Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Higg's Boson discovered

tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 9:09:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Thank you Jesus for revealing yet another secret of your beautiful Universe. Amen.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 9:11:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Every article I read on this has been filled with scientific jargon. Can someone give a laymen's term explanation of what this thing actually is?
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 9:18:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/4/2012 9:11:22 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
Every article I read on this has been filled with scientific jargon. Can someone give a laymen's term explanation of what this thing actually is?

So, the current model treats all particles as dimensionless points with absolutely no volume. In this model there really is no explanation for mass. Why are some particles more massive than others?

The Higg's boson is the explanation. The Higg's boson creates a field (Higg's field) which interacts with particles that gives themthe phenomenon of "mass."

Without Higgs no particles would have mass and we'd behave pretty much like photons.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 9:22:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/4/2012 9:21:35 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:18:57 PM, drafterman wrote:
Without Higgs no particles would have mass and we'd behave pretty much like photons.

At least then we'd finally lighten up.

Ba-dum tsss
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 9:45:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/4/2012 9:36:00 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:22:47 PM, tvellalott wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:21:35 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:18:57 PM, drafterman wrote:
Without Higgs no particles would have mass and we'd behave pretty much like photons.

At least then we'd finally lighten up.

Ba-dum tsss

http://myfacewhen.com...

Awesome site; I will be using it often.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 10:19:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/4/2012 9:18:57 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:11:22 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
Every article I read on this has been filled with scientific jargon. Can someone give a laymen's term explanation of what this thing actually is?

So, the current model treats all particles as dimensionless points with absolutely no volume. In this model there really is no explanation for mass. Why are some particles more massive than others?

The Higg's boson is the explanation. The Higg's boson creates a field (Higg's field) which interacts with particles that gives themthe phenomenon of "mass."

Without Higgs no particles would have mass and we'd behave pretty much like photons.

That makes sense. Pretty interesting.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/4/2012 11:18:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Sounds like it could open a possible way to travel at c; hypothetically, if one could detach these higgers from himself he could travel without any of the limiting effects.
Rob
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 12:24:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/4/2012 11:18:57 PM, Lasagna wrote:
Sounds like it could open a possible way to travel at c; hypothetically, if one could detach these higgers from himself he could travel without any of the limiting effects.

If we could control the resulting disintegration, then possibly yes.
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 12:29:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Btw, this was a good video explaining the essence of the issue. What a Higgs Boson is, and the implication of its discovery.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 5:23:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/4/2012 10:19:35 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:18:57 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:11:22 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
Every article I read on this has been filled with scientific jargon. Can someone give a laymen's term explanation of what this thing actually is?

So, the current model treats all particles as dimensionless points with absolutely no volume. In this model there really is no explanation for mass. Why are some particles more massive than others?

The Higg's boson is the explanation. The Higg's boson creates a field (Higg's field) which interacts with particles that gives themthe phenomenon of "mass."

Without Higgs no particles would have mass and we'd behave pretty much like photons.

That makes sense. Pretty interesting.

Well done drafterman.

Allow me to add that what's most important about this discovery is that it confirms the validity of the primary line of reasoning of the physics community for the last 40 years. Almost all leading edge physics during that time presumed that there was an original underlying symmetry in the universe, and that almost everything that followed was a matter of spontaneous broken symmetries. It was no secret in the physics community that there was no real reason to make this presumption other than the human minds insatiable hunger for symmetry and the resultant neat and orderly nature of consequent theories. This makes it astoundingly important because it says we didn't waste the last forty years, and most of what has been accomplished during that time will now be pretty certain to yield intended results.

Plus the entire physics community gets to start breathing again, they were pretty much holding their breath untill there was confirmation that they didn't completely pi$$ away thier entire physics career.

In case you are wondering what the down side of all this is...

The primary bad thing about it is that it will lead to a ton of new interest in String and M-Theory and people will start making the astoundingly false claim that it in some strange way validates String and M-Theory, which it doesn't by any stretch of the vain imagination. And that unfortunate development will mean that I will have to endure another round of all that unadulterated nonsense crap about String, and especially M-Theory, and I will have to spend the next couple years trying hard to hold back the associated gag reflex that this inane, pseudoscience, boatload of horse manure String and M-Theory nonsense brings about.

