 Quote by elas
I really hope this complete COMPLETE MISUNDERSTANDING of collider physics and, in general, particle physics is not prevalent in the general public.
As one of the interested general public I would like make it clear that you are missing our point. At present we do not know why atoms and particles have their particular properties or even what those particular properties really are.
Now you would not expect someone who knows nothing about car parts to build a car without first teaching him about the function of the various parts; but physicist are continueing to build without a clear understanding of what the bits are, and all you are really achieving is a succession of ever smaller pieces. Worse still these pieces vanish before you can even carry out a thorough exmination of them.
Right from the beginning physicists have ignored work that does not agree with the standard model. As a result they have built up a remarkably accurate predictive (crash) theory that totally fails to tell us how or why the theory works; we are always rebuffed with statements like "learn the (predictive) theories". This refusal to give priority to the question of 'how and why' is what annoys us and we do not see how smashing bits into ever smaller parts or simply learning the predictive theories, offers any hope of answering the 'how and why' question.
I for one would be delighted if you could explain how you expect your experiments to produce the desired results and not just more vanishingly small particles.
|
Please read ZapperZ's message on the previous page.
And the question about why these things have their properties is what is being explored. You seem to expect a
particle physicist to have the answer before he asks the question. There are some fundamental questions that are going to (hopefully) be answered once the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) comes online at CERN. You also seem to think that what is being currently done in physics is not concerned with the "how and why"... but this is exactly what is being done. Why is the physics community trying to create higher energy
colliders? To probe new regimes of physics, to see if there really is a Higgs
particle, to try and find out if QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics- the theory that explains the Nuclear Strong Force) is complete or is it simply the low energy limit of some other underlying theory... all questions that are being asked. Now, this is not a fast process. It takes time to sift through all the data collected in these experiments, let alone the time it takes to actually do the experiment. You also seem to think that physicists don't understand what particles consist of and how they interact. That is EXACTLY what the Standard Model does. It explains
particle interactions.
You also seem to think that physics may be able to answer every question asked. It is possible that some of our questions may not be answerable. Such as why a
particle has the mass it does. Most physicists assume it is due to the strength of the interaction between the
particle and the Higgs boson, but why do they have that exact value. This question may not be answerable and that is ok.
Now you use the example of the mechanic knowing how are car works, but do you expect the brake technicians who work on your car to understand the microscopic theory of friction? You seem to be very mislead by some notion that physics is not trying to answer the questions of why and how, because you don't know how they are going about the process of attempting to answer the questions. That is why most people, along with myself, will ask you to learn something about it before you start making wild assertations about what is and isn't going on in the world of science. I hope I cleared some things up for you.
Cheers
Similar Threads for: Why Should We Care About Particles?
Physorg.com Science News Partner
