LHC Spies Hints of Infant Universe

techbeat writes "The big bang machine may already be living up to its nickname, writes New Scientist. Researchers on the Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS) experiment at CERN's Large Hadron Collider near Geneva, Switzerland, have seen hints of what may be the hot, dense state of matter thought to have filled the universe in its first nanoseconds."

Re:full article

[Anonymous Coward]

Paragraphs?

Re:Let's build an accelerator that circles the ear

[tomhudson]

... except that time probably doesn't flow the same way under those conditions, and even the smallest asymmetry makes a difference (and since we're seeing it through the lens of our own perception and current state of time, it's inaccurate at best). Or do we now want to have people claim that time is not (a manifestation of) one (or more) of the dimensions?

I know - I'll just go back in time and find o ...

Re:This is why science rocks.

[captaindomon]

Thank you for this post. Although we can argue the validity of creation theory, I think it is important to give kudos and respect to serious historians, who have spent a lot of time and effort researching historical time lines. I think we can object to a certain theory without belittling the effort of people involved in the research of any certain subject.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[WeatherGod]

Dammit, where is the 'hurts brain' moderation?

Re:This is why science rocks.

[feidaykin]

While it can be funny to poke fun at Creationists, part of me doesn't find them funny at all. I've met some and they really, truly believe they are right, and that modern science is some evil hegemony determined to discredit religion. They believe it as strongly as say, extremists that believe they will meet 72 virgins if they die in a suicide bombing. I find that more frightening than amusing, especially since some of the Creationist folks have ventured into politics, like Christine O'Donnell, with her dismissal of evolution by calling it "only a theory." Gravity is also "only a theory" but that doesn't mean you can fly if you don't "believe" in it. I don't like the idea of people who have a fundamental flaw in their understanding of the universe making decisions that impact millions of people. That's more frightening than funny, so while I can still laugh at a Creationist joke like this, it's kind of a nervous laugh since there is this constant reminder that people exist who want to turn the clock on human knowledge back hundreds of years.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[TheRaven64]

There was quite an appropriate SMBC a couple of days ago [smbc-comics.com].

Title fail

[Anomalyx]

The title is total fail.
The correct summary would be: "Scientists aren't sure, but they think they've detected a quark-gluon plasma. They aren't sure if this plasma even really exists, but it happens to be the same stuff that they think existed in the instants after the big bang"

Re:This is why science rocks.

[Randy Jian]

But belittling the efforts of some people and their research is just one style of peer review... and insults are but another test to the validity of a theory...

Re:This is why science rocks.

[Bootsy Collins]

As soon as you say "Until _(insert any scientific theory at all here)_ can be proven . . .," you've demonstrated that you don't understand even the tiniest little bit of how science is done or what scientific understanding is.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[sayfawa]

Funny but.. also interesting. I mean, what with all the hoopla over Hawking's recent comments, and the predictable "rebuttals" by the religious folks, about how someone must have started the universe in the first place, therefore there's a god. What if the person/people who started our universe were just a bunch of scientists in their universe?

What would the zealots hate more, the idea that our universe sprang out of nothing, or that our "god(s)" were just some nerds performing an experiment?

Re:Quark gluon plasma?

[Giranan]

That... is an amazing analogy. Thank you.

Re:Quark gluon plasma?

[John_Sauter]

And thank you from me, also. If you aren't a physics teacher, you should be.

rest of the reaction

[Joebert]

Wouldn't it be reasonable to believe that if they truly were seeing what they think they see, it would have continued to expand and wipe us all out in an instant ?

Re:This is why science rocks.

[Raenex]

Capital letters are your friends.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[Creedo]

I've studied the Bible. The cosmology is wrong. It requires a very "liberal" interpretation to wring out something approximating the truth. The morality is repulsive. The theology is degrading. Frankly, the good you can take from the "Good Book" could be summarized in a very short pamphlet. Not sure why anyone takes it seriously, aside from cultural indoctrination.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[jackbird]

It's the young earthers who are trying to pack school boards and screw up primary education in the US. Someone whose religious views and organized actions aren't antithetical to the teaching and practice of science is much less interesting/threatening. Granted, many in the latter category are involved in pushing anti-AGW agendas, but that's another thing altogether.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[Anonymous Coward]

i know that i am important.

We're talking about the Universe here. You are NOT important on any scale other than your mom loves you.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[Creedo]

Sure.

First, the two versions of the creation myth don't match. The origin of man is placed last in the first version, and before the creation of other life forms in the second. There is no mention of forbidden fruit in the first. And there is no separation between the creation of man and woman. There was no point at which there was just one man and one woman. Furthermore, even taking the first version as an extremely attenuated account of the actual development of life, it gets the order wrong. Plants are created before the sun, moon and stars. The seas were populated after the land. It's just a hodge podge of mythical explanations which bear no resemblance to actual events or the actual structure of the universe. That's without going into the concepts of Sheol, the Firmament and other such physical explanations. It's myth, not science.

The morality of the Bible is repulsive. Women and children are treated little better than chattle. Blind obedience is exalted(Abraham and Isaac). Genocide is a commandment from God. Ritual vicarious atonement is practiced as blood sacrifices, which the Christians later claim as a precursor to Jesus' sacrifice. The New Testament would seem better if it didn't add in the concept of Hell, reinforced the earlier misogyny and make claims which can be empirically proven false about the efficacy of Christian prayer.

The theology is degrading. It starts with a concept of man as a deviant, broken being in need of salvation. The supposedly omnimax deity which created him deems it sufficient to only enable that salvation through the bloody, ritualistic murder of his son/self. The acquisition of knowledge is viewed as a sin, while blind obedience to dogmatic creeds is exalted. I could spend hours talking about the nastiness of the lesson of Job, or the concept of infinite punishment inflicted on a finite being for finite offenses in a finite frame of reference or any of the other myriad things which make it so hideous.

Sure, the ethic of reciprocity is good. The story of the Good Samaritan is laudable. But none of it makes up for the loads of ignorance and degradation you have to wade through to find such nuggets. I assume that if you are the Bible devotee that you claim, my descriptions are sufficient for you to place what I am talking about.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[Creedo]

Have fun in Hell.

Yes, the eternal answer to criticism of Christianity. When you can't make a logical reply, resort to fear mongering and threats. How pathetic.

Re:This is why science rocks.

[radtea]

This is one of the most clear and brief accounts of what is wrong with the Bible I have ever read. Thanks!

Re:This is why science rocks.

[Creedo]

Unfortunately, it's also wrong and misguided. But whatever makes you feel better.

I notice you didn't bother refuting any of it. Typical. Feel free to cling to your delusions. Whatever makes you feel better.