The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

While Man has still to truly define his question of everything, that Cern might show, he wars, both overtly and covertly. What is the Answer?

What does it matter, when man is an animal prone to barbaric tendicies it is in his nature. If he found the answer to it all what would he ultimatley DO with the information?

Mans arogance surpasses his intellect .... the fact he still is very primitive overall is beyond his comprehension not to mention he being a war like creature holding great intelligance but with the mastery equivocal of a disgruntled three year old child wheeling his dads loaded gun. How can he ever be trusted?

i agree if they could find a way to make some sort of super weapon with the results of cern i believe they would

Is existence over rated? the jury is still out.

we exist. maybe, that's the answer.. in itself.

we're doomed as a species.

Say what you will, Mans behavior and question of all things is reflective upon each and every one of us. We all have our own views and questions of things each as individual and different as we are from each other, personally SO WHAT IF I'M PRIMITIVE, i deal with what i have been given and seek to improve myself and there isn't a person in the world who can tell you that they have never indulged in what their basic instincts would have them do. I for one embrace my fate as a barbarian and live the life of a fighter and i'm damned proud to do it. The world could end tomorrow and i'd welcome it for i've been true to myself.

**Grins**
so well said. to me: what is... is.

All very well to dwell on too many 'what if's'

That said, I'd like to think we'll leave Earth, in one piece...

Personally I don't think if a person accepts their instinct, that they are primitive. I think people who use the excuse of "acting on their primal needs" are not taking responsibility for themselves.
There are intelligent ways to accept and deal, and even act, on your instinct. We must live our lives to the greatest potential of ourselves for the sake of all living things.

But just saying that we're a primitive race and therefore nothing else matters, is giving in to greed in itself. Taking what you want or doing whatever you want harms all of mankind.

We are animals with a greater sense of intelligence and evolution has worked had for that purpose. Therefore we should be obligated to act more compassionately, intelligently than other animals. Most people don't. Most people live in a scary state of apathy toward their fellow living things.

CERN..long ago Einstein and some others came up with a train station analogy, how a ball thrown from a train appeared at different speeds to those on the train and those on the station platform. Accelerate the protons around the train track passed the train station, the station master gives six station boy conductors, 3 either side 3 coins each. As the ball of energy rushes passed the station boys they check teir pockets...the coins keep changing positions. The station Master pulls the lever and the ball crashes, at this point the dye is caste and all the coins are on the otherside of the train track. The station Master smiles, the more energy the greater the possibilities, it's all in the timing.
He smiles once more and bids us get back in our car, it is now at the top of the train track. Does anyone understand this?

yes, why not?

AND NOW, they say... they MAY... have found the elusive Higs Bosun particle... what with that and faster than light... ??? Methinks there's a plan.

Just the conspiracy theorist in me coming out.

Oh good, it seemed to be a message, here is another. A clock turns by six degrees, exactly so it clicks 15 times to complete 1/4 hour. By sixty times it completes the circle and the hour is up.60x6 = 360 degrees the circles complete?
Yet divide 6 into 1 and it is 1 remainder 4, add the decimal zero, 6 into 40 = 6 remainder 4 recurring.0.16666666666 recurring, IT IS NEVER COMPLETELY RIGHT.

The Gaps in time my friend, the gaps in time. Who uses the gaps in time? This Lucid thought maybe linked to Cern.

**Chuckles**

maybe I am dyscalculic?
but yes, I know there's anomalies.

Just find it intrigueing they're announcing these things Now... and, each announcement is made, with doubt.

It's only funny or "doubtful" if you don't know anything about science or reading for that matter.

These announcements or theories are on things that have been talked about for decades, they're not new. We just didn't have a way to test them 30 years ago.

A theory is just that, a theory, and no theory is 100% complete without full testing.

Any questions raised by the "god particle" (that term has NO reality to what the particle is) have little or nothing to do with the meaning of life itself. The question of love & hate has less to do with physics and more to do with emotion and the nature of consciousness. While some things may be brought to light or better understood by physics you're still dealing with ever changing variables...us.

Lay people tend to grab on a theory and then when that theory changes or is disproven shout out "science is wrong and majick is right", I say BULL CRAP. A theory is a theory and it may be partially correct or fully correct but it takes time to figure it out.

Enough with the lunacy surrounding the Higgs and neutrinos. Pick up a text book, set aside your preconceived notions and desires and just think for a second.

Science is a tool and the compendium of human knowledge is ever changing. It's only natural.

Could there be life after death, are there aliens, can we go into another universe...science doesn't know and may get things wrong time to time but in the end there's little reason to think that IF something is testable (able to be proven) then it will be, either tomorrow or 10,000 years from now.

The only answer we will get if the Higgs is found to exist is why matter has mass. If it isn't found then the search will continue. Nothing magical or conspiratorial about that.

if they did find the god particle it could turn religion on its head and who knows what the outcome of that may be thats why i think there expressing doubt on any posative results and asking other scientists to do experiments

Xzavier. interesting. yet, as you said yourself, all of this has been around for decades, true.

I follow science, have done since I was fourteen.
YET. After listening to the twerp Cox, the failed popstar, calling those like me a Tw*t for seeing another point of view than his, I maintain my doubts even more.

YES, as you say Sir, a theory is a theory is a... I know.
But, these twerps figure to make a reputation with a discovery and, woe betide anyone who doesn't agree.

[[Brian Cox et al. No Einstein, any of 'em.]]

BUT. What did the discovery of neutrino's themselves prove, in the grand sceme of things... ? Little.

Personally, I'd like THEM to tell me how the Big Bang came into being... then THEY might impress me, just a little... till then, I'll doubt them all.

First, how would the "god particle" turn religion on it's head? That's one of the silliest things I've heard. The correctly named Higgs Boson is nothing more than another (out of over a dozen) quantum particles. The reason it's special is because it may explain why particles have mass, something that currently we don't understand.

Angelus:

I actually like Cox, mostly because I think he's cute lol.

What exactly are you wanting to know about? I'm not sure I understand the specific problem. As for the Big Bang (which wasn't big and couldn't have banged - just a trade joke) we've known about it for 60 years or so the problem is it's discovery relies on observation. We can't observe the universe as it was 13.7 billion years ago, the best we can do is several hundred thousand years after. So we have to rely on theoretical physics and try things like smashing atoms to squeeze out the rest of the picture.

No scientist I'm aware of has ever said "this is what made it happen" or "this is how/why it happened". Simply, the expansion of the universe occurred at some point which is the only logical explanation to an expanding universe.

Now, there are several theories as to why and how it happened but the certainty of them is still very much in debate. One possible explanation (and one I personally find plausible) is the "brane" theory. That is, our universe exists along objects called "branes/membranes" which collectively are referred to as the "bulk" or "multiverse". These branes exist as part of a larger and multiple dimensional super structure, there could be any number of these branes. And when 2 branes collide (or if one folds on itself potentially) the differences in their respective energy states causes an explosion aka a big bang.

It doesn't answer where the branes come from and if true it's more than likely we could never know because we only exist in a 3+1 dimensional universe. The big bang theory itself also has some questions beyond origin but it still represents the best solution to our universe, at least as we understand it now.

Another theory is the cyclic universe, a BB happens, that universe ends up collapsing and then another BB happens in an eternal cycle. I discount this fully.

You could also suggest that a higher power (god) exists as the ultimate combination of all universes/dimensions/energies etc and creates them at will to fit whatever purpose "he" has. But even if that's true we could still theorize and test and figure it out, at least partially.

Being one of those undereducated folks because I don't have a science degree, my belief is it doesn't matter. Who cares. Those who have to know how everything works and when they figure out one thing, figuratively, they will want to know something else and it will go on and on.

I don't think there is a conflict with those who believe in some form of a god which I use generically here because it isn't a specific word to be used to mean any one in all actuality. It is a descriptive word that some take for granted to belong to one belief system or so. It wouldn't conflict because if you look at the writings realistically it doesn't give extreme details other than on this day this happened and so on. It's just a story from older stories and I don't say that to be insulting to anyone, it's just the truth but doesn't negate anyone's beliefs. I think one is a spiritual view which is not specific whereas others want to know how it works from a scientific viewpoint. Unfortunately as long as there are camps and rivalries amongst the scientific community I don't believe anyone will ever come up with a definitive answer even if they find a particle and call it the "god particle."

The "theory of evolution" has been accepted as fact much to the chagrin of Darwin and I have read a couple of books concerning all the anomalies and there are many. I wonder why they are trying to find such a particle. Do they plan on creating their own universe? What is the purpose for all of this except keeping a lot of men busy writing articles for scientific journals and spending a lot of money? Are they looking for the means to create a weapon? In the end, this is generally the agenda of most men. Ever see a movie called Mindwalk?

several Horizon in one entry, "sound."
Thanks.

personally, I go with the cyclic theory.
for me, it makes sense.

what do I want to know... ? more, always more.

As to the question, it came from the search for this elusive Higgs Bosun, which 'they' tlaud as the answer to EVERYTHING. reasonable IQ or no, I still can't figure how it might...

No, the Higgs is NOT the theory of everything (TOE). It's illogical and basically apples & oranges. I don't know of anyone who has said that. So much of the publics opinions and understanding of these things come from regular media sources from articles written by folks not in the scientific community and they make lots of mistakes.

The whole "god particle" for example is, in my mind, nothing but media hyperbole and it confuses way too many people. It's got nothing to do with god, religion, magic etc. It's just a particle that could answer a big question.

Now, finding the Higgs will go a long way in helping us find a true TOE. Such a theory aims at combining all the forces (weak nuclear, strong nuclear, EM and gravity) and answer questions about super symmetry etc. A true TOE would provide solutions and predictions for any and all natural physical phenomena and gives us predicted outcomes.

There are a number of theories that are potential candidates for the TOE and they're string theory, M-theory and possibly loop quantum gravity. But they all still have holes in them (then again so does evolution).

In regards to the cycle theory, it no longer gets much attention because we're pretty sure the universe is open and will never collapse. Plus it doesn't answer the question of "where did the energy come from to begin with". The more probable outcome is that the universe will expand forever ultimately reaching a state of total entropy (heat death) where nothing but energy exists..no particles, no stars and no black holes and after many trillions of years the universe will live on forever as a giant cold blob of empty space.

Well that's rather rude...have you read KPO or Zen and the art of motor cycle maintenance? I thought not.

Well read this, merry xmas master doubter...

Breaking news...they have found the Higgs Boson God particle.....amazingly they have managed to enlarge the image using high tech electron microscopes and computer imaginhg. These images show a symbol actaully on the particle....it says "made in china" experts are still trying to decipher what this means.

On second thoughts, if you really want to know about Love and the flip side...read Chaka....not for the faint hearted..

Breaking news-- The have NOT found the Higgs Boson (and please for the love of...anything stop using "god particle"). What they have done is eliminated some of possible energy states it could exist as thus cornering the actual thing into more and more better described energy states. So basically if it is real we know with greater certainty of where it may reside. It could take another or year or so to fully show it's existence if it occurs naturally.

As for the other stuff, unless something can be observed and repeated, for the sake of human understanding, it doesn't exist. Example, in 1150 Antarctica did not exist as a reality. Only once something can be looked at does it become part of our reality. Now that starts to move into the realm of philosophy but science's role is not to answer questions of love or purpose. If you look to science to do that you'll be sorely disappointed. Science can help us understand those things to a degree and can be used to inform us as to the best actions but in the end science doesn't care much about the meaning behind our existence and speaking for myself neither do I...at least not using pure science alone.

Don't mean to be a downer but facts and logic are here to keep us from thinking a rock controls our future. The truth shall set you free, not rampant speculation with little to no solid foundation.

Interesting topic. Men tend to ask everything, but, always the answer founded is the one that is most accepted by many. But, the real question is, is it the real answer? Is a human tendency to accept the most easy answer to any question, because that will end the question. IE, Death. there is no answer for death, if you analyze the ramification of the question; all the answer which are out there were created by all different people from all different background. So, in conclusion, there is no answer to any question, just opinion of some.

I believe you make decisions based upon background, rearing and experiences, and therefor hold the responsibility. If people are prone to violent tendencies it's because they're taught to usre this as a survival mechanism or criminal intent.

Xzavier... I do like the 'if it is real'.

but thanks for summary, I spent the evening avoiding Brian Cox, or I'd have seen this earlier...

For I believe a first in the forums I have to agree with mel. Chiefly being experiences that shape a person and the decisions they make.

Oh my dear Angelus, I did love Brian Cox's night with the stars, if you missed it, please tune in. He is very good at explaining the boring stuff to us normal folks.
Ahem, a question?
About a year ago I mentioned it was possible to disassemble water and reassemble water thus giving free energy.
How? passing water through a gravitational field....as water sinks its electrons do not not lose energy due to the "Powlee principle"...tried and tested.

My question stands, if you gain the same amount of energy splitting H2O as you do igniting it....then the energy loss is Zero.

Yet the water sunk, power turbines, then rose as a gas powering turbines.

The equation seems to stand, deconstructing and reconstructing matter through a gravitational difference = Free energy....well not free but leeching quantom energy because of the Powlee principle?

I'd rather listen to Xzavier than Brian Cox.
Less condescending to doubters.

Free energy? man's dream. but, I cannot envisage 'them' letting such a thing happen...

'they'd' lose to much money.

Eventually one pauses and wonders, "Who is it that is doing the asking?" Until then, it really doesn't matter.

if you're doing the asking, you require answers, surely?

as for the theorists, they'll keep theorising, to 'prove' someone else wrong...

i'd like to amend my prior statement, i'm not retracting anything only adding that i agree with anji in that we have a responsibility as a more intelligent species to show compassion to each other and other living creatures and that our responsibilities are greater than those of our less intelligent counterparts, i also agree that there are healthy and unhealthy ways to indulge in our primal instincts, good and bad ways. Que Cerat Cerat! there's no changing the end only the time and means by which we reach it. If the world ends on account of mankind's nature then thats the way its going to happen.

It can all be summed up in one word:

Pie

Yes, Pie.

Apple pie, Peach pie, Pumpkin pie...etc..etc...etc

Pie.

Pie as everything else in creation is made up of atoms and molecules except it tastes better than tree bark or sea weed.

What matters most in life....Pie

Why pie? Just look at what goes into making it. Think about it now...all of the ingredients that go into the process including the labor. All of those atoms and molecules spinning and churning and banging up against each other and the end product of their existence so tasty and finger licking good. That's emotion of a higher level. Pure ecstasy.

Pie and coffee..mmmmmmm...

That is the answer of everything....Pie

And the question of everything?......Is there more? Pie that is.


What man need is more Pie in his diet and less Pi.

In order to understand the above post you have to go beyond the obvious.

There's a science to language and fair seeming mirth.

Comparisons of seemingly meaningless quips & quirks, can easily be passed over by the highly educated, stiff necked, obnoxiously formatted and filed intellectuals who can not see beyond the firmly formatted and founded pillars of their own creation.

Just saying.......the above post is not meant to be a joke or to ridicule in any shape, form or fashion the intelligence of my friend who posted the subject.

I like pie and, with reverence... I'd say that I make a good one. Yet, much like a theorist, I often take what's accepted and, ammend it to suit my own personal taste.

As many have done, before me...

Thx Angelus, I try to not be condescending and such but sometimes folks have told me I can come off a bit arrogant...don't mean to be.

As for energy loss. We gotta remember that old law, energy can't be created or destroyed, only changed. Matter (like a hydrogen atom) can be broken apart into its own particles or joined together to form something heavier, all the while losing energy, but that energy isn't lost form the universe it's simply given off as heat which can be used by us to generate electricity.

Interestingly as advanced as nuclear power seems it's still creating electricity the same way we did 100 years ago, by heating up water, turning it into steam and then using that steam to turn turbines.

The Sun converts about 5% of it's matter into pure energy (x-rays, heat etc) the rest is just reformed or blown off in the form of neutrinos and other particles. The vast majority of matter will remain as matter over many millions of years, only a tiny percent will be turned into energy (even in a nuclear explosion) but the amount of energy held within matter is so immense we can have things like stars exploding and outshining an entire galaxy for a brief moment.

Current calculations say that it would take over a million trillion years for all matter to break down into energy. Matter can be fairly easily converted into energy, sadly it is uber hard to turn energy back into matter.

His arrogance when he first appeared on television here was truly galling; all that from a failed-pop star… And Now, just for once, I would like to hear the pretty boy’ Brian Cox acknowledge that he owes much to those before him and, not slate those who counter his point of view.

{{A repeat of one of HIS shows was on tonight}}

He seems to forget, that to paraphrase someone... he stands on the shoulders of giants...

Xzav, old technology, my point exactly. Anyway according to Brian Cox and planck, diamonds and other matter jump around all the time?
Yet nobody has ever seen this phenomena. This is because diamonds and all matter are set in the glue of dark energy, the counteracting anti-matter force we cannot see or measure. This principle is known as common sense.
Now back to using water gasses to pull turbines...

Simply, we are no different than the beast.

"For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same. As one dies so dies the other; indeed, they all have the same breath and there is no advantage for man over beast, for all is vanity. All go to the same place. All came from the dust and all return to the dust."

Ecclesiates 3; 19 & 20

Agrred,

"Life- a series of disasters with brief interludes of happiness"

TFS 101 2009.

and while theologians theorise and, scientists get caught in the cult of celebrity... we carry on...

such is the Nature of Life itself.

Fallenstar, you're misunderstanding what's going on.

Individual particles, quantum particles, jump around all the time and it's been seen many, many times. The reason a larger object like a football doesn't move about by itself is in part an illusion of perception and part because the whole system isn't bound by the same fields that bind individual quarks for example. Plus the motion of a quark even magnified 1 million times wouldn't be visible to the naked eye. Everything is vibrating, you just can't see it with your eye and the distances are often smaller than you'd imagine.

The rules that govern the quantum and the rules that govern larger objects aren't the same, they're different. Should the Higgs be found it would help us figure out why they're different and how they can be different.

Remember this, 90+ of you is just empty space, totally void of solid particles. The other ~10% is a pile of molecules (where regular gravity begins to give way to the quantum world) but what makes up your atoms are in a constant state of movement and further down still a fair portion jumps in and out of being, never to be seen again exactly the same.

Dark matter doesn't exist in the same densities on Earth as it does around galaxies. There seems to be some sort of trade, the greater amount of matter in a given space the less dark matter, the less normal matter the more dark matter.
Dark matter binds the outer stars to their galaxy and it binds all galaxies together along a massive web 10s of billions of light years across. Dark matter, at least most of it, isn't made up of any kind of atom but the "baryonic dark matter" does play a role on smaller scales.
An interesting thing to look into is the "Bolshoi" simulations which show that the only way for our universe to exist as it does today is if it has dark matter.

Particles popping in and out has less to do with something hard like a marble and more to do with simple points of energy, after all quantum particles are more or less just points and exist within fields of energy.

see, it makes sense when written and said without a false stoopid smile.

although Xzavier? How much, if any of that can be proven, as yet???

it's all still conjecture.

I see, that being the case the equation written on the show is wrong, they said the chances of matter moving around were at a known constant.

By your own explanation above, observation shows this is not the case... there is a tarde offf between where energy and matter already exits, and where it does not. Somebody needs to find the equations that show how energy/matter and nodes are repelled by the vast nothing.
It strikes me the universe broke in two and they don't get on, funny that...Btw I like the idea of rock physics, Brian should lay down some equations in some hard core riffs, might enthuse a few more people...
(Here is Brian and his Fangy mates playing God...)

How much of what can be proven? The Higgs? Mathematically we can show where it *should* be, it just takes a ton of testing to actually find it.

Funnily, the smaller the particle you're trying to find the bigger the "microscope" you need. The LHC detector is bigger than a house and it works not by physically looking at the particle but by acting like a map, being able to trace its energy trail.

Because the quantum world is so difficult to examine physically we are forced to create theories and then test them using simulations. If the simulation (when given the suspected particle data) ends up looking like the universe we live in then there is a pretty good bet the theory is right.

In the very beginning the universe did split, you had an amount of anti-matter and an amount of regular matter. Over a period of time they annihilated each other and because there was a slightly greater amount of regular matter what's left is the universe we live in now.

We don't know where dark matter came from BUT without it the universe wouldn't have the structure it does today. The DM provides a sort of scaffolding for regular matter to build around and form complex structures.

It's going to be many years before we find the answers to these things because DM and dark energy are fairly new to us. One possible explanation for dark energy (the energy pushing the universe apart faster than it should) might come from some sort of "heat" being released by the expansion of the very real "fabric" of space/time which would then impart more energy into the regular matter fabric causing its expansion to speed up.

Oh, I did not say where energy and matter exists there's a trade off.

I said where normal matter is (the stuff you & I are made of) and dark matter is there ~seems~ to be a transition. The more normal matter is concentrated in an area (like a planet) the less DM will be in that same physical space.

Keep in mind matter IS energy, it is condensed energy.

with each new theory postulated, there should be clarity, there is not. There is instead, greater confusion.

Well that's kinda missing the point.

Scientists don't belong to some secret club where they get together and come up with grand theories via a vote.

The ONLY way to figure out the way things work is to come up with a theory and test it. There are many ways to get to the truth and people have different opinions on things so they try to figure it out themselves and sometimes you get clarity, others not.

This whole "so and so is misleading" thing is kinda childish in my opinion. The History channel is for entertainment, it isn't the layman's source for 100% accuracy in all things. If you go to a forum about some of the shows you'll find tons of people pointing out errors etc...it's just a TV show and the people on it are doing their best to explain incredibly complex ideas, the meaning of those ideas being unknown and the path to the answer being different for each group (pro-string theorists, anti-string theorists etc).

The reason why something is a theory is because we don't know the answer so how then can there be a totally clear and never changing explanation?

You have laws, facts and theories. Theories run from being far-out ideas that a single scientist came up with or supports that has little basis in reality all the way to what are known as "working theories", those theories we use in everyday life like the Standard Model.

Don't look to science for a set of ideas that are eternal and stable. Science changes, knowledge expands, and people learn. But science isn't what's at fault..its just the freaking tool. The people who try to explain, or give misinformation, or rely on the media etc that's where the fault lies if something gets messed up. Scientists are humans, we don't know everything, we don't each know everything about what's going on in all of science and we make mistakes..more times than not. Just like anything you've got people trying to push their own ideas and science is a very competitive and fast paced world. Whoever is in front gets a lot (usually not money though).

At least people make an effort to explain stuff to folks without 12 years of education and 30 more experience. Why? Because these ideas & discoveries are very important, they can and will affect our lives in many ways and can make our everyday lives freakin awesome. What scientists discovers belongs to all because we're all bound to the universe. It can be frustrating but stuff like that other thread saying E-MC2 was wrong and thus the "moon goddess" must be real does nothing to move humanity forward and only serves to add confusion. If you're confused ask but don't get disillusioned with the whole thing just because 1 or 2 folks don't give the best answer.

History channel? PAH! Horizon. The Observer.

Reith lectures... a veritable plethora of medium: meaning ANYTHING but the history channel... and because of it's dumbing down, not Quest or the like and as for the Discovery channel... Oh Good Grief.

I should have said, why not prove a theory, or disprove it, before prattling on... about something new, or trying to debunk someone else.

a bit of consistency in approach.

it'd be novel.

Furthermore... unless you're Douglas Adams and you think up 42... HOW ON EARTH... can there be a theory that unifies everything. Heck, even Eintein couldn't do that! [[And... he was good.]]

It’s a pity, that there are few theoretical scientists, who can interpret their work to accommodate those who don’t see the world as they do. For example, those pragmatists amongst us can hold little truck with theorists, as they simply don’t ‘see’ as they do.

When a theorist can explain something, to a non-theorist, then they’re to be admired…

With this in mind, might I suggest a BBC4 programme, ‘Beautiful Equation’, in which a group of academic theorists explain five of the most famous theories… to an artist, Matt Collings. To someone with little conception of numbers, it was enthralling.

And Xzavier, thanks for your patience.

well, there is a super rediculous show on the history channel...about man and aliens and dna, and a whole lot of bullshit, saying beings came down and mated with us, please....it is what it is...we have become a creature of our feelings, our passions...some are good, some are not...everything cannot be explained, unfortunately...humans are pestulance (in my opinion)

I think the verdict is till out... otherwise we would not be here.
Angelus has some good points, the fact we are watched seems to be a common denominator.

Are we doing well?

In my opinion not so well, seriously the folks who have have put themselves up for election should take a deep hard look at the way they have behaved over the last 30 years...there is no hiding...

We see You...

With every theory that is tested, we only grow slightly more accurate. What arises from the results is not confusion, but more theories that attempt to increase that accuracy. It's like the measurements of the coastline: first in miles, then in yards, then in feet, progressing with each new advancement. You never become more confused than originally you were, you just get closer and closer to the way things really are.