Large Hadron Collider nearing completion

I see you found "a quote" --

don't let UTEOTW see that!

 

Yes, I am quite excited about this.

To find the Higg's would be a significant find for the standard model.

The part that I am particularly interested in is another aspect. The top energy level possible with the LHC should be right at the edge of possibly making the lightest of the proposed supersymmetric particles. I find this exciting for two reasons.

The first is that supersymmetric particles are one of the leading candidates for dark matter along with axions. Discovery of one of the supersymmetric particles could shed much light on the nature of dark matter. (Some recent observations point more towards axions. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060221_stues_dark_matter.html But it might be that dark matter is made of both kinds of particles in different roles.)

The second is that string theory is supersymmetric. Finding a supersymmetric particle would demonstrate that supersymmetry really is a part of how our universe operates. While this would in no way be actual evidence for string theory, it would give some comfort that the theory has some merit. Much like string theory predicting the properties of the graviton give it some reason for optimism.

 

You really have no idea on how to properly use quotes, do oyu?

A quotation can be appropriate or not/

You seem to like to quote things like journalists, or interviews or opinions. While these may be interesting, they are not really scientific. But the worst aspect of your quoting is that you seem to think that the intent of the one being quoted is not of any relevence. If you can pull out some seemingly juicy bit, you go for it. And you ignore that the author of the quote does not agree with you at all in what you are trying to demonstrate.

If you want to quote facts, be my guest. I will often do this myself. Quoting from journals about the results of research is a legitimate type of quotation. Results of research are facts worth quoting. But even then, you have to careful to make sure that you are not distorting the findings of the author.

But quoting decades old opinions and then not even honestly presenting the actual opinion of the author ... Well that's pretty close to useless.

Besides, with all of your randonly scattered quotation marks, it becomes very difficult to understand just what it is that you are saying. Are you quoting an author or are you quoting a poster or are you quoting yourself. It seems that often, as in your post here, you are doing none of these things. You are just putting in quotes on a whim. Very confusing and difficult to read.

 

It will be some years yet before they find Abraham's boson.

Rob

 

That is a good example of a factless quote. Thanks!

By contrast we see well recognized authorities on various topics quoted all the time.

In the original case in point - these are quotes where they identified a debunked horse fossil series and then we also have a quote from someone as obscure as yourself admitting that the fossil series in question is admitted by all to be "discredited".

ODD that you choose to fall on your sword -- decrying the use of "guotes" and doubling back on your own statements -- over this fully "discredited" horse series.

I just thought the "quote" that started this thread was "illustrative" for this case.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hey I wish I did too.

See we agree on something.