instead of the religion they replaced them by.
Fame and the thought of a Nobel Prize is what is on the minds of some physicists today.
Let us pray and hope the committee in Stockholm votes “NO” in secret.
“O what a goodly outside falsehood hath”. William Shakespeare
Winfield J. Abbe
A.B., Physics, UC Berkeley, 1961
M.S., Physics, California State University at Los Angeles
Ph.D., Physics, UC Riverside, 1966
#3 Oct 9, 2013
Comment on the recent award yesterday, October 8, of the 2013 Nobel Prize in Physics for speculated political propaganda not supported by experiments and facts consistent with the scientific method as established at least since the days of Galileo Galilei.
The speculations on how subatomic particles acquire mass are just that; speculations which were not verified by the single experiment cited. The scientific method demands that many experiments be performed at different places and times to prove a result, not just a single one however expensive and complex to perform.
Science is supposed to be honest and open. But today even physics has become dishonest and secret. The many letters supporting the award of this prize are secret. They are promoting an agenda which is not supported by the facts. So called quarks have never been observed nor have particles with fractional electric charge. No "particle" ostensibly made of quarks has ever been convincingly calculated; neither the forces nor the equations to solve are known. This is a house of cards promoted by a secret physics orthodoxy in patent violation of the well established scientific method. The Nobel Committee are not experts in this field. They have been hood winked by arrogant egotistical physicists who seek short term vanity and fame, not long term truth. This particle, even if it exists, which was not proved by this single isolated experiment, is improperly named. It is the physics orthodoxy which thinks it is God and for which this failed theory has become a virtual religion to them. The physicists have become essentially the creationists they criticize.
Secrecy is the enemy of the truth. Virtually every claim about this speculated particle and its speculated properties is based on pure unproved false assumptions.
The award of this prize takes the good name of Alfred Nobel in vain and proves that the standards for this award have now degenerated to a low level of political propaganda, promoted one sidedly and dishonestly in secret by pushy individuals in secret behind the scenes, not open honest science. It was no more intelligent than the awarding of the so called Peace Prize to warmonger Obama or awarding cancer prizes for failed genetics dogma. However, most lay persons and some physicists and other scientists are easily fooled by the esoteric theoretical physicists who seek short term fame and self glorification and gratification from the failed research project of roughly the past century in strong interaction physics. Few physicists like to come up empty handed for a century of work, and how many of them would have the personal courage, honesty and integrity to admit it? All this is shameful.
At least the physics orthodoxy has not killed a bunch of unwitting innocent patients as have the cancer generals from their failed speculations in cancer research similar to the failed speculations of the high priests of the secret physics orthodoxy.
Shame, shame, shame....on the Nobel prize Committee for awarding this undeserved and misrepresented award, based on secret propaganda letters of recommendation hidden, likely forever, from public view.
This is most certainly not science and represents the very worst of possible human decisions in patent violation of the long established and true scientific method. This award is a slap in the face of every great original scientist.
Ignorance is bliss.
#4 Jan 21, 2014
According to the site http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physic... the 2013 Nobel Prize for physics was awarded jointly to two physicists
Peter Higgs and Francois Englert. Here is the statement quoted from there::“The Nobel Prize in Physics 2013 was awarded jointly to François Englert and Peter W. Higgs "for the theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles, and which recently was confirmed through the discovery of the predicted fundamental particle, by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at CERN's Large Hadron Collider"”
Both individuals were asked to state what they did in simple terms. If you listen to their responses and expect to be enlightened you will be sadly disappointed. Also, if you read their speeches you will also be sadly disappointed. Higgs basically reviews the history of some esoteric work by him and others without providing the many sordid details of the many unpleasant assumptions regarding this theory. Basically he was seeking to find a way to provide a mass to a system which had been constructed with zero mass particles in the first place from an analogy with the BCS superconducting theory. The entire theory is based on the old well worn out field theory which this whole scam is based upon.
What Higgs and Englert do not say is that it is totally misleading to claim that this speculated particle will be responsible for the mass of all others. Many arbitrary parameters are involved in any such calculation. If one has enough free parameters, one can calculate anything. Moreover they speculate that some mysterious and unknown new field might penetrate throughout the whole universe and through some mysterious way, particles with zero mass pass through it without gaining mass while others pass through it gaining mass. But there is not one shred of evidence that such a field exists or what its properties are or what its mathematical description might be. This is all pure speculation hot air. It is nothing but a belief system. It is no better than religion. It is not science at all. It is worse than Astrology.
