• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Explaining the God particle

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
With recent news, it might be good to explain what the particle is.

Here is a short version

--God created the world and many things that are physical. He used materials, many very small. There is speculation one of the smallest may be involved in sort of 'manufacturing mass'. It is logical God would have used such a thing if they are right...hence a God particle is a good name! Kids...it just means another little thingie God used. Now remember also that this thing they think they found is on earth. We cannot imply it would exist far far away and long ago. Especially before anything was created!

If I missed anything feel free to chirp in....
 

Greatcloud

Senior Member
May 3, 2007
2,814
271
Oregon coast
✟55,500.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
With recent news, it might be good to explain what the particle is.

Here is a short version

--God created the world and many things that are physical. He used materials, many very small. There is speculation one of the smallest may be involved in sort of 'manufacturing mass'. It is logical God would have used such a thing if they are right...hence a God particle is a good name! Kids...it just means another little thingie God used. Now remember also that this thing they think they found is on earth. We cannot imply it would exist far far away and long ago. Especially before anything was created!

If I missed anything feel free to chirp in....

The God particle; thank you for explaining it. Let there be light and there was light; when God created light he may have made the God particle.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,821
52,558
Guam
✟5,138,869.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
With recent news, it might be good to explain what the particle is.

Here is a short version

--God created the world and many things that are physical. He used materials, many very small. There is speculation one of the smallest may be involved in sort of 'manufacturing mass'. It is logical God would have used such a thing if they are right...hence a God particle is a good name! Kids...it just means another little thingie God used. Now remember also that this thing they think they found is on earth. We cannot imply it would exist far far away and long ago. Especially before anything was created!

If I missed anything feel free to chirp in....
Interesting perspective.

Thanks for the 411 ... :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,821
52,558
Guam
✟5,138,869.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I wish people would stop calling it the God particle. No scientist calls it that - only the media who like to hype up a story which 99% of people would have no interest in.
The Internet isn't the media?

Maybe some of us don't like to talk technobabble all the time.
 
Upvote 0

CabVet

Question everything
Dec 7, 2011
11,738
176
Los Altos, CA
✟35,902.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
With recent news, it might be good to explain what the particle is.

Here is a short version

--God created the world and many things that are physical. He used materials, many very small. There is speculation one of the smallest may be involved in sort of 'manufacturing mass'. It is logical God would have used such a thing if they are right...hence a God particle is a good name! Kids...it just means another little thingie God used. Now remember also that this thing they think they found is on earth. We cannot imply it would exist far far away and long ago. Especially before anything was created!

If I missed anything feel free to chirp in....

Oh, so cute, now for the real story behind the name:

Higgs is an atheist, and is displeased that the Higgs particle is nicknamed the "God particle", as he believes the term "might offend people who are religious". Usually this nickname for the Higgs boson is attributed to Leon Lederman, the author of the book The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?, but the name is the result of the insistence of Lederman's publisher: Lederman had originally intended to refer to it as the "God damn particle".
 
Upvote 0

mindlight

See in the dark
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
14,271
2,996
London, UK
✟1,005,024.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
With recent news, it might be good to explain what the particle is.

Here is a short version

--God created the world and many things that are physical. He used materials, many very small. There is speculation one of the smallest may be involved in sort of 'manufacturing mass'. It is logical God would have used such a thing if they are right...hence a God particle is a good name! Kids...it just means another little thingie God used. Now remember also that this thing they think they found is on earth. We cannot imply it would exist far far away and long ago. Especially before anything was created!

If I missed anything feel free to chirp in....

Thanks for that , interesting and of course whatever has been discovered is no news to God who nonetheless probably still takes pleasure from our baby steps towards understanding his creation.

I found this link from NASA that explains the nitty gritty science in a way that I as a non scientist found quite accessible.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap120501.html
Apparently the Higgs theory helps to explain why tiny particles have a greater or lesser amount of mass and this discovery appears to confirm he is on the right track with this theory. I was trying to think of a practical implication that might follow eventually from these kinds of deep level understandings of the imputation of mass to an object. At the moment this is really just pure research I realise that and so actual practical implications are not at all obvious.

But If people ever get any kind of control over these subatomic forces I wonder if that would mean they could temporarily remove the implication of mass from some objects so that for example light speed travel would then be possible or very large objects could be lifted into orbit for instance. Guess we are nowhere near that though and not sure it could be done without somehow disassembling those objects into something completely different.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Well it didn't take long for the fnarring at the name God particle to turn to "Oh look, this totally was predicted by our belief all along" once it was shown to actually exist.
Don't get ahead of yourself. It is not shown to ...anything! We have a bunch of toddler like beings in white jackets smashing stuff and looking at the bits and fragments that result. Something apparently..they think..kinda maybe almost looks like it lasts about the right little time to resemble some godless little thing they imagine...wow. Impressive.

Gee lets look at the millions of things it might be besides what they think! Hey...the jury is out...way out.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Oh, so cute, now for the real story behind the name:

Higgs is an atheist, and is displeased that the Higgs particle is nicknamed the "God particle",
Right..what's he got to do with anything!? If you think for one micro second his insane dreams enter into this, you are very wrong.

as he believes the term "might offend people who are religious".
No offense..I could not care what the poor sod thinks.

Usually this nickname for the Higgs boson is attributed to Leon Lederman, the author of the book The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?, but the name is the result of the insistence of Lederman's publisher: Lederman had originally intended to refer to it as the "God damn particle".
God causes the wrath of man to praise Him! It makes sense that if a little particle may be involved in a process of making physical objects...that God has to be involved. He spoke....the word was the real power.....any little processes that resulted are secondary in the extreme.


You should remember also that the physical only is restricted most likely to near earth! So, for those with a broader perspective then, we might look at any process/particles that were used of God in manufacturing the physical only stuff (so called God particle) as a small part of the picture. The spiritual components of creation must be considered also in any big picture or universal outlook. Otherwise we have..well...intellectual toddlers smashing stuff.

Whoopee doo.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Thanks for that , interesting and of course whatever has been discovered is no news to God who nonetheless probably still takes pleasure from our baby steps towards understanding his creation.
Maybe the pleasure lies mostly in a good laugh? It is not that man makes baby steps that is the problem as I see it...but that man proclaims they are GIANT steps!
I found this link from NASA that explains the nitty gritty science in a way that I as a non scientist found quite accessible.

APOD: 2012 May 1 - Higgs Boson Explained by Cartoon
Apparently the Higgs theory helps to explain why tiny particles have a greater or lesser amount of mass and this discovery appears to confirm he is on the right track with this theory.
Careful....smoke and mirrors. If we go toe to toe on each step in their conclusion train...I think it will never leave the toddler station!


I was trying to think of a practical implication that might follow eventually from these kinds of deep level understandings of the imputation of mass to an object. At the moment this is really just pure research I realise that and so actual practical implications are not at all obvious.
Bah -- add the word of God and then you can start to get somewhere. Smashing stuff is kind of a backwards way to look at things. Let's see them assemble stuff!!!! Then...let's see them assemble spiritual stuff!!! THEN..we can give them a hero cookie.
But If people ever get any kind of control over these subatomic forces I wonder if that would mean they could temporarily remove the implication of mass from some objects so that for example light speed travel would then be possible or very large objects could be lifted into orbit for instance.
Nah...relax. Man will get NO more control over anything than God allows when He allows. That is 99% pipe dreams.
Guess we are nowhere near that though and not sure it could be done without somehow disassembling those objects into something completely different.
Ha...try assembling them. Their trillion dollar smash up derby is pretty useless.
 
Upvote 0

mindlight

See in the dark
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
14,271
2,996
London, UK
✟1,005,024.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Maybe the pleasure lies mostly in a good laugh? It is not that man makes baby steps that is the problem as I see it...but that man proclaims they are GIANT steps!

Yes there is an arrogance about the modern scientific community which lacks godly perspective.

Careful....smoke and mirrors. If we go toe to toe on each step in their conclusion train...I think it will never leave the toddler station!

These are the only people who have a worked out model of how mass might be imputed to particles. Creationists do not have a theory on the how of this even if they know the big answer to that question already. So it was interesting to follow their argument and to understand it on her own terms. But I was left thinking so what!- what's the implication- what can you actually do with that?

Bah -- add the word of God and then you can start to get somewhere. Smashing stuff is kind of a backwards way to look at things. Let's see them assemble stuff!!!! Then...let's see them assemble spiritual stuff!!! THEN..we can give them a hero cookie.
Nah...relax. Man will get NO more control over anything than God allows when He allows. That is 99% pipe dreams.
Ha...try assembling them. Their trillion dollar smash up derby is pretty useless.

I agree they have spent a lot of money smashing things up and then drawing conclusions from the debris. That afterall is their chosen methodology. They would say that the debris provides the unique conditions in which certain phenomena can then be observed. And the frequency with which they are able to do this gives them a very large data set to examine.

But you are right disassembling and assembling are actually completely different activities and noone is duplicating the expertise of creating stuff in this area and it is not clear that their results give them much to work with the kind of practical projects I would be interested in e.g. lifting large objects or interstellar travel. Indeed I am not sure there are any obvious practical implications to the research as it stands.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Yes there is an arrogance about the modern scientific community which lacks godly perspective.
Yes...one stemming from inspiration I wager. Impulse power from the depths of darkness.
These are the only people who have a worked out model of how mass might be imputed to particles. Creationists do not have a theory on the how of this even if they know the big answer to that question already.

A theory has no meaning when it omits the force behind the particles! Their idea of a theory is constructing a model based on only the forces and laws we know at this time on and near earth, carefully hiding their core belief that this is all there was is and will be!
So it was interesting to follow their argument and to understand it on her own terms. But I was left thinking so what!- what's the implication- what can you actually do with that?
The implication seems to me to be that they try to claim credit for any little particle they can! They try to ram it into their godless fantasy models.

Another way to look at the chain of particles going from small to big, is that they are all part of what God used and uses, including of course the big factor of how things came together and even into being..His spoken word! Science seems to imagine something more along the lines of little thingies popping out of nowhere, for no reason, and doing stuff in a godless way a godless long time:)

I agree they have spent a lot of money smashing things up and then drawing conclusions from the debris. That afterall is their chosen methodology. They would say that the debris provides the unique conditions in which certain phenomena can then be observed. And the frequency with which they are able to do this gives them a very large data set to examine.
Yes, normally I would not expect to see some little particle hanging around if it was used in the assembling of matter. After all the stuff is already assembled! Now once we start bashing the living daylights out of stuff, heck, naturally we might see some unusual things. To try to superimpose some bits of this smash up derby onto a screen of some godless past fantasy.

But you are right disassembling and assembling are actually completely different activities and noone is duplicating the expertise of creating stuff in this area and it is not clear that their results give them much to work with the kind of practical projects I would be interested in e.g. lifting large objects or interstellar travel.

Ha. Not sure how a speck of a particle they know pretty well nothing about, that appears (they think) for some billionths of a second would help us lift rocks in a quarry:) Perhaps you are thinking they may discover gravitons some day and be able to tweak those.

Man, as we who are informed about history and God's word know, is on a short leash. A strict timetable. All of the maybes that they hope for need to happen fast enough to be a part of reality in this soon to be unreal state we live in:)

Indeed I am not sure there are any obvious practical implications to the research as it stands.
Me either. But since I suspect that the inspiration is not from above for their little big bang what if games and scenerios, the true objective man might not even be privy to..yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mindlight
Upvote 0

DontTreadOnMike

Eddaic Literalist
Jan 28, 2010
1,316
69
✟24,436.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No one calls it the God particle except reporters. Just thought I'd point it out. The only reason religious people are either latching on to or getting upset over this discovery rather than the discovery of some obscure quark, is because of it's unfortunate nickname which the media can't seem to stop repeating. It has nothing to do with gods.
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
No one calls it the God particle except reporters. Just thought I'd point it out. The only reason religious people are either latching on to or getting upset over this discovery rather than the discovery of some obscure quark, is because of it's unfortunate nickname which the media can't seem to stop repeating. It has nothing to do with gods.

:confused:
Why would any theist get upset over the discovery of such a particle regardless of the name? I can see why the name itself might spark interest/curiosity, but I don't see why it would cause any theist to get upset. Maybe an atheist would resent the name, or resent the discovery of a "God particle/Higgs Boson" but I don't see why any theist would get their nickers in an uproar over such a discovery.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
No one calls it the God particle except reporters. Just thought I'd point it out.


False. Almost everyone calls it that! If we resort to higgs boson or some such name, they start wavering and admit it is still not known. You can call Christmas xmas if you like, but we all know what is being talked about:) They even refer to the collider as the genesis machine!!!! Not just hilbillies either. Here is an example..




"This is a huge step toward unraveling Genesis Chapter 1, Verse 1 - what happened in the beginning," physicist Michio Kaku told The Associated Press.

"This is a Genesis machine. It'll help to recreate the most glorious event in the history of the universe."

Atom Smasher Could Reveal "The Beginning" - CBS News

The only reason religious people are either latching on to or getting upset over this discovery rather than the discovery of some obscure quark, is because of it's unfortunate nickname which the media can't seem to stop repeating. It has nothing to do with gods.
False. It is directly related to the god of this world and to God Almighty! The god of this world seeks to instill doubt about God as he did since Eden. And any particle or anything else that may be a part of creating or manufacturing physical matter has everything to do with God.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
:confused:
Why would any theist get upset over the discovery of such a particle regardless of the name? I can see why the name itself might spark interest/curiosity, but I don't see why it would cause any theist to get upset.
I could see why they might. The big bang is an imaginary event, and contrary to God's word, and is an integral part of the claims about the God particle.

Maybe an atheist would resent the name, or resent the discovery of a "God particle/Higgs Boson" but I don't see why any theist would get their nickers in an uproar over such a discovery.
Yes, they seek to omit God...but are confounded as always...it cannot be done...ever.
 
Upvote 0

DontTreadOnMike

Eddaic Literalist
Jan 28, 2010
1,316
69
✟24,436.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
:confused:
Why would any theist get upset over the discovery of such a particle regardless of the name? I can see why the name itself might spark interest/curiosity, but I don't see why it would cause any theist to get upset. Maybe an atheist would resent the name, or resent the discovery of a "God particle/Higgs Boson" but I don't see why any theist would get their nickers in an uproar over such a discovery.

I know christians who think the name is arrogant, which i can sort of see. But they understand that it really has nothing to do with it.

But wait, why would an atheist resent the discovery of this particle? The vast majority of the people in this field who are doing the discovering identify as atheists or non-believers. Unless you mean they resent the name, in which case I agree. they probably do resent it because it's not called the god particle, thats juat what reporters call it.
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟320,648.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
I know christians who think the name is arrogant, which i can sort of see. But they understand that it really has nothing to do with it.

Ah. I guess I just don't really "grok" the whole arrogance claim.

But wait, why would an atheist resent the discovery of this particle?
As you already surmised, I wouldn't expect an atheist to be offended by the discovery, just the nickname that was given to it.
 
Upvote 0