4 ms·

How'd it fail at it's primary task? Wasn't the Higgs a big part of that? Or is the argument that is hasn't found anything outside of the standard model?

• shepardrtc 10y ago
  It succeeded at its primary task, and the Higgs was a big part of it. Its still doing its job, so give it time. Finding nothing can often be just as important as finding something unexpected.
  • wolfgke 10y ago
    > Finding nothing can often be just as important as finding something unexpected. From a scientific point you are right. From a political point or the point of securing further funding this statement is (unluckily) wrong.
    • kuschku 10y ago
      Not really, the European funding isn’t that relying on new findings.
    • TheGRS 10y ago
      I think its a fundamental problem with teaching science history. We tend to look at achievements in history as being inevitable, like of course we discovered flight after the locomotive was invented, that's just how it happened! But those discoveries were all a circumstances of chance. If we're going to continue to make progress in science we need to accept that new, groundbreaking discoveries don't happen inevitably, they happen from people doing a lot of the dirty work and from imaginative people putting the puzzle pieces together in new ways. There's no inevitability to discovery.
  • Waterluvian 10y ago
    Mapping an open field fills in just as much paper as if you mapped a busy forest. I'm not sure what the best way is to convey this idea since people naturally want to find things that are exciting.
    • TheGRS 10y ago
      I think its a good analogy. Or just talk about the original periodic table. It was put together with many holes, but with the assumption that those elements would later be found and sure enough they were. I suppose scientists of the day could have openly accepted that model and decided there was no reason to prove silicon existed, but I think anyone would see that as silly. Its necessary to prove these things.
• dkural 10y ago
  The physics community does not consider finding the Higgs new physics. Not finding Higgs would've been more exciting, or a more massive / lighter Higgs, etc. The Higgs showed up exactly as predicted with the predicted mass, so we're stuck with the Standard Model - i.e. no "new physics".
  • marcosdumay 10y ago
    You don't go into an experiment with the goal to find new physics.
    • dkural 10y ago
      And yet, that was precisely one of the stated goals of LHC. Observing things is not a bad way to find new physics: Radiation was observed before there was a theory for it. Electrons were also generated as a "ray" before people had any concept of electrons. We've observed the microwave background without knowing about the big bang, or cosmic expansion. Most new physics starts out as experimental observations. Einstein's theory of relativity is one of the amazing (partial) exceptions.
      • marcosdumay 10y ago
        You can search for it at any time. But how can you state you will find it when you don't know if it's there? I don't think LHC can be considered a failure on that basis.
    • deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]