29 votes

CERN experiments observe particle consistent with long-sought Higgs boson

From the CERN Press Release:

“We observe in our data clear signs of a new particle, at the level of 5 sigma, in the mass region around 126 GeV. The outstanding performance of the LHC and ATLAS and the huge efforts of many people have brought us to this exciting stage,” said ATLAS experiment spokesperson Fabiola Gianotti, “but a little more time is needed to prepare these results for publication.”

"The results are preliminary but the 5 sigma signal at around 125 GeV we’re seeing is dramatic. This is indeed a new particle. We know it must be a boson and it’s the heaviest boson ever found,” said CMS experiment spokesperson Joe Incandela. “The implications are very significant and it is precisely for this reason that we must be extremely diligent in all of our studies and cross-checks."

More here

Liveblogging of announcement @ Guardian.co.uk

See also Reuters.

From NYT:

ASPEN, Colo. — Physicists working at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider said Wednesday that they had discovered a new subatomic particle that looks for all the world like the Higgs boson, a potential key to an understanding of why elementary particles have mass and indeed to the existence of diversity and life in the universe.

“I think we have it,” Rolf-Dieter Heuer, the director general of CERN, said in an interview from his office outside Geneva, calling the discovery “a historic milestone.” His words signaled what is probably the beginning of the end for one of the longest, most expensive searches in the history of science. If scientists are lucky, the discovery could lead to a new understanding of how the universe began.

more here

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

should scientists stop experimenting and hypothesizing?

what do you care what Europeans spend their $$$ on anyway?

See my post above. It

See my post above. It requires understanding economics to realize why it is a bad idea.

you don't think you're paying for CERN?

find the dollar trail. Europeans aren't the only ones paying for CERN.

If you know how the FED works, that should already be a given.

oh yes, we're all 'paying' for CERN. so you really should care "what Europeans spend their $$$ on anyway?"

Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

it's like blaming me for FED policy

just like it's a stretch to say I am paying for CERN.

now that's what I call a logical leap.

First of all I'm not "blaming" you for an act committed by another person or entity. So that 'logic' is irrelevant.

Second, how is pointing out the reality that our tax dollars are factually funneled into foreign coffers, "blaming" anything?

If you know that FED. funnels and bails out foreign banks illegally by pledging our own labor and those of our future unborns' to pay for it sometime down the line, what makes you think it's any different if the same American wealth and future labor are being pledged as collateral to pay for it all, just because it's a 'scientific endeavor?' Should we really pay any less attention to them, just because that 'money' is being used for scientific endeavors in Switzerland that you may approve of?

So yes, of course, we should pay attention to how the Europeans are spending 'their' 'money' because they're using OUR 'money' to do it. All this tells me is that now you're not likely denying that fact, but have since switched to arguing personal guilt non-sequiturs; I'm not gonna disprove your non-existent negative, which I've never accused you of. Which, frankly you're simply making the case for me.

They took your money FRN's and directed it something you did not approve of, as with all our stolen wealth at the hand of govt.

Or, guess I should correct myself: more apropos with your analogy would be, I should be 'happy' with govt theft, as long as it goes to something that I may approve of like CERN, or are interested in pursuing, like Higgs-Boson.

Corporatist/Bankster-Hijacked Govt theft is a theft, is a theft, is a theft!

Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Work was being performed

here in the states at Fermi Labs as well. In fact, the number crunching is taking place all over the world from what I have read...

Why does it occur to so few ...

Why does it occur to so few, that discovering some mechanical method by measuring nature says NOTHING about original cause?

If there is an intelligence and emotional spirit behind the universe ... doesn't it need an elegant way need a way to make everything happen?

OR are you lot all saying - that the only way God can operate is to make 'everything' happen instantly, with a snap of a metaphysical finger ...

Which rules out evolution, because it's to grand and elegant and simple to be the work of God?

OR an infinitely expanding and contracting Universe, which moves from an tiny point to an a vast unfathomable distance that contains all things ...

This is not amazing and crazy and stupendous enough for God?

I'm not 'religious'. So explain to me why this is so offensive to people.

Please don't say 'its not in the Bible' or I won't take you seriously. The Bible doesn't say anything about electricity, or gravity, or magnetism, or about anything else concerning Science yet ya'll accept THAT as God's work.

So why are some discoveries OK for God, and others not?

It's amazing to me how many

It's amazing to me how many religious people there are here, saying how the Big Bang theory isn't true. You're also going to tell me that the theory of evolution is fake as well?

The U.S. sure is Way back on religious progress compared to the rest of the world's developed countries. This is one of the biggest flaws in your culture, and it's really fucking scary when thinking of that and the size and power of your military.

Just wait until you've gotten to the point like in most of Europe where atheism and science is the norm, not some 2 000 year old fictional book written by humans with some serious control issues, featuring stories and characters heavily based on tons of other religions from that same era and earlier.

The big bang theory and the theory of evolution is FACT! Get over it already! Grow up and start thinking for yourselves. You're already so close being libertarians and all...


Yes the "Theory' of Evolution is fake

The theory of evolution is harder to believe than the creation theory.

Can you point out one animal on earth right now that is evolving into something else? Like is an ostrich becoming something different than an ostrich? Point out an animal that is on its way to becoming something different that what it is and I can swallow this crackpot theory

2 Chron 7:13-14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

If you really want to

If you really want to understand evolution as biologists do please read Richard Dawkin's books especially The Ancester's Tale.

Also the works of Niles Eldredge who is the curator of the American Museum of Natural History and the head of the department of invertebrate zoology there. Eldredge worked with Stephen Jay Gould in discovering the theory of "punctuated equilibrium" to explain certain questions about how evolution occurs.

Gould wrote popular essays in a monthly column in Nature Magazine for decades and many were printed as books entitled Bully for Brontosuarus, The Panda's Thumb, The Flamingo's Smile etc.

But if you really want to understand you have to take time and the trouble to actually read until you get the idea clearly. i say that because of the kind of question you asked.

I hope you decide to find out what scientists who love to understand Nature have discovered.

It helps to have some appreciation of astronomy to keep things in perspective. As a boy I read The Stars In Their Courses by Sir James Jeans. Jastrow's Red Giants and White Dwarfs is enlightening about the source of all the elements beyond the simplest, Hydrogen which has one proton in its nucleus and out of which stars are formed such as our own Sun.

I think it is worth perusing Andrew Dickson White's great two volume work entitled The History of the Warfare Between Science and Theology in Christiandom.

There are many works on the life of Galileo but my own favorite is The Star Gazer by Zoltan Harzanyi

Not to mention the life of Giordano Bruno which you can find online at wikipedia to find out how those who preach brotherly love treat someone who was one of them, loved the Church and wanted the Church to be right on the matter of the movements of the planets around the sun and the possibility of life elsewhere in the universe.


"Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the

The Big Bang was a hypothesis

The Big Bang was a hypothesis dreamed up by a Christian Physicist who happened to believe in the biblical version of creation and the time line created in medieval times which was included as part of the King James Bible.

Einstein was skeptical.

Turns out there are many good reasons.

"The force one feels from gravity and the force one feels from acceleration are the same. They are equivalent. Einstein called this the principle of equivalence. Since gravity and acceleration are equivalent, if you feel gravity's influence, you must be accelerating.

If we see red shift of distant stars, we do not know it it is due to acceleration (as Hubble proposed) or from gravity.

Was Hubble looking through the gravity of the universe and seeing a redshift?

The further away the greater the intervening mass and the more the redshift.

Hubble however concluded that the further away the star, the faster it was moving away. Yet he provides no mechanism for matter speeding up the further away from us it is. Terra-centricity has no place in cosmology.

Free includes debt-free!

SteveMT's picture

Paul, Thank you for explaining acceleration and redshift data.

Very clear now. Got it.

Seriosly dude

Before we can even discuss the big bang theory I have got to ask which big bang theory? Is it the one that says that the universe started off as a really big ball of energy and then blew up (the one my parents were taught)? Is it the one that says that all the matter in the universe was condensed into a tiny dot smaller than the period on this page? By the way as I understand it both those big bang theories also say the universe every few billion years get sucked back into the little tiny dot and blow up again. Or is it the new big bang theory where there are infinite universes and because of that there has got to be a few that the big bang happened (and you made fun of my faith). By the way the multiverse theory was made up by marvel comics in 1939, but now the big bang has got to use that idea to make sense.

Furthermore I am sure that the guys at cern are getting good science from their experiments, but every time they do something they want to say it proves the big bang theory. Thats stupid, unless they are saying the conditions are very very similar to the big bang, and honestly I dont think a collider would count, as that would not have been around during the big bang, and according to the text books the big bang created time space and matter if thats true then how would anyone be able to recreate a space, with no space time or matter?

The big bang is a joke, the stated conditions that made the big bang make impossible to test scientifically, Furthermore we are currently unable to even go to where it happened (according to y'all) 12-14 billion light years away. The funny part is they are trying to prove a cosmic universal event from earth. I think Im gonna call bull on that one.

Go back to reddit

Where it's more socially acceptable to spend all day demeaning others.

It scares you that the the 'religious' US has weapons? I guess you fell asleep in history class when they were discussing how the largest massacres in history occurred under secular regimes.

I'm not trying to take either side in a 'religion vs science' debate ( if there is such a thing going on here), but spouting off rude and baseless remarks will get you nowhere in life.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

Most people understand that

Most people understand that evolution within species exists (dog breeding is a big example), so evolution in that sense is true. But that is the only aspect that is directly observable. Evolution beyond simple speciation includes a myriad of imaginings that people believe are true as well, unfortunately, because it falls under the umbrella of what's called evolution. It is that double standard in the school systems that I find troubling. Only the directly observable ought to be taught as fact, yet so many are brainwashed to believe the entire umbrella of evolution must be true and attack others for not believing it.

atheism and science is the norm ???

Why do you equate the two ???

FACT: Atheism is a religion that requires faith.


Patriot News
Stand up For your Civil Rights

As I understand it because I

As I understand it because I am one of them, atheism is simply the refusal to accept something as being true, a supernatural being, for which there is no rational evidence.

Now if you believe that "god" is a "supreme being" then how is that different from my belief in the natural universe? I believe that there are two axiomatic concepts, Existence and Consciousness. Stated as postulates Existence exists and Consciousness is conscious.

IF you can accept that Being is the same as Existence we are closer in our beliefs than you think. I believe in the natural universe in which everything which happens and has happened are the result of natural forces consistent with the nature of matter and energy in all their forms.

I believe that Existence does not require an explanation. There can be no cause outside of Existence or before Existence.

I believe that life arose on this planet by natural processes. Look it up in biology texts under origin of life. It has to do with the conditions which existed at the time which enabled certain molecules to form which had the capacity to replicate themselves just as we understand DNA to do in every form of life which has progeny.

I don't believe that two apes mated and gave birth to a human child. The process took many generations and gradual changes. I think that homo sapiens and present day primates had common ancestors if you go back enough generations.

Many intelligent religious people who have become scientists accept the scientific evidence although many still believe in a kind of divine intervention at some point.

I think that Ron Paul's belief that a microscopic fertilized ovum is a person is absurd and ridiculous. His failure to believe in evolution is equally absurd and ridiculous in this day and age. His belief in an afterlife is likewise wishful thinking. Admittedly there is a huge number of people who share those beliefs among Americans as a consequence of indoctrination by their parents and the churches.

As a consequence lovers of liberty such as we are find ourselves advocating that pregnant women remain pregnant against their own will and against their own pursuit of their own happiness, as stated in the Declaration of Independence which also considers that their right to their own life is inalienable, but our leader is trying to deny her those inalienable rights for the sake of a microscopic cell which I agree has the potential to become a human being but is not one and certainly has no rights at that stage.

There is a distinction between a potential something and an actual something. An acorn is not an oak tree. Sure it has the potential to become one but at the point where it is still only a potential whatever it is not yet that whatever. A microscopic ovum is not a person with rights. It is the responsibility of the pregnant woman to decide whether she wants to nurture it or not. Her decision not the State and certainly not the Church as occurred during the Dark Ages when non believers were tortured and killed for using their own judgment. Look up the Inquisition to see how your beloved Church and Religion treated those who did not accept the dogmas rather were called heretics and blasphemers.

Do you really want to go back to that?

Get over it. Read Nathaniel Branden's Breaking Free and Ayn Rand's For The New Intellectual

See Atlas Shrugged part two when it comes to the theaters in October 2012.

"Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the

Just a note

WND.com is not a credible source for news. There really are so very few.

Torcaso v. Watkins (1961), Justice Black

"...Among the religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others..."

Patriot News
Stand up For your Civil Rights

Just because SCOTUS says it's so, doesn't make it right

just sayin.

Where does one go to attend

Where does one go to attend Atheist services? Give me a break.

To nature.

To nature.

Then where does an agnostic

Then where does an agnostic "worship"?

An agnostic is simply a

An agnostic is simply a person who is unsure of the existence of a god. They wouldn't "worship" anything so they would not need a place to "worship". We're all agnostic to a certain degree. And why do I get the feeling that you're simply being antagonistic here?

This thread isn't about

This thread isn't about religion anyway,it's about a scientific breakthrough. That's what we should be discussing here.

"worship" is a religious concept

as a "non-religious" person myself..."worship" is silly and is based on the idea that some white-bearded man in the sky is watching over us.

I'm open to FACT

but to bad you have none. You have absolutely ZERO fact to show that proves evolution or the big bang or little green men from Mars or any of your other whacked out fantasies. And for all your "scientific" research and "advancement" you have done nothing but destroy our planet and make us slaves to the junk you produce and the PTB that funds you. You are like a cancer that is being treated with cancer causing drugs. You are beyond hope.

What are you basing this on though??

Evolution isn't a perfect concept...

but at least it's based on Facts instead of "faith"

You say that but you can't show me one bit.

There are no FACTS that support evolution. There is only evidence which you religious zealots have misinterpreted to suit your fantasy view. That evidence when taken objectively clearly supports creation over evolution.

Get back to me when you have some evolution FACTS.