http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... exist.html
2ArXbUhbikQ'An asymmetry must exist here somewhere but we simply do not understand where the difference is. What is the source of the symmetry break?'
2ArXbUhbikQ'An asymmetry must exist here somewhere but we simply do not understand where the difference is. What is the source of the symmetry break?'
Guess you couldn't be bother to read the Wikiped link on baryon asymmetry and learn something.Mr. Perfect wrote:Boy are you right about that. However you don't seem to grasp yet the problems that creates.Typhoon wrote: Currently no one knows.
Not dogma, but theory.Mr. Perfect wrote:Again, correct. However big bang hypothesis is indeed dogma.Again, science is not dogma,
Actually, no. The further away an object, the longer it take light or other EM radiation to reach earth. So we are looking back in time.Mr. Perfect wrote:Hard to answer. The Church of Scientism doesn't seem to grasp what science actually is, so this really depends. For example, science has almost nothing to say about the beginning if any of the universe, the creation of life or the creation of species. However the Church of Scientism has some deep dogmas about it they think are science.it does not claim to have the answers to everything.
Well, first one had to understand them before declaring them to be "toilet paper".Mr. Perfect wrote:Proposed theories are often as useful as used toilet paper and paper over the catastrophic setbacks of recent CERN research.If you bother to read the Wikiped link above you will learn about various proposed theories.
That the universe is expanding is well established.Mr. Perfect wrote:Cool story, but that's not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is how could professional astrophysicists be so wrong in what they believe, and what else are they wrong about, and why should anyone believe anything they say if their ideas aren't even observable. Like big bang, expanding space etc.It will be up to future experiments to test these theories and for theorist to come up with new testable hypotheses when some or all candidate theories are excluded.
That's how science progresses.
Nope. What he is saying is that by CPT symmetry we expect all properties of matter and antimatter to be the same: mass, magnitude of charge [although of opposite sign], magnetic moment, etc.Mr. Perfect wrote:Herein lies the problem. You arguments are with Albert Einstein, the Standard Model and CERN, not me. Mr. Fujiwara from CERN (not a creationist) states in his own words that antimatter and matter have to be equal and opposite according to the standard model.
No, these are your misunderstanding. Baryon asymmetry does not invalidate the SM.Mr. Perfect wrote:However the Standard Model calls for the destruction of the universe, and the latest CERN findings affirm that indeed the universe should be destroyed according to the Standard Model. Since the universe exists this continues to call into question the Standard Model itself. These are the findings of CERN, not me or the Creationist Museum.
Thanks for your offer, but as I know people working on one of the antimatter experiments at CERN, no need.Mr. Perfect wrote:If you need to get in touch with them I can help you out, I'm good at cold calling.
Dr. Makoto explained it reasonably well. Perhaps you should have taken the time and trouble to understand what he is saying.Mr. Perfect wrote: 51zwdWWEOwQ
Yes, this is the baryon asymmetry puzzle, however, it is not inconsistent with the SM which has passed every experimental test to-date.Mr. Perfect wrote: https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/257 ... ldnt-existIn particle physics, the Standard Model describes the four known fundamental forces in the universe: the gravitational, electromagnetic, weak, and strong. The first two have very clear consequences in the universe while the other two are detectable only at the subatomic scale. The Standard Model has been supported by experimentation, but it predicts that the big bang that created the universe would have resulted in equal amounts of matter (us and everything around us) and antimatter (rare). If they were equal, why didn’t the early universe cancel itself out, leaving just a sea of energy?
Sure. The media, such as the Daily Mail, does not know it's arse from a hole in the ground when it comes to particle physics:Mr. Perfect wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... exist.htmlAgain, direct quotes from the researchers employed by CERN. You appear to know something we don't, please let us know what it is.'All of our observations find a complete symmetry between matter and antimatter, which is why the universe should not actually exist,' said Dr Christian Smorra, lead author of the new study.
I already read about it in the other articles, I didn't need the wikipedia. It's more cool stories.Typhoon wrote: Guess you couldn't be bother to read the Wikiped link on baryon asymmetry and learn something.
No, dogma. No questioning is allowed, no questions are answered. It is dogma. Your dogma.Mr. Perfect wrote: Not dogma, but theory.
Yep. And what we see are stars. Nobody has seen a big bang.Mr. Perfect wrote: Actually, no. The further away an object, the longer it take light or other EM radiation to reach earth. So we are looking back in time.
Yep. And we haven't seen a big bang in that time machine either.In particle accelerators such as the LHC, conditions are created that only existed during the Electroweak Epoch, about 10^-32 seconds after the Big Bang.
So in a sense it is also a time machine.
That's a tricky one. Most theories come and go without anyone even looking at them, popular or unpopular. Popular theories are proven wrong, unpopular theories are proven right. So many theories, almost all in the wastebin now. So, is it necessary to catalog and analyze every theory man has ever made? Obviously no. Now, what to do?Well, first one had to understand them before declaring them to be "toilet paper".
