I read this and it made me very sad

[TemperateSeaIsland]

CBBC - Newsround - Huge experiment explosion recreates Universe's Big Bang

People like to joke about the poor level of the actual science in science reporting by the media but this article takes the cake.

Yeah, I know it's for kids but still...

 

[AV1611VET]

People like to joke about the poor level of the actual science in science reporting by the media but this article takes the cake.

Yeah, I know it's for kids but still...

All they've done is crashed two particles into each other head-on; then claimed some kind of mini-victory.

Science at its best, I guess.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

All they've done is crashed two particles into each other head-on; then claimed some kind of mini-victory.

Science at its best, I guess.

Do you have a problem with humanity adding to its collective understanding of science?

(Stupid question, I know... anytime religious theocracies rule, well science, reason and understanding take a back seat to piety)

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you have a problem with humanity adding to its collective understanding of science?

Um ... again ... you guys have crashed two particles head-on, under controlled conditions, and are calling it a mini-recreation of how our universe started.

Yes, I have a problem with humanity adding to its collective [cough] understanding [/cough] of science.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Um ... again ... you guys have crashed two particles head-on, under controlled conditions, and are calling it a mini-recreation of how our universe started.

Yes, I have a problem with humanity adding to its collective [cough] understanding [/cough] of science.

Thought so.

 

[matthewgar]

I just hope we won't have to wait 10 years for them to post info about what they discovered...:>

 

[AV1611VET]

Thought so.

I'd say though that it is making a nice plug for Intelligent Design -- wouldn't you?

(Although I do question the intelligence behind this endeavor.)

 

[AV1611VET]

I just hope we won't have to wait 10 years for them to post info about what they discovered...:>

I'll do it for them: nothing.

(They can aim, I'll give them credit for that; but even then, I have to wonder how many tries it took -- which I feel they won't publish.)

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

I'd say though that it is making a nice plug for Intelligent Design -- wouldn't you?

(Although I do question the intelligence behind this endeavor.)

Not so much ID, more like anthropic principle.

 

[woutyet]

how can you replicate something that happened when there was nothing, in something. wouldn't this have to happen in a void of nothingness where the particles themselves don't even exist

 

[AV1611VET]

Not so much ID, more like anthropic principle.

What am I missing here?

After n-tries, scientists managed to make two particles collide head-on inside of a relatively small tunnel.

And somehow, this shows what?

That, once upon a time, two particles (nevermind where they came from) somehow managed to be on the same head-on trajectory, despite having unlimited "space" to travel in?

What a coincidence.

Remember what they say about 10[sup]50[/sup]?

 

[AV1611VET]

how can you replicate something that happened when there was nothing, in something. wouldn't this have to happen in a void of nothingness where the particles themselves don't even exist

Just fill in the gaps as needed, and consider it 'progress'.

 

[woutyet]

i was meaning that, it was just some fairly simple reasoning as to why this thing seems like a bunch of hoey.

 

[AV1611VET]

i was meaning that, it was just some fairly simple reasoning as to why this thing seems like a bunch of hoey.

Whenever you get a bunch of scientists poking around how the universe got started, 'hooey' is an acceptable synonym for the outcome.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Whenever you get a bunch of scientists poking around how the universe got started, 'hooey' is an acceptable synonym for the outcome.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing, except, you know, for theologians.

 

[AV1611VET]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing, except, you know, for theologians.

I know --

 

[USincognito]

how can you replicate something that happened when there was nothing, in something. wouldn't this have to happen in a void of nothingness where the particles themselves don't even exist

I see the Creationists have claimed another victim. The inflation of the Big Bang didn't come from "nothing". All of the Universe existed in a singularity. There was "something" not "nothing" according to the real version of the theory (as opposed to the Creationists straw man one).

 

[Cabal]

I'll do it for them: nothing.

(They can aim, I'll give them credit for that; but even then, I have to wonder how many tries it took -- which I feel they won't publish.)

Wow. Please keep advertising your ignorance like a flag here.

"Nothing" will most definitely not be the result here. You have no clue about particle physics nor what this work implies, nor do you wish to find out. Ergo, your opinion is worth NOTHING.

Yet again - a few minutes work could have stopped you looking like a colossal n00b. I mean, this week you already fell foul of your claims about the level of Neanderthal fossils we have. Haven't you learned yet?

 

[Cabal]

Remember what they say about 10[sup]50[/sup]?

I remember what creationists claim. Funnily, I've never heard the claim from someone who actually knows what they're talking about. You know this, so stop spreading this claim like it actually means something.

 

[AV1611VET]

I see the Creationists have claimed another victim. The inflation of the Big Bang didn't come from "nothing". All of the Universe existed in a singularity. There was "something" not "nothing" according to the real version of the theory (as opposed to the Creationists straw man one).

You mean, according to this Large Hadron thing that supposedly created a mini-big bang by colliding two particles together?

If the entire universe came from a collision of two particles, then your post doesn't make sense.