By the way, are there any M-Theorists in here? In case you are wondering, I kind of have an opinion about it.

Want to discuss?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 7:19:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/5/2012 5:23:55 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 7/4/2012 10:19:35 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:18:57 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:11:22 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
Every article I read on this has been filled with scientific jargon. Can someone give a laymen's term explanation of what this thing actually is?

So, the current model treats all particles as dimensionless points with absolutely no volume. In this model there really is no explanation for mass. Why are some particles more massive than others?

The Higg's boson is the explanation. The Higg's boson creates a field (Higg's field) which interacts with particles that gives themthe phenomenon of "mass."

Without Higgs no particles would have mass and we'd behave pretty much like photons.

That makes sense. Pretty interesting.

Well done drafterman.

Allow me to add that what's most important about this discovery is that it confirms the validity of the primary line of reasoning of the physics community for the last 40 years. Almost all leading edge physics during that time presumed that there was an original underlying symmetry in the universe, and that almost everything that followed was a matter of spontaneous broken symmetries. It was no secret in the physics community that there was no real reason to make this presumption other than the human minds insatiable hunger for symmetry and the resultant neat and orderly nature of consequent theories. This makes it astoundingly important because it says we didn't waste the last forty years, and most of what has been accomplished during that time will now be pretty certain to yield intended results.

Plus the entire physics community gets to start breathing again, they were pretty much holding their breath untill there was confirmation that they didn't completely pi$$ away thier entire physics career.

In case you are wondering what the down side of all this is...

The primary bad thing about it is that it will lead to a ton of new interest in String and M-Theory and people will start making the astoundingly false claim that it in some strange way validates String and M-Theory, which it doesn't by any stretch of the vain imagination. And that unfortunate development will mean that I will have to endure another round of all that unadulterated nonsense crap about String, and especially M-Theory, and I will have to spend the next couple years trying hard to hold back the associated gag reflex that this inane, pseudoscience, boatload of horse manure String and M-Theory nonsense brings about.

By the way, are there any M-Theorists in here? In case you are wondering, I kind of have an opinion about it.

Want to discuss?

I was about to ask what the implications are for Supersymmetric String Theory were. Based on my rather rudimentary understanding, I thought this would be a blow to it. As I understand it, String Theory provides its own explanation for the mass of particles. Particles are vibrating strings. The frequency of vibration corresponds to its energy, and energy translates to mass (E=MC^2). To me this says there is no need to posit an external particle (Higgs) to account for mass, mass is an inherent property of each string as a result of the frequency of its vibration.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 10:11:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Slow down, chief: http://www.sciencedaily.com...

"The next step will be to determine the precise nature of the particle and its significance for our understanding of the universe. Are its properties as expected for the long-sought Higgs boson, the final missing ingredient in the Standard Model of particle physics? Or is it something more exotic?"

Seems like there's more work to do before we know for sure!
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 10:17:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/5/2012 5:23:55 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 7/4/2012 10:19:35 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:18:57 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:11:22 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
Every article I read on this has been filled with scientific jargon. Can someone give a laymen's term explanation of what this thing actually is?

So, the current model treats all particles as dimensionless points with absolutely no volume. In this model there really is no explanation for mass. Why are some particles more massive than others?

The Higg's boson is the explanation. The Higg's boson creates a field (Higg's field) which interacts with particles that gives themthe phenomenon of "mass."

Without Higgs no particles would have mass and we'd behave pretty much like photons.

That makes sense. Pretty interesting.

Well done drafterman.

Allow me to add that what's most important about this discovery is that it confirms the validity of the primary line of reasoning of the physics community for the last 40 years. Almost all leading edge physics during that time presumed that there was an original underlying symmetry in the universe, and that almost everything that followed was a matter of spontaneous broken symmetries. It was no secret in the physics community that there was no real reason to make this presumption other than the human minds insatiable hunger for symmetry and the resultant neat and orderly nature of consequent theories. This makes it astoundingly important because it says we didn't waste the last forty years, and most of what has been accomplished during that time will now be pretty certain to yield intended results.

Plus the entire physics community gets to start breathing again, they were pretty much holding their breath untill there was confirmation that they didn't completely pi$$ away thier entire physics career.

In case you are wondering what the down side of all this is...

The primary bad thing about it is that it will lead to a ton of new interest in String and M-Theory and people will start making the astoundingly false claim that it in some strange way validates String and M-Theory, which it doesn't by any stretch of the vain imagination. And that unfortunate development will mean that I will have to endure another round of all that unadulterated nonsense crap about String, and especially M-Theory, and I will have to spend the next couple years trying hard to hold back the associated gag reflex that this inane, pseudoscience, boatload of horse manure String and M-Theory nonsense brings about.

By the way, are there any M-Theorists in here? In case you are wondering, I kind of have an opinion about it.

Want to discuss?

Could you explain (simply) how this discovery enables string theory? Is this what string theorists were waiting for? Do you not believe that vibrating strings are at the heart of matter like they do?
Rob
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 11:12:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/5/2012 5:23:55 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
In case you are wondering what the down side of all this is...

The primary bad thing about it is that it will lead to a ton of new interest in String and M-Theory and people will start making the astoundingly false claim that it in some strange way validates String and M-Theory, which it doesn't by any stretch of the vain imagination.
I'm with you on that one!

And that unfortunate development will mean that I will have to endure another round of all that unadulterated nonsense crap about String, and especially M-Theory, and I will have to spend the next couple years trying hard to hold back the associated gag reflex that this inane, pseudoscience, boatload of horse manure String and M-Theory nonsense brings about.
Lol! So you think that String Theories have NO place in physics at all?

By the way, are there any M-Theorists in here? In case you are wondering, I kind of have an opinion about it.
You know what they'll do (String Theorists): they will adjust the theory to fit this observation and then say, "this fits perfectly well with String Theory!"

However, I am not convinced yet (and neither are the results official) that the Higgs has been found.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 11:49:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/5/2012 7:19:35 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 7/5/2012 5:23:55 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 7/4/2012 10:19:35 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:18:57 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 7/4/2012 9:11:22 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
Every article I read on this has been filled with scientific jargon. Can someone give a laymen's term explanation of what this thing actually is?

So, the current model treats all particles as dimensionless points with absolutely no volume. In this model there really is no explanation for mass. Why are some particles more massive than others?

The Higg's boson is the explanation. The Higg's boson creates a field (Higg's field) which interacts with particles that gives themthe phenomenon of "mass."

Without Higgs no particles would have mass and we'd behave pretty much like photons.

That makes sense. Pretty interesting.

Well done drafterman.

Allow me to add that what's most important about this discovery is that it confirms the validity of the primary line of reasoning of the physics community for the last 40 years. Almost all leading edge physics during that time presumed that there was an original underlying symmetry in the universe, and that almost everything that followed was a matter of spontaneous broken symmetries. It was no secret in the physics community that there was no real reason to make this presumption other than the human minds insatiable hunger for symmetry and the resultant neat and orderly nature of consequent theories. This makes it astoundingly important because it says we didn't waste the last forty years, and most of what has been accomplished during that time will now be pretty certain to yield intended results.

Plus the entire physics community gets to start breathing again, they were pretty much holding their breath untill there was confirmation that they didn't completely pi$$ away thier entire physics career.

In case you are wondering what the down side of all this is...

The primary bad thing about it is that it will lead to a ton of new interest in String and M-Theory and people will start making the astoundingly false claim that it in some strange way validates String and M-Theory, which it doesn't by any stretch of the vain imagination. And that unfortunate development will mean that I will have to endure another round of all that unadulterated nonsense crap about String, and especially M-Theory, and I will have to spend the next couple years trying hard to hold back the associated gag reflex that this inane, pseudoscience, boatload of horse manure String and M-Theory nonsense brings about.

By the way, are there any M-Theorists in here? In case you are wondering, I kind of have an opinion about it.

Want to discuss?

I was about to ask what the implications are for Supersymmetric String Theory were. Based on my rather rudimentary understanding, I thought this would be a blow to it. As I understand it, String Theory provides its own explanation for the mass of particles. Particles are vibrating strings. The frequency of vibration corresponds to its energy, and energy translates to mass (E=MC^2). To me this says there is no need to posit an external particle (Higgs) to account for mass, mass is an inherent property of each string as a result of the frequency of its vibration.

Well, if you were to apply real science, mathematics, and logic...and were somewhat reality adjusted about the whole thing, then yes, the energies at which it was found, and the mass it was found to have, would sort of remove the primary motivation for having developed string theory in the first place. But fortunately for the string theory industry, and it is a massive industry now, none of those silly things really apply anymore. String theorists have their own special science, their own special mathematics and logic, and there's no real need to be reality adjusted because they have created their own special reality that they can adjust to their special science, mathematics, and logic.

String theory isn't even a theory by the way, it's a loose collection of five groups of speculative theories about the potential development of real theories some day, and they have aggregated those five groups of theories into a mega-theory called M-Theory, which is a speculative theory, about speculative theories, about potential theories, and it all comes packaged with a new and improved reality of eleven dimensions, seven more undetectable dimensions than the plain old four dimensions the real world has. It predicts roughly10 raised to the power of 520,000 different universes, each with a different physics and completely different laws of nature. To give you a feel for how many universes that is, the known visible universe is estimated to have around 10 raised to the power of 80 atoms in it. 10 to the 520,000 power is about as close to infinity as a number gets, and M-Theory predicts that many different universes, each with its own set of different physical laws, did I mention that already? OK, so they want to say M-Theory is a theory of everything, but it isn't, it's a theory of anything, which is pretty handy because anything imaginable can happen and you get to say it was predicted by M-Theory and therefore provides confirmation…and they actually have the audacity to call it science. (Excuse me, but I have to go gag and retch for a few minutes)

OK, I'm back, so where was I, oh yeah…so String/M Theory is pure speculative conjecture, nothing in String or M-Theory is the least bit confirmable, even theoretically, which also means there's nothing that can ever prove it's wrong either, which is pretty convenient, I just don't know how you can actually call it science. OK, I'm exaggerating a little bit, theoretically you actually could confirm M Theory, all you would have to do is build a collider about the size of the Milky Way Galaxy, and supply it with about the power of all the mass in the Milky Way Galaxy converted to energy….but I don't really think we should try to hold our breath till that happens

Here's an example of just how incredibly convenient String/M Theory is, and why the Higgs Boson announcement is going to boost the hype in the string theory business, and try my gag reflex for the next couple years. They have been finalizing the research, crunching the final numbers and getting ready to announce this Higgs Boson news for almost a year now, and under the circumstances they have done a great job of relatively keeping it a secret so they could get it released this week to the appropriate hype and fanfare, which it certainly deserves. But there were over 10,000 physicists actively involved in this discovery, and it hasn't been THAT secret, especially in the physics community, tidbits about what it was going to look like have been leaking out the entire time. By March of this year, all of the salient points of the announcement in terms of energies and mass were available in the general press, if you were looking hard and paying attention you pretty much knew what was coming. And guess what happened in April, just a month later? A group of string theorists selected one set of assumptions out of a possible 10,000 mentioned in the paper, to use their version of string theory to predict that if the Higgs Boson is discovered, it's calculated mass would be between 122 and 129 GeV (it came in at 125 or 126 GeV by the way, just like the March news reports said it would). This one month later April paper concluded that "If the prediction for the Higgs mass turns out to be correct, it would be an extremely important step forward in relating the string/M theory framework to the real world and would open up many opportunities for learning about the string vacuum we live in."

Excuse me, but I need to go retch for a few more minutes again…
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/5/2012 11:52:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
OK, I'm back again, so anyway, holy cow, these string theorists finally made a string theory prediction and it was one that could be confirmed even, and face it, there hasn't been such an uncanny coincidence since Lou Gehrig just happened to die from Lou Gehrig's disease…so it must be confirmation of