The standard model says that antimatter and matter must be equal in amount and opposite in nature, however this would negate matter itself. CERN spent 10 years creating an experiment in hopes of finding an asymmetry and it failed in totality, further calling into question the standard model. What am I misunderstanding.There are no "catastrophic setbacks" at CERN except in you willful misunderstanding.
No it isn't. The expansion of space has never been observed.That the universe is expanding is well established.
Ermm, again, I'm not the one declaring things wrong, CERN is. Your argument is with CERN and Albert Einstein. They are totally confounded by the current state of physics. If you know something we don't please let us know.As I've repeatedly noted, if you're going to declare something "wrong", first demonstrate that you have some real understanding of the subject.
Otherwise you're just another crackpot.
YepTyphoon wrote: Nope.
What specifically did I misunderstand.No, these are your misunderstanding.
OK would you mind asking them why the universe hasn't blown up yet? The standard model calls for it.Thanks for your ofre, but as I know people on one of the antimatter experiments at CERN, not necessary.
I did. He said the antimatter and matter have to be equal in amount and opposite in nature according to the standard model.Dr. Makoto explained it reasonably well. Perhaps you should have taken the time to understand what he is saying.
Good one. "The Hindenburg has passed every experimental test to date" - April 1937.Yes, this is the baryon asymmetry puzzle, however, it is not inconsistent with the SM which has passed every experimental test to-date.
Oh, my bad. Where did the daily mail misquote the CERN director? Do you have the real quote?Sure. The media, such as the Daily Mail, does not know it's arse from a hole in the ground when it comes to particle physics:
http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=9700
Ignoring my explanations and recycling your misunderstandings is not going to get you anywhere.
That's not what he said. I repeated exatly what he said. You expanded on it in an attempt to show that I misquoted. Your little diversion changed nothing of the facts. What I said is what he said. These games won't get you anywhere.Typhoon wrote: Nope. What he is saying is that by CPT symmetry we expect all properties of matter and antimatter to be the same: mass, magnitude of charge [although of opposite sign], magnetic moment, etc.
Direct quote. Your argument is with CERN not me. Get in touch with your friend they need your help.Mr. Perfect wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... exist.html'All of our observations find a complete symmetry between matter and antimatter, which is why the universe should not actually exist,' said Dr Christian Smorra, lead author of the new study.
I don't know if Dr. Smorra made that statement, but it is incorrect.Mr. Perfect wrote:Direct quote. Your argument is with CERN not me. Get in touch with your friend they need your help.Mr. Perfect wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... exist.html'All of our observations find a complete symmetry between matter and antimatter, which is why the universe should not actually exist,' said Dr Christian Smorra, lead author of the new study.
I already know the answer.Mr. Perfect wrote:I will know in 48 hours
"All of our observations find a complete symmetry between matter and antimatter, which is why the universe should not actually exist," explained Christian Smorra, first author of the study.
I'm all ears. I have his email and phone number as well as some of the other authors, linked in says I'm 2 points of contact away.Typhoon wrote:I already know the answer.Mr. Perfect wrote:I will know in 48 hours
CERN is linking to the above link, I think we have a legitimate quote.Mr. Perfect wrote: http://www.uni-mainz.de/presse/aktuell/ ... G_HTML.php
"All of our observations find a complete symmetry between matter and antimatter, which is why the universe should not actually exist," explained Christian Smorra, first author of the study.
Some real subversives with the standard model. Maybe this indeed should be in the conspiracy section. The CERN conspiracy. I think Dan Brown did that already.The search goes on. No difference in protons and antiprotons have yet been found which would help to potentially explain the existence of matter in our universe. However, physicists in the BASE collaboration at the CERN research center have been able to measure the magnetic force of antiprotons with almost unbelievable precision. Nevertheless, the data do not provide any information about how matter formed in the early universe as particles and antiparticles would have had to completely destroy one another.
Oh, so you do know how to google.Mr. Perfect wrote:CERN is linking to the above link, I think we have a legitimate quote.Mr. Perfect wrote: http://www.uni-mainz.de/presse/aktuell/ ... G_HTML.php
"All of our observations find a complete symmetry between matter and antimatter, which is why the universe should not actually exist," explained Christian Smorra, first author of the study.
http://base.web.cern.ch/content/parts-b ... tic-moment
Now what.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/fear-m ... -in-kenya/Nonc Hilaire wrote:"Everytime a bell rings, the WHO sterilizes another Kenyan woman with a tetanus vaccine."
Another WHO done it mystery......Typhoon wrote:https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/fear-m ... -in-kenya/Nonc Hilaire wrote:"Everytime a bell rings, the WHO sterilizes another Kenyan woman with a tetanus vaccine."
You did post material from CERN. However, your claims regarding it were completely imaginary and false.Mr. Perfect wrote:Lol I posted research material from CERN. Your criticism of me is completely imaginary, and false.