finding dark matter! Sciences holy grail.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostThu Jun 13, 2013 10:57 pm » by Noentry


Scientists release plans for new largest particle accelerator, designed to find dark matter



One of the biggest science projects in human history is ready to begin. Scientists from around the world announced today that they have completed the final design specs for what will become the largest particle accelerator ever built, the International Linear Collider, a planned 19.3-mile-long (31 km) machine that will be used to reveal the properties of dark matter and other fundamental particles that make up the universe. "The technology is there, the R&D milestones have been achieved, the physics case is clear, and we could start construction tomorrow," said Barry Barish, a US physicist and the leader of the accelerator's global design effort, in a statement.

The goal of the machine is to understand just what the universe is made of and how it all fits together. Scientists theorize that most of the universe (95 percent or more) is made up of dark matter, but no such particles have actually ever been observed. The new International Linear Collider (ILC) should be able to create these particles and more by smashing together beams of electrons and their opposite particles known as positrons

Image


But there are still two major obstacles standing in the way of the construction of the ILC at this point, namely, finding a host country for the project and funding it. Japan is the leading likely candidate for where the new collider may be built, with two potential sites located in the mountains, where construction is more challenging. And at an estimated cost of $7.8 billion US dollars, almost twice the amount it cost to build the world's current largest accelerator — the approximately 17-mile-long (27 km) Large Hadron Collider (LHC) — it may prove tough to raise all the necessary funds for the new project, even if they are divided as planned among the various countries and organizations whose scientists will be using it. "There is no funding yet on the table for construction," said Brian Foster, a physicist who serves as director of the European Linear Collider collaboration.

Still, all of the scientists involved in the new ILC project, over 1,000 at last count, broadly agree that the instrument is necessary to further advance the study of particle physics and understand exactly how the universe works. That's because while the older accelerator, the LHC, has already made some incredible discoveries and will still be operational for many years to come, its design and equipment don't allow for it to smash together the types of particles that scientists are aiming to collide with the new ILC. For one thing, the LHC is circular and the proposed ILC would be a straight line, allowing for substantially different kinds of experiments. "A linear collider has much more flexibility and is more upgradeable," Fowler told The Verge. The ILC would also be able to study in greater detail the Higgs boson, a particle discovered by the LHC in 2012 which had evaded detection for nearly 50 years.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/12/44227 ... r-collider


Well there goes another $10'000'000'000.
What I cant understand is why didnt they just make the LHC a little longer, then we wouldn't need to build this new one.
What do they think money comes out of nothing. Oh yes I forgot Science does believe that.
:look:
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne

Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:04 am

PostFri Jun 14, 2013 2:59 am » by sweetpetrichor


(Greetings, this is my first post. I'm going to go off on a tangent.)

This won't happen. Dark Matter/Dark Energy is purely theoretical pseudo-science created to fill in the gaps of the ridiculous Big Bang Model (along with other :bullshit: theoretical concepts, such as the graviton, String Theory, etc.). Electric Universe/Plasma Cosmology easily explains these areas where the Big Bang Model screws up.

The mainstream perspective of Reality (which mostly only exists in theoretical concepts, phantom math equations, and virtual computer models - that isn't reality) is so heavily flawed, it is amazing they invent more and more ways to prop up their lies. Mainstream science is just a bunch of academics patting each other on the back. Too many peer-reviewed nonsense and textbooks out there to have to rewrite if they were to admit they're wrong. Also, not to mention the loss of that precious academic prestige and illusion of "authority." That's more of a narcissistic, rather than a scientific attitude.

The major difference between the Big Bang Model and Plasma Cosmology is that those proponents of the former attempt to make the data they record fit their theories (trying to always prove their theories despite evidence to the contrary), while the proponents of the latter allow the data to shape their theories (if their theories are false, they use the findings of the data to form new ones - they have no problem letting go, unlike mainstream academics).

An idea about reality is not reality. Yet, mainstream science continues to treat their ideas as such, and because of the illusory "authority over reality" they think they hold, and the collective ignorance of the masses, the public plays "follow the leader", despite these (mis)leaders being complete full of shit. I mean, they're going to sale you one theory of how the whole universe (time, space, matter, energy - everything [a "big bang" that came from nothing - not much of an explanation if you ask me]) came into existence, but they can't nail down one theory to explain how the moon came into existence? No one is troubled by that?

Another thing that troubles me is that they keep attempting to find a "backdoor" or "hack" into reality. It is like they are so incredibly perplexed how the universe is animated (where is the outlet for the human body to plug into?). To them, it seems the universe should be just a bunch of dead matter. The very fact that consciousness can occupy matter (we're living proof of that) is what confuses them. Attempting to paint a purely objective perspective of reality would only be half true, as there exists the subject component (consciousness) to also have to calculate into the equation - which is tricky for them (if they want a uniform conception of reality for the public to adopt in their thinking to further give them "authority" over the minds of the masses) because subjectivity is... subjective. They will never own reality. This is something they're slowly getting up on, such as the Measurement Problem in quantum physics, doctors seeing unexplainable "spontaneous healing" from cancer and other sicknesses, and in other such areas in science where the existence of consciousness needs to be taken into consideration - that not everything is a result of a mechanical material process - consciousness does affect matter (you can prove that by wiggling your toes).

Anyway, my point of contention is that mainstream science doesn't really know anything for certain (the only thing they're good at is immersing themselves in their own ideas about reality, instead of attempting to experience reality directly - like many people in this world), and only if we were more open-minded, we can leave ourselves open to discover some pretty amazing things about our individual selves and connection with reality/nature. But, of course, saying it like that sounds too "hippie-ish" - so it must be pseudo-science. Science-forbid that consciousness actually has a role to play in the universe. So let us all just disregard this incredible miracle and obvious fact of reality - possibly the only fact of reality we can deduce: consciousness occupies matter. Isn't that tell-tale enough about the nature of reality? Apparently not.

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 8119
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostFri Jun 14, 2013 4:06 am » by Noentry


sweetpetrichor excellent first post.

:hiho: to DTV.

I look forward to reading more of your insights in the future.

:cheers:
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne

Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 2:04 am

PostFri Jun 14, 2013 4:52 am » by sweetpetrichor


Thanks for the welcome! :cheers:

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 16546
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 4:20 am
Location: ...between a rock and a hard place...

PostFri Jun 14, 2013 4:57 am » by The57ironman


sweetpetrichor wrote:(Greetings, this is my first post. I'm going to go off on a tangent.)

This won't happen. Dark Matter/Dark Energy is purely theoretical pseudo-science created to fill in the gaps of the ridiculous Big Bang Model (along with other :bullshit: theoretical concepts, such as the graviton, String Theory, etc.). Electric Universe/Plasma Cosmology easily explains these areas where the Big Bang Model screws up.

The mainstream perspective of Reality (which mostly only exists in theoretical concepts, phantom math equations, and virtual computer models - that isn't reality) is so heavily flawed, it is amazing they invent more and more ways to prop up their lies. Mainstream science is just a bunch of academics patting each other on the back. Too many peer-reviewed nonsense and textbooks out there to have to rewrite if they were to admit they're wrong. Also, not to mention the loss of that precious academic prestige and illusion of "authority." That's more of a narcissistic, rather than a scientific attitude.

The major difference between the Big Bang Model and Plasma Cosmology is that those proponents of the former attempt to make the data they record fit their theories (trying to always prove their theories despite evidence to the contrary), while the proponents of the latter allow the data to shape their theories (if their theories are false, they use the findings of the data to form new ones - they have no problem letting go, unlike mainstream academics).

An idea about reality is not reality. Yet, mainstream science continues to treat their ideas as such, and because of the illusory "authority over reality" they think they hold, and the collective ignorance of the masses, the public plays "follow the leader", despite these (mis)leaders being complete full of shit. I mean, they're going to sale you one theory of how the whole universe (time, space, matter, energy - everything [a "big bang" that came from nothing - not much of an explanation if you ask me]) came into existence, but they can't nail down one theory to explain how the moon came into existence? No one is troubled by that?

Another thing that troubles me is that they keep attempting to find a "backdoor" or "hack" into reality. It is like they are so incredibly perplexed how the universe is animated (where is the outlet for the human body to plug into?). To them, it seems the universe should be just a bunch of dead matter. The very fact that consciousness can occupy matter (we're living proof of that) is what confuses them. Attempting to paint a purely objective perspective of reality would only be half true, as there exists the subject component (consciousness) to also have to calculate into the equation - which is tricky for them (if they want a uniform conception of reality for the public to adopt in their thinking to further give them "authority" over the minds of the masses) because subjectivity is... subjective. They will never own reality. This is something they're slowly getting up on, such as the Measurement Problem in quantum physics, doctors seeing unexplainable "spontaneous healing" from cancer and other sicknesses, and in other such areas in science where the existence of consciousness needs to be taken into consideration - that not everything is a result of a mechanical material process - consciousness does affect matter (you can prove that by wiggling your toes).

Anyway, my point of contention is that mainstream science doesn't really know anything for certain (the only thing they're good at is immersing themselves in their own ideas about reality, instead of attempting to experience reality directly - like many people in this world), and only if we were more open-minded, we can leave ourselves open to discover some pretty amazing things about our individual selves and connection with reality/nature. But, of course, saying it like that sounds too "hippie-ish" - so it must be pseudo-science. Science-forbid that consciousness actually has a role to play in the universe. So let us all just disregard this incredible miracle and obvious fact of reality - possibly the only fact of reality we can deduce: consciousness occupies matter. Isn't that tell-tale enough about the nature of reality? Apparently not.

.


Image....great stuff...

:cheers: and :hiho: sweetpetrichor



....a man after my own heart..


.
.

.... so-called "free speech zones."..?...Image

.



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook