Physicists Find Elusive Particle Seen as Key to Universe

Physicists Find Elusive Particle Seen as Key to Universe [nytimes.com]

Quote : Signaling a likely end to one of the longest, most expensive searches in the history of science, physicists said Wednesday that they had discovered a new subatomic particle that looks for all the world like the Higgs boson, a key to understanding why there is diversity and life in the universe. ..... “I think we have it,” said Rolf-Dieter Heuer, the director general of CERN, the multinational research center headquartered in Geneva. The agency is home to the Large Hadron Collider, the immense particle accelerator that produced the new data by colliding protons. The findings were announced by two separate teams. Dr. Heuer called the discovery “a historic milestone.” He and others said that it was too soon to know for sure, however, whether the new particle is the one predicted by the Standard Model, the theory that has ruled physics for the last half-century. The particle is predicted to imbue elementary particles with mass. It may be an impostor as yet unknown to physics, perhaps the first of many particles yet to be discovered.

American scientists are too busy looking for that pesky gay gene.

Quote from charles052 : American scientists are too busy looking for that pesky gay gene.

Particle physicists don't do genetics.

Quote from 124nic8 : Particle physicists don't do genetics.

Apparently, scientists in the US don't do particle science either.

Quote from 124nic8 : Physicists Find Elusive Particle Seen as Key to Universe [nytimes.com] America should be ashamed that "socialist" Europe has taken the lead from us.

We had our chance with the Super Collider and DOE mismanaged the cost so badly that it finally was killed. (I worked in a related capacity at one point long ago.)

We did have a significant role in building it and a continuing stake in the CERN consortium. That's the way that major science projects are going to be done going forward. Unlikely that any one country is going to fund major efforts like that, space stations, etc.

What's the point at "going it alone" in MAJOR projects such as this? I mean, how much work is there for one of these things? Does it warrant there being 2 or 3 in the world? someone brought up the ISS - perfect example.

Quote from charles052 : Apparently, scientists in the US don't do particle science either.

Apparently you don't know what's going on.

American particle physicists still do particle science, they just don't do leading edge stuff on American colliders anymore.

So if there is a higgs field, does that mean we can somehow negate this field to generate a mass less object which will enable us to move through the gravitational field effortlessly?

Quote from Dr. J : What's the point at "going it alone" in MAJOR projects such as this? I mean, how much work is there for one of these things? Does it warrant there being 2 or 3 in the world? someone brought up the ISS - perfect example.

An fundamental understanding of what gives matter 'mass' may lead to technology that enables us to reverse the effect of the Higgs Field. Imagine reducing the mass of things like car engines, freight, even things such as space shuttles (which would significantly decrease the fuel needed to escape the Earth's gravity. If you ever played a game like Mass Effect you'd see how such an understanding could fundamentally alter our current society. I also find it amazing how everyday citizens continually question why we conduct certain research...when their entire lives is dependent on the progression of research whether for greater understanding of natural process or direct application of new ideas.

Quote from 124nic8 : Apparently you don't know what's going on. American particle physicists still do particle science, they just don't do leading edge stuff on American colliders anymore.

Lot of misinformation here. They still do. The Tevatron also ran experiments concurrently with the LHC and confirmed the existences of the HB.

Quote from Slvrshot : An fundamental understanding of what gives matter 'mass' may lead to technology that enables us to reverse the effect of the Higgs Field. Imagine reducing the mass of things like car engines, freight, even things such as space shuttles (which would significantly decrease the fuel needed to escape the Earth's gravity. If you ever played a game like Mass Effect you'd see how such an understanding could fundamentally alter our current society. I also find it amazing how everyday citizens continually question why we conduct certain research...when their entire lives is dependent on the progression of research whether for greater understanding of natural process or direct application of new ideas.

Not hard to understand really given that such things require massive funding and the results aren't necessarily very apparent. Even though I tend to favor such things if only on the basis of knowledge alone, sitting here now I'm hard pressed to come up with practical applications resulting from fundamental physics research.

Nuclear power and weapons are obvious and impressive from the standpoint of their respective applications but that's at a much higher level and they also come with some fairly obvious practical limitations. Although technically there are lots of things that you *could* do with them, the reality is far more practically limited. Also, like electricity, magnetism, etc., that's more a matter of simply harnessing versus altering inherent physical properties/laws.

When you get to the level as you suggest of altering the fundamental nature of things then you've entered a completely different realm. That is, as a more simple analogy, while we can fly, to do so we're simply leveraging aerodynamics versus altering the nature of gravity. I won't say that it's absolutely impossible, but even with vast knowledge, thinking that you're going to change the way that mass itself works by one day waving a magic Higgs wand at an engine block probably isn't very realistic. I mean look at what it takes just to see indirectly and largely by inference that such things even exist, not to even mention somehow changing and actually controlling how they work.

Selling such things on the basis of practical applications I suppose is required in order to justify funding but there really shouldn't necessarily be a direct link between the knowledge gained through fundamental research and some specific practical applications. We should appreciate that knowledge has its own value, but given the cost to do such things that becomes harder given real-world limitations and other competing priorities for finite funds. At some point, we may simply reach the state where we just plain can't afford to know more.