Higgs wanted to find a way to predict a particle with mass because the original failed theory was constructed with all zero mass particles in the first place due to the way the Action for the LaGrangian of their field theoretic model. Volia, he found by doing some mathematical hocus pocus he could predict possibly a massive boson might be found. But he provides none of the enlightening details in his speech
Englert merely provides a series of slides with various references on them and some virtually unintelligible diagrams known only to a relatively few insiders to this defacto religion. One of the diagrams has two circles with three circles inside presumably representing the proton and neutron made of three speculated quarks which are assumed to have fractional electric charge but have never been observed in isolation by any experiment. Therefore they exist only as a “belief” or myth or a religion or Astrology. The final slide has a graph with no lines on it. It has three small boxes, the top marked with 126 GeV presumably the mass of the so called speculated “Higgs” particle “found” as a result of a billion dollar project, but no other graphs. Most lay persons and even most physicists find these presentations totally unintelligible and meaningless.
#5 Jan 21, 2014
continued from above:
Did either of these so called “scientists” calculate, with high precision, either of the two nucleons ostensibly “made” of three quarks as one has been able to calculate the Hydrogen atom with high precision “made” of proton and election held together with Coulomb’s law and described by the laws of quantum mechanics? No they did not. They did not do this calculation because it is too difficult if not impossible although they have had almost fifty years to do it! They did not know the force law between the speculated quarks. They did not know the complicated relativistic equations necessary to be solved to obtain the masses of these two particles as well as their other properties. And even if they could write down all these equations, they wouldn’t know how to solve them anyway because they would be very complicated non linear equations possibly with no unique solutions at all. If they had, they might deserve a Nobel Prize.
Finally note that in all this religious theory or belief system and speculation system, the oldest and most basic force involving mass; namely Gravitation was totally left out of the picture! This is totally absurd and patently violates the Scientific Method. Moreover, the Scientific Method requires that many experiments at different places and different times in the universe obtain and confirm the speculated result, however meaningless it may be in and of itself, but only one, if you can believe that, was presented. Therefore the statement above by the Nobel Committee is totally false and misleading.
None of these serious problems or speculations or assumptions with the theory are even mentioned by these two so called “scientists”. They are and have been promoted by a relatively small group of people seeking to push this one sided unsuccessful and failed theory not because it is successful and enlightening, but for selfish vanity and fame because they want recognition via a duped Nobel Committee in their lifetime for what is not a proper and sustainable and supportable physics theory of so called “elementary particles”, but little more than a speculated hot air religion. These people think they are the high priests of physics and no one is authorized to criticize their failed dogma. They are a Physics Pope.
And why did not the experimentalists who did all the work supposedly “finding” and “discovering” this speculated particle, with its speculated properties, based on speculated unobserved quarks and speculated unobserved particles with fractional electric charge, also participate in this undeserved international award promoted likely in secret by their cronies over the years to jam this scam physics theory down the duped throats of a very ignorant and gullible public and even other physicists and scientists also? Shameful is far too polite an adjective to describe all this gang rape of the most basic principles of physics and the time honored Scientific Method. All this is nothing short of a fraudulent non scientific obscenity. This undeserved award takes the good name of Alfred Nobel in vain.
Winfield J. Abbe
Pasadena High School, Pasadena, California, 1956
A.A., Pasadena City College, 1958
A.B., Physics, UC Berkeley, 1961
M.S., Physics, California State University at Los Angeles, 1962
Ph.D., Physics, UC Riverside, 1966
Institute of Science and Technology Fellow University of Michigan Ann Arbor, 1966-1967
Faculty member with lifetime tenure University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, 1966-1978.
Awards for outstanding achievement in mathematics, physics and chemistry.
Born at Cleveland, Ohio, 1939, raised at Sierra Madre, California.
Present address Athens, Georgia USA
#6 Jan 24, 2014
Wikipedia is not my favorite reference, but it is clear it has been hijacked by proponents of quarks and it is easy for anyone to access, so I used it. Other more obscure references in physics libraries would not be read due to difficulty of readers to access them.
How many proponents of the quark theory make clear what they mean by such terms as “elementary particle” or “particle” or “point particle” or gravitation or strong interaction, etc.?
Quote from first link above:
“A quark (/ˈkwɔrk/ or /ˈkwɑrk/) is an elementary particle and a fundamental constituent of matter. Quarks combine to form composite particles called hadrons, the most stable of which are protons and neutrons, the components of atomic nuclei. Due to a phenomenon known as color confinement, quarks are never directly observed or found in isolation; they can be found only within hadrons, such as baryons (of which protons and neutrons are examples), and mesons. For this reason, much of what is known about quarks has been drawn from observations of the hadrons themselves.”
It is a speculation that a so called quark is an elementary particle and a fundamental constituent of matter. This information is not known as a fact. If one reads the three articles at the links following the first above, one sees that elementary particle has various meanings depending on the scale one is using.
For example, if one looks at the earth from many miles away it would look like a point with no mass distribution or a particle. But when looked at close up, it exhibits many details which do not come into focus from afar. These many details are usually not made clear even to physicists, let alone lay audiences when making claims, often exaggerated, about this so called “theory”.
The so called phenomenon “color confinement” was in fact cooked up exactly because no so called “quarks” were ever directly observed, not as claimed in the above paragraph. Great experimental efforts were made to observe quarks directly. Since none were ever found, the theory would have to be abandoned. But rather than abandon it, the proponents of it simply added the ad hoc and very arbitrary condition that the quarks, regardless of whether they existed or not, simply could not be observed in isolation at all and gave it a name,“ quark confinement”. Obviously it did not bother its proponents that no quarks could be experimentally verified so they just cooked up a “reason” for this failure and went blithely on their merry grandiose way building a theory on a false foundation.
It is an assumption that quarks are “found in hadrons, baryons and mesons” since no quarks have ever been observed directly.
Second quote from first link above:
“Having electric charge, mass, color charge, and flavor, quarks are the only known elementary particles that engage in all four fundamental interactions of contemporary physics: electromagnetism, gravitation, strong interaction, and weak interaction. Gravitation is too weak to be relevant to individual particle interactions except at extremes of energy (Planck energy) and distance scales (Planck distance). However, since no successful quantum theory of gravity exists, gravitation is not described by the Standard Model.”
The first sentence is an assumption, not known as a conclusion at all. The second sentence is not known since no one knows what the gravitational force is inside say a proton for example. It is totally false to claim that gravitation is weak because it is unknown. It is totally wrong to use the classical form of the gravitational force at very small distances since it is only valid at relatively large distances. There is also no successful quantum theory inside an electron or proton either.
#7 Jan 24, 2014
Continued from above:
Third quote from same article above:
“The initial reaction of the physics community to the proposal was mixed. There was particular contention about whether the quark was a physical entity or an abstraction used to explain concepts that were not properly understood at the time.”
The same objections exist today nearly fifty years later. Even if a large majority of people claim to support and believe this so called theory, does not mean it is correct and valid. After all a large majority once believed the earth was flat and some still do. Lay people especially are easily fooled by the many false claims and assumptions of this so called theory, falsely stated as true without proof or virtually unverifiable claims.
For example when they claim to have verified something by experiments, remember they had an axe to grind because they were desperate to find the answer they were looking for lest they have to abandon their pet theory. Difficult questions that would normally kill such a theory, like being unable to observe speculated quarks directly were conveniently overlooked and swept under the intellectual rug with fancy ad hoc disingenuous indulgence and excuses and rationalizations to preserve the failed theory at all costs.
Fourth quote from first link above:
“Quarks have fractional electric charge values – either 1⁄3 or 2⁄3 times the elementary charge, depending on flavor. Up, charm, and top quarks (collectively referred to as up-type quarks) have a charge of +2⁄3, while down, strange, and bottom quarks (down-type quarks) have −1⁄3. Antiquarks have the opposite charge to their corresponding quarks; up-type antiquarks have charges of −2⁄3 and down-type antiquarks have charges of +1⁄3. Since the electric charge of a hadron is the sum of the charges of the constituent quarks, all hadrons have integer charges: the combination of three quarks (baryons), three antiquarks (antibaryons), or a quark and an antiquark (mesons) always results in integer charges. For example, the hadron constituents of atomic nuclei, neutrons and protons, have charges of 0 and +1 respectively; the neutron is composed of two down quarks and one up quark, and the proton of two up quarks and one down quark.”
Isn’t this nice that the sum of the charges of the speculated three quarks which make up the proton add up to 1? After all they were cooked up that way in the first place. But it did not bother the proponents of this theory that no particles with fractional electric charge have ever been observed in the real physical world did it? Therefore these are not real physical particles. They further rationalize this little “problem” with the claim that the so called quarks can only be observed in “combined internal groups” conveniently providing a further excuse for why no one can observe them and dispute their fake phony existence. If they do not exist the theory must be abandoned since it is based on nothing but a belief, rather than repeatedly observable facts according to the long accepted scientific method.
The proponents of this failed fake theory, better called a religion of belief, just won’t let go. They have bullied this phony religious theory for almost 50 years with the many hot air false claims wasting enormous amounts of beam time to promote what is little more than a belief and hope, not supported by facts and hard difficult if not impossible calculations.
#8 Jan 24, 2014
Continued from above:
For example, professors Higgs and Englert, why didn’t you do the following calculation since you both are obvious supporters of all this mythology: The well understood hydrogen atom consists of a single proton and a single electron. According to your theory, right or wrong, the electron is regarded as an elementary particle, that is, not “made” of other constituents. This of course is an assumption since at some future time it might be shown to consist of other constituents. The proton, according to your theory or the theory you so strongly support, is “made” of three so called “quarks” each with claimed fractional electric charge. Each of the quarks is also, according to your theory,“elementary”, or not “made” of anything else. Therefore a simple hydrogen atom can be regarded as 3 quarks plus 1 electron.
The obvious problem which presents itself then, as it did almost 50 years ago, is why not calculate the “hydrogen atom” as three quarks and one electron as your model claims, and see if you can obtain the energy levels and all other properties to the same precision as Feynman did so many years ago based on QED? But do your calculation from first principles using only the forces between the quarks and the electron and the relativistic equations solved exactly. No cheating by solving the bound state problem first with the non relativistic Schroedinger equation either as Feynman basically did with his relativistically invariant Born series.
Or, short of this calculation, how about a “simple” calculation of just the proton from “three quarks” from first principles?
You have both had almost fifty years to do these calculations no? Obviously you can’t do them or you would have done them. If you had done them, you might deserve a Nobel Prize. But not for what you did. Talk and hot air speculations are cheap. Actions speak louder than words. The Nobel Committee was secretly sucker punched by these physics bullies promoting speculative garbage based on a house of cards to a duped physics and lay population. Shame on all those responsible for this fraudulent misrepresentation of the Scientific Method. Ignorance is bliss.
“O what a goodly outside falsehood hath”. William Shakespeare
#9 Jan 24, 2014
Have you ever considered this point?
If particles such as quarks really are basic building blocks of matter as their proponents claim, and indeed do possess fractional electric charge, and even if we indulge them that these so called quarks cannot be individually observed in experiments, why do we not observe some other charged particles with fractional charge? For example,we know that Mother Nature is not perfect. Children are born with genetic defects. Some children have perfect teeth, while others do not. Some children have perfect eyesight while others do not. Some twins are stuck together with common organs Siamese Twins.
Therefore, why do we not observe some electrons or protons say, where Mother nature has endowed them with the wrong electric charge sort of like the errors above or that she makes endowing a woman with male characteristics or a man with female characteristics, etc.?
I recall years ago when the great effort was on to prove quarks do exist that someone checked Millikan's notes from his great experiments and I believe found one entry of about 1/3 the charge on an electron! This might have been a valid data point where Mother Nature simply made an error which rarely happens, but does sometimes, no?
So far as I know, there are no data available regarding the frequency of errors in electric charge on say electrons or protons for example. In fact, I know of no data illustrating exactly how electric charge even exists on these so called particles, on the surface say or distributed throughout the volume and what, exactly the electric charge consists of. Evidently more is involved than just electric charge since these particles also possess mass, spin and other properties. Evidently they are not geometric points but occupy a non zero volume of space however small.
Regarding the so called "deep inelastic scattering experiments" claiming to support their theory by finding "three points inside a proton", what if these had been done before the number of quarks had been known? Isn't it convenient they knew what to "look for". Everything seems to go their way but this sort of advance information can bias the results. For example, suppose they had done the experiment blind without knowing how many points to look for and perhaps arrived at a different number of points?
And are these three points just sitting there in space at rest? This would be unbelieveable.
The proponents of this theory seem to be quite lucky. Everything seems to go their way which is unusual for most physics theories and most physics experiments. Perhaps they should consider addressing their great prescient talents to the art of winning one of the large lotteries!
If they won the big one, they might even have enough money to build a second hadron collider and do a second experiment to obtain the Higgs mass they so worship.
Add your comments below
|In the middle (Oct '14)||Apr 6||no one||31|
|CAT M318 wheel Excavator||Mar 19||tiger_-_dad||2|
|hey there||Mar '15||tiger_-_dad||2|
|Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-white||Feb '15||9486kyyre||1|
|The Koyal Group Info Mag: Nobel Prize for work ... (Oct '14)||Jan '15||tiger_-_dad||2|
|Diverse Sweden Rushes to Embrace (and Become) a... (Aug '14)||Dec '14||J_a_n||2|
|End to End 5G for Super, Superfast Mobile||Nov '14||New China||1|
Find what you want!
Search Stockholm, Sweden Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC