D&ST - Science - BF2S Forums

2011-12-12 00:20:44

#1226

globefish23: sophisticated slacker; +334|6608|Graz, Austria

Spark wrote:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/armageddon-super-virus-recipe-keep-secret-or-publish-20111206-1og76.html?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews

Here's an interesting one. Bio-engineerined ultra-nasty version of the ol' H5N1 bird flu virus. If they publish, it lets people look-see and could help people design more effective antivirals and whatnot. The potential risks are obvious.

Not sure where I stand yet. Splinters digging into my backside as we speak.

Hmm.
I can imagine a Chinese delegation with a big suitcase full of money on their way to Australia.

2011-12-13 05:33:49

#1227

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6959|Canberra, AUS

atlas thinks they might have the higgs. 126GeV.

edit: 2.8 sigma bump raw. interesting but shouldn't get too excited yet.

edit2: SCRATCH THAT.

there are 3 main decay paths they look at. higgs to gamma+gamma (two photons), higgs ---> W + W* (W plus anti-W bosons), higgs ---> Z + Z*

the respective bump sizes for each decay are 2.8 sigma (that is, a 2.8-standard deviation bump above expected values for the photon readings), 1.4sigma and 2.1sigma. all at 126GeV

overall a 3.6 sigma bump at 126GeV across these three channels.

for the higgs (once you include look-elsewhere effect) reduces to 2.3sigma. the convention is that >3sigma is treated as hard evidence.

too early to draw definitive conclusions obviously - those bump sizes individually are a tad small and get smaller once certain things are taken into account but this is worth watching. 126GeV is quite a nice energy to study

Last edited by Spark (2011-12-14 03:23:26)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-12-13 06:50:46

#1228

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6959|Canberra, AUS

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressRel … 5.11E.html

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-12-14 03:07:00

#1229

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6695|'Murka

Spark wrote:
atlas thinks they might have the higgs. 126GeV.

edit: 2.8 sigma bump raw. interesting but shouldn't get too excited yet.

edit2: SCRATCH THAT.

there are 3 main decay paths they look at. higgs to gamma+gamma (two photons), higgs ---> W + W* (W plus anti-W bosons), higgs ---> Z + Z*

the respective bump sizes for each decay are 2.8 sigma (that is, a 2.8-standard deviation bump above expected values for the photon readings), 1.4sigma and 2.1sigma. all at 126GeV

overall a 3.6 sigma bump at 126GeV across these three channels.

for the higgs (which includes the gamma/gamma, w/w*, z/z*, b/b, tau/tau) reduces to 2.3sigma. the convention is that >3sigma is treated as hard evidence.

too early to draw definitive conclusions obviously - those bump sizes individually are a tad small and get smaller once certain things are taken into account but this is worth watching. 126GeV is quite a nice energy to study

whatisthisidonteven

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-12-14 03:23:49

#1230

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6959|Canberra, AUS

tl;dr, they haven't found the higgs, but they think they know where to look now, and people are getting a tad excited.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-12-14 03:33:19

#1231

Shocking: sorry you feel that way; +333|6284|...

I'm still a bit confused as to what the practical applications of finding the higgs could be.

inane little opines

2011-12-14 03:50:09

#1232

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6437|what

Shocking wrote:
I'm still a bit confused as to what the practical applications of finding the higgs could be.

If you can control the mass of objects, faster than light travel is possible.

2011-12-14 03:53:51

#1233

Shocking: sorry you feel that way; +333|6284|...

Yes but I'd assume finding the higgs and actually controlling it are two rather seperate things, though one will probably lead to the other in a distant future.

inane little opines

2011-12-14 03:55:51

#1234

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6959|Canberra, AUS

Shocking wrote:
I'm still a bit confused as to what the practical applications of finding the higgs could be.

let's find it first before we go anywhere. this kind of science isn't done with practical applications in mind... they just sort of happen by themselves. the internet and wireless were both complete "accidents" that came out of high level particle and astrophysics respectively (accidents in the sense that they were designed with particle physics and astrophysics in mind before someone realised that "hey, this stuff is actually kinda useful beyond that")

Last edited by Spark (2011-12-14 03:56:47)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2011-12-14 03:56:55

#1235

Shocking: sorry you feel that way; +333|6284|...

fair enough

inane little opines

2011-12-14 04:01:41

#1236

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6755

shocking that question is kinda like asking someone to predict the invention of the ipod in 1950 when vinyl records were 'cutting edge'.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-14 04:03:45

#1237

Shocking: sorry you feel that way; +333|6284|...

you're right it was rather dumb.

inane little opines

2011-12-14 04:06:55

#1238

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6755

but not really cause it is a question that many non-scientists are asking. this is a recession and many people (politicians included) are saying that science research (as well as all other pure academic research - maths, arts, humanities) should be 'entrepreneurial' in spirit. which basically means it needs an immediate relevancy or a cash-back plan within the next 10 years. so it probably seems like a silly question to a scientist but to someone that doesn't give much of a shit about the theoretical thrill of discovering the higgs-boson... not so.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-14 23:27:09

#1239

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

Science-Technology-Engineering - They're all different things and not bound together all that closely.

Saying science research should be entrepreneurial is like saying University literature departments should focus on what sells best in airport bookstores - because thats where the money is.

I don't particularly give a shit about another nuanced opinion on the works of a long dead, thoroughly irrelevant author. It won't improve my life and I don't see why my taxes should pay for it.

Higgs-Bosons - We don't know where that will lead any more than we knew plasma physics would give us 60" TVs.
In all probability it will give us nothing. Its still more interesting to follow than the latest thinking on something no-one really has been interested in for hundreds of years.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-12-15 00:06:17)

Fuck Israel

2011-12-15 04:26:09

#1240

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6695|'Murka

I'd say in all probability, it will give us something. There's just no predicting what that will be, so forcing it into an entrepreneurial model is nonsensical.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-12-15 04:28:41

#1241

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

Entrepreneurs pretty well never do basic science.

Fuck Israel

2011-12-15 07:17:14

#1242

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6755

dilbs where do you get this idea from that all english university departments are still fawning over milton and shakespeare? most english research nowadays is completely current and up-to-date. unless you're a genius you're not going to get a grant to conduct research into something that has been studied to death for 400 years. and comparing 'entrepreneurial' research in the sciences to 'relevant' research in the arts/humanities is nothing like insisting everyone reads airport literature-- that's a really shitty argument. 'relevancy' is now one of the main requirements on any higher-education research funding proposal (thanks current government). there are equivalent criteria in other major western education systems, too. of course it makes sense that publically-funded institutions with taxpayer's money invested in them are going to have a slight social and political debt to produce 'relevant' works. your view that everyone in art and humanities departments all over the world are browsing through dusty tomes from 1470 is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

and as for "stuff no one is interested in"... speak for yourself, and be aware that is all you can speak for. you seem to have a particularly narrowminded and limited area of interests, besides, so i don't know why you're passing some grand pronouncement that states all academic research is irrelevant, all because you really hated dickens in secondary school (poor you, the trauma keeps cropping up everywhere, doesn't it?)

Last edited by Uzique (2011-12-15 07:19:11)

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-15 07:28:31

#1243

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

Uzique, what exactly do professors of English research? Is it stuff like how commas were used differently in the past or what? I'm not trying to be a dick, I just don't understand what there is to research about the language. History, sure, paleontology, sure, science, of course. English? dungeddit

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2011-12-15 07:29:22

#1244

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6755

lmao

english degrees have nothing to do with the english language. language studies are normally tacked onto science departments, see: chomsky at mit. and if you're suggesting that what he does with his research into language isn't 'work', or isn't intellectually valuable, or isn't academically 'rigorous', then i'm going to carry on laughing you back to your pog college. it's a shame your only experience of english at supposedly 'college level' was writing a few book reports talking about the "use of a comma".

Last edited by Uzique (2011-12-15 07:30:37)

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-15 07:30:21

#1245

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

I'm serious. What are they getting paid for? Sitting in an obscure library searching for books that people haven't seen in hundreds of years? Is that what constitutes research?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2011-12-15 07:31:07

#1246

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6755

jay shut up and drop the attitude when you are clearly completely in the dark about things (as per usual)

i enjoy your ignorance more when you're making entertaining hegelian commentaries out of it

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-15 07:31:40

#1247

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

Uzique wrote:
jay shut up and drop the attitude when you are clearly completely in the dark about things (as per usual)

i enjoy your ignorance more when you're making entertaining hegelian commentaries out of it

Enlighten me uzique, what does research by an English department consist of?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2011-12-15 07:32:11

#1248

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6755

Uzique wrote:
jay shut up and drop the attitude when you are clearly completely in the dark about things (as per usual)

i enjoy your ignorance more when you're making entertaining hegelian commentaries out of it

yeah you're totally right. if i 'research' and 'find' 20 dusty books in 5 years, i get my PhD! basically it's a lot like a treasure hunt through a harry potter set, only with more long words.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-15 07:33:02

#1249

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

Uzique wrote:
Uzique wrote:
jay shut up and drop the attitude when you are clearly completely in the dark about things (as per usual)

i enjoy your ignorance more when you're making entertaining hegelian commentaries out of it
yeah you're totally right. if i 'research' and 'find' 20 dusty books in 5 years, i get my PhD! basically it's a lot like a treasure hunt through a harry potter set, only with more long words.

Do you get bonus points for inventing a new turn of phrase?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2011-12-15 07:34:11

#1250

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5643|London, England

I wasn't mocking, merely curious. Stop being so defensive about everything.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

BF2S Forums D&ST - Science

Spark wrote:

Spark wrote:

Shocking wrote:

Shocking wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Board footer