The Higgs boson and God particle | Page 2 | INFJ Forum

The Higgs boson and God particle

Proof of god is not proof of the christian god

Proof of god is not proof of any man made god at all

We don't have proof of god. The god particle is not proof of god

It perfectly plausible that our universe was created by some sort of being/creature/entity. By definition that would make it a god. That doesn't mean it gives a shit about you. It doesn't mean there is an after life. It doesn't mean it wants you build fancy buildings in it's honour and pretend to talk to it whilst on your knees with your hands together. Thats just some random crap people made up. Every group of people on the planet invent a set of rituals and beliefs to do with god. They always have done.

If you had an ant farm and the ants decided that every day at dusk and dawn, if they put a piece of rock on top of another piece of rock, wrapped themselves in a leaf and spun around four times whilst clicking their heels together you would take their souls to a magical land of milk and honey when they died you would think that was hilarious, ridiculous or even disturbing. For a while at least and then you'd stop caring and get on with your life.

If god cares at all about us, this is probably how ridiculous he thinks your beliefs are.

Yes, you
 
ENT8 said:
Well, I'm pretty sure this is the KC in Kansas if I recall correctly... and I hate to put you on the spot CL...but, it would really depend on how old ya are now... since this was big news in...o0h.. i think about 2005.

WHOOPS! I was wrong... it was just Kansas state, not kansas city (there is still a kansas city in the state of kansas... but I digress...)

Here's a link to what i'm talkin bout:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/08/AR2005110801211.html
Click to expand...

Lol, I'm 30...well 31 in two days. I didn't know that was going on! I hate Kansas anyway. Hahaha!

I like the nickname CL too. :)
 
@Poetic Justice
I'm not entirely sure you understand what God is, less you'd not try to contain it within human actions. Here is a creative opinion-
"Now: God is more than the sum of all the probable systems of reality He has created, and yet He is within each one of these, without exception. He is therefore within each man and woman. He is also within each spider, shadow, and frog, and this is what man does not like to admit.
God can only be experienced, and you experience Him whether or not you realize it, through your own existence. He is not male or female, however, and I use the term only for convenience's sake. In the most inescapable truth, He is not human in your terms at all, nor in your terms is He a personality. Your IDEAS of personality are too limited to contain the multitudinous facets of His multidimensional existence.
On the other hand, He is human, in that He is a portion of each individual; and within the vastness of His experience He holds an "IDEA-SHAPE" of Himself as human, to which you can relate. He literally was made flesh to dwell among you, for He forms your flesh in that He is responsible for the energy that gives vitality and validity to your private multidimensional self, which in turn forms your image in accordance with your own ideas."
 
Last edited:
Kmal said:
@Poetic Justice
I'm not entirely sure you understand what God is, less you'd not try to contain it within human actions
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. I don't know what god is. Nobody does. You don't

I wasn't trying to contain him within human actions. It was a metaphor. Nothing more. That being said, no discussion about the possibility of god can be undertaken without using human terms. Or to be more accurate, 3D/4D terms.

We are incapable of using any other language (aparently maths can talk in extra dimensional terms but that doesn't count. A religious belief can't be expressed in maths. At least I don't think so). But this only serves to prove my point. Any belief about the nature of god must be worded and believed in human terms. The idea must also come from a human brain. Proving it's falseness/innacuracy

I had a rebuke all written out to do with the example you quoted but then I read it again a few times to make sure I wasn't being a jerk. I noticed you called it a creative opinion so I will withdraw my many objections to it ;)

You can be sure I fully understand the point you thought I didn't and I believe my original post (as a metaphor) still stands as a more likely scenario than any man made religion
 
[MENTION=472]Poetic Justice[/MENTION] Surely we can use math to explain what people mean when they say God. Although, I can't say that humans must always be wrong because they're humans- that would make you wrong, since you're a human, meaning humans cant always be wrong. :p
 
I think that there are some things that science hasn't yet explained that have already been grasped intuitively by mystics

Whats interesting is the levels of resistance a person will often meet from some people when they put forward an idea about something that others haven't yet realised

Here's a clip of the scientist who discovered quasicrystals. In it he describes how he was insulted and ridiculed by some until he was proven correct beyond doubt:

[video=youtube;EZRTzOMHQ4s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZRTzOMHQ4s[/video]
 
Kmal said:
@Poetic Justice Surely we can use math to explain what people mean when they say God.
Click to expand...

Possibly but I doubt it. I do know that very few ideas can't be expressed in maths. Particulary, any sentence which refers to itself, for example "this statement is false".
You could write out in maths a statement which refers to the entire universe but how do you then say what created it? Surely that would involve referring to the statement which covers the entire universe. So, an equation which refers to the universe (a), followed by an equation which says "the thing that created (a)". This refers to itself, so I don't think it's possible.

10 man points (and my respect) to anyone who can prove me wrong ;)

Although, I can't say that humans must always be wrong because they're humans- that would make you wrong, since you're a human, meaning humans cant always be wrong. :p
Click to expand...

Humans aren't always wrong. But any sentence not involving maths which refers to anything extradimensional must by definition be incomplete. The closest we can get is to slim our universe down to two dimensions and then refer to the third dimension as being the extra dimension.

This I think, is good enough to prove my point, but I will go even further and say that dimension isn't necessarily the right word here. Perhaps even that is thinking about it in too human terms.

There are many possibilities as to the true nature of the universe. They are just that. Possibilities. Having a strong belief about something we have so little information about is frankly ridiculous.

Whoever decided to call it the god particle was an idiot. Or possibly wanted to stir up a bit of media interest in it. It has no more right to be called the god particle than do photons, electrons or any other particle
 
@Poetic Justice this is how a friend of mine explained the higgs boson
That means that mass is an illusion of our senses. Because mass doesn't exist. Energy exists, and the energy moving though the Higgs Bosons give the energy its mass. The Higgs Bosons vibrate at a certain frequency that gives energy its dimensional mass. Change the frequency and you change the perceived Dimension in which the mass exists! This means that mass (which is everything we see, touch, smell with our senses) Is an Illusion that our senses put together and tell our conscious mind! This means we are all part of one collective soul. (sense of self) Reality is nothing more than a illusion of our senses detecting vibrations and interpreting them as a desk, what you see in the mirror, the trees, EVERYTHING! The only thing that truly exists is our consciousness. All this means... that matter doesn't come into existence unless its being viewed. Which in turn means that if a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? No, because there is no tree! Quantum physics proves that when you look at an atom we are able to measure its mass, when we are not it becomes all atoms at once with no determined spot in existence while it actually exists AS ALL ATOMS. I know this makes no sense..... But its been huge news.
Click to expand...
Some religions and teachings call the energy that gives reality its shape spirit, or qi. Science calls it energy. They're both looking at the same thing, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cornerstone and muir
Kmal said:
@Poetic Justice this is how a friend of mine explained the higgs boson

That means that mass is an illusion of our senses. Because mass doesn't exist. Energy exists, and the energy moving though the Higgs Bosons give the energy its mass. The Higgs Bosons vibrate at a certain frequency that gives energy its dimensional mass. Change the frequency and you change the perceived Dimension in which the mass exists! This means that mass (which is everything we see, touch, smell with our senses) Is an Illusion that our senses put together and tell our conscious mind! This means we are all part of one collective soul. (sense of self) Reality is nothing more than a illusion of our senses detecting vibrations and interpreting them as a desk, what you see in the mirror, the trees, EVERYTHING! The only thing that truly exists is our consciousness. All this means... that matter doesn't come into existence unless its being viewed. Which in turn means that if a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? No, because there is no tree! Quantum physics proves that when you look at an atom we are able to measure its mass, when we are not it becomes all atoms at once with no determined spot in existence while it actually exists AS ALL ATOMS. I know this makes no sense..... But its been huge news.
Some religions and teachings call the energy that gives reality its shape spirit, or qi. Science calls it energy. They're both looking at the same thing, though.
Click to expand...

That's one of the best posts i've heard around here for a long time!

Its like the double slit experiment as well where particles behave differently if observed

Its a truly revolutionary idea because if we are all just energy and one consciousness then why mistreat each other?

It seems to me that the whole agenda of the elites is to keep us all seperate and competing and it looks like science is about to turn that on its head by confirming what the mystics have said all along!
 
So...we see the world not as it is but as we are?

Makes sense because all life is viewing the same world but sensing it differently.

100th Post! :party:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kmal
Poetic Justice said:
Whoever decided to call it the god particle was an idiot. Or possibly wanted to stir up a bit of media interest in it. It has no more right to be called the god particle than do photons, electrons or any other particle
Click to expand...

Well... erm... actually, the person who decided to call it the God particle was a physicist who found it extraordinarily difficult to locate/prove/whatever else it is one does with obscure particles, and in frustration (SEE! Even physicists are human!), he called it the Goddamn Particle.

That's what I read, anyway. Then people ran with it and made it religious.
 
You know what's embarrassing? Until I was struck by the epiphany that the 'on' in 'boson' is like the 'on' in 'electron' or 'photon', I'd been pronouncing it in my head like 'bosom'...with an n. :m066:
 
this is only temporary said:
Well... erm... actually, the person who decided to call it the God particle was a physicist who found it extraordinarily difficult to locate/prove/whatever else it is one does with obscure particles, and in frustration (SEE! Even physicists are human!), he called it the Goddamn Particle.

That's what I read, anyway. Then people ran with it and made it religious.
Click to expand...

Ah, ok. That makes sense then. I didn't think a physicist would call it that.

Yeah, reality is an illusion, blah blah blah. This is old news. Very old news

It is even thought now that every electron in the universe is actually the same electron. Forgive me if i'm a bit fuzzy with the details here but it's something along the lines of the electron playing the part of one of the electrons we can percieve up to the end of the universe then using photons to travel back to the beginning of the universe and then playing the part of a different electron this time round and so on. It apparently does this over and over, each time appearing to us to be a differnet electron, "knitting" matter as it goes.

even stranger is the possiblity that our consciousness created the big bang when we tested for it. This then set into motion the photons and electrons which created us, allowing us to create them in the first place. My head hurts

Common sense is common delusion
 
I'm just glad we finally have proven that God exists by finding one of his particles.
 
:D I think it is absolutely hilarious. I really do.

And of course I forgive you for being fuzzy with the details, who isn't? I do plan on reading more, maybe even the book called the God Particle!

Just in case you're interested, here is a link explaining the origins of the term a bit more. Evidently, there is a particle physicist named Leon Lederman who got frustrated, called it the GD particle, then became concerned he would offend someone, and dropped the "damn". The press loved it.

Here is a rather simplified description, and Leon Lederman is the man responsible -- or, rather, his editors, who thought the term "God Particle" would sell more books:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...-has-misnamed-god-particle-finally-been-found
 
It really needs a new name. The Higgs mechanism and its boson are great and all but their real importance is in helping to confirm a fundamental set of assumptions in the Standard Model of particle physics. Finding the Higgs boson is like finding that crucial clue that says "we were right."
 
Heh. Marketing ploy, just like I thought
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back