OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 24, 2014, 04:31:06 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Higgs Particle  (Read 750 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« on: July 06, 2012, 06:10:47 PM »

Quote
Our understanding of physical reality — of everything and nothing — has changed forever. We don't yet know where we are heading, but nothing will ever be the same. As a scientist, I don't know what more I could ask for.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/06/opinion/krauss-higgs-particle/index.html?hpt=hp_abar

Can we please stop calling this the "God particle" please?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,238



« Reply #1 on: July 06, 2012, 06:18:28 PM »

What's your problem with God and His creation!?  Cool
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #2 on: July 06, 2012, 06:21:06 PM »

What's your problem with God and His creation!?  Cool
I refuse to be labeled as a particle!
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,238



« Reply #3 on: July 06, 2012, 09:17:29 PM »

What's your problem with God and His creation!?  Cool
I refuse to be labeled as a particle!

Works for this guy...

Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,238



« Reply #4 on: July 09, 2012, 01:46:10 PM »

The Higgs Boson walks into a Catholic Church. The priest says: "What are you doing here?" HB says "You can't have mass without me."

-Source: The Interwebs
« Last Edit: July 09, 2012, 01:46:31 PM by Asteriktos » Logged
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #5 on: July 09, 2012, 01:54:54 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Quote
Our understanding of physical reality — of everything and nothing — has changed forever. We don't yet know where we are heading, but nothing will ever be the same. As a scientist, I don't know what more I could ask for.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/06/opinion/krauss-higgs-particle/index.html?hpt=hp_abar

Can we please stop calling this the "God particle" please?

Its actually called the "God d**n particle" but the original was a bit too offensive Wink

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,172


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2012, 02:25:06 PM »

What's your problem with God and His creation!?  Cool
I refuse to be labeled as a particle!

Works for this guy...


HEY! You leave the Son of Keldar out of this!!!!

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,652


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 09, 2012, 07:22:13 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHgziac87-Y

Here we go...  Smiley
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #8 on: July 09, 2012, 07:30:01 PM »

Lol, I love this thread!

but, for the record, One guy called it the "God particle" in the title of his work (everything needs a catchy name, right?), then became a Nobel laureate, so it caught on among the people. Physicists themselves, however, generally discourage the nickname.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2012, 08:04:29 PM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom was the smallest particle in existence.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2012, 08:17:17 PM by Kerdy » Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #10 on: July 09, 2012, 08:09:13 PM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom Aww the smallest particle in existence.
What constitutes, in your opinion "real" science vs "fake" science?
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,238



« Reply #11 on: July 09, 2012, 08:10:11 PM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom Aww the smallest particle in existence.

Some scientists dislike the term "the God particle". Others like it because it's good PR (it gets journalists to get off their butts and pay attention to science for once). But this has nothing to do with replacing God with science.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #12 on: July 09, 2012, 08:13:55 PM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom Aww the smallest particle in existence.
What constitutes, in your opinion "real" science vs "fake" science?

Without getting too deep into it, science in many ways has lost sense of its purpose.  It's no longer implemented in the fashion which it works best.  Much of what passes today as science doesn't seem to stand up to its own standards or methods.  Much of it is fueled by politics or ideology.  That sort of thing. 
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #13 on: July 09, 2012, 08:15:12 PM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom Aww the smallest particle in existence.

Some scientists dislike the term "the God particle". Others like it because it's good PR (it gets journalists to get off their butts and pay attention to science for once). But this has nothing to do with replacing God with science.
Also, as Habte pointed out earlier. The God Particle's original title was the God D**n Particle because of the difficulties they had trying to find it. Trying to make this about science vs. religion is just silly IMO.
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #14 on: July 09, 2012, 08:15:57 PM »

Well of course not, God is not the object of science.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #15 on: July 09, 2012, 08:16:55 PM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom Aww the smallest particle in existence.

Some scientists dislike the term "the God particle". Others like it because it's good PR (it gets journalists to get off their butts and pay attention to science for once). But this has nothing to do with replacing God with science.

Perhaps, but I have learned to be pessimistic about this sort of thing.  The original intent is oftentimes ignored and consumed by ideologs.
Logged
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,400


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2012, 08:17:12 PM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom Aww the smallest particle in existence.
What constitutes, in your opinion "real" science vs "fake" science?

Without getting too deep into it, science in many ways has lost sense of its purpose.  It's no longer implemented in the fashion which it works best.  Much of what passes today as science doesn't seem to stand up to its own standards or methods.  Much of it is fueled by politics or ideology.  That sort of thing. 
So you're saying the scientific method no longer works? Or is it just no longer being used?
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2012, 08:20:15 PM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom Aww the smallest particle in existence.
What constitutes, in your opinion "real" science vs "fake" science?

Without getting too deep into it, science in many ways has lost sense of its purpose.  It's no longer implemented in the fashion which it works best.  Much of what passes today as science doesn't seem to stand up to its own standards or methods.  Much of it is fueled by politics or ideology.  That sort of thing. 
So you're saying the scientific method no longer works? Or is it just no longer being used?

No longer being used, but this is a wide generalized sweeping statement which certainly does not apply to all scientists or all fields of study.  The faults lies in individuals, not the science itself.
Logged
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #18 on: July 09, 2012, 08:42:55 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Well of course not, God is not the object of science.

Sir Isaac Newton and even Albert Einstein may just disagree with you Wink

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,238



« Reply #19 on: July 09, 2012, 08:54:13 PM »

Sir Isaac Newton and even Albert Einstein may just disagree with you Wink

I'm a bit confused here, as one of these men definitely believed in God, while the other definitely did not Smiley
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #20 on: July 09, 2012, 08:54:59 PM »

Sir Isaac Newton and even Albert Einstein may just disagree with you Wink

I'm a bit confused here, as one of these men definitely believed in God, while the other definitely did not Smiley
Both believed in God..?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,238



« Reply #21 on: July 09, 2012, 09:17:39 PM »

Sir Isaac Newton and even Albert Einstein may just disagree with you Wink

I'm a bit confused here, as one of these men definitely believed in God, while the other definitely did not Smiley
Both believed in God..?

Einstein used "God" in the same way I do when I say "God Bless" when someone sneezes... it's just a saying, not a statement about one's theological beliefs. People talked about this during Einstein's life, and his response was:

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

(Source is wiki and a thousand other sites)
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #22 on: July 09, 2012, 09:20:29 PM »

He may have denied a personal god, but there is no way, based off his writing, that he was an atheist. That I am 100% convinced of.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Faith: BZZT
Posts: 29,238



« Reply #23 on: July 09, 2012, 09:41:23 PM »

He may have denied a personal god, but there is no way, based off his writing, that he was an atheist. That I am 100% convinced of.

There are plenty more quotes to look up, if you're interested. Personally I find it somewhat distasteful, the way religionists and atheists argue over him and try to claim him, though I do like to put my 2 cents in nonetheless.  angel police
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #24 on: July 09, 2012, 09:53:26 PM »

He may have denied a personal god, but there is no way, based off his writing, that he was an atheist. That I am 100% convinced of.

There are plenty more quotes to look up, if you're interested. Personally I find it somewhat distasteful, the way religionists and atheists argue over him and try to claim him, though I do like to put my 2 cents in nonetheless.  angel police
The same goes for Hitler, unfourtantley. I mean in regards to him being a Christian or not.

But I guess it doesn't really matter.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
vorgos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 193


« Reply #25 on: July 10, 2012, 08:54:15 AM »

Quote
Einstein used many labels to describe his religious views, including "agnostic"[3] "religious nonbeliever"[4] and a believer in "Spinoza's God."[5] He rejected other labels like "atheist" and "pantheist".[6]

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Albert_Einstein

and a view of God which sounds very Orthodox.....

Quote
I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contribution to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and body as one, and not two separate things.[6]
Logged
vorgos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 193


« Reply #26 on: July 10, 2012, 08:58:52 AM »

As for the naming of it....

Quote
The contrary impression, evidently shared by your friends, is undoubtedly due to the appellation “the God Particle” given to the Higgs boson by Leon Lederman in his 1993 book The God Particle. Some people seem to think that the Higgs Boson takes the place of God. In fact, however, Lederman called it “the God Particle” for two reasons: (1) like God, the particle underlies every physical object that exists; and (2) like God, the particle is very difficult to detect!

From http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2012/07/q-theological-implications-of-higgs.html

and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_God_Particle:_If_the_Universe_Is_the_Answer,_What_Is_the_Question%3F
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2012, 09:16:23 AM »

People have been attempting to replace God with science for a long time.  They are not going to stop, nor should they as their attempts reveal just how finite their understanding is and how futile their efforts are in doing so.  I love real science.  Sadly, much of it today isn't "real" any longer.  For the record, I remember when the atom Aww the smallest particle in existence.
What constitutes, in your opinion "real" science vs "fake" science?

Without getting too deep into it, science in many ways has lost sense of its purpose.  It's no longer implemented in the fashion which it works best.  Much of what passes today as science doesn't seem to stand up to its own standards or methods.  Much of it is fueled by politics or ideology.  That sort of thing. 
So you're saying the scientific method no longer works? Or is it just no longer being used?

No longer being used, but this is a wide generalized sweeping statement which certainly does not apply to all scientists or all fields of study.  The fault lies in individuals, not the science itself.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.1 seconds with 55 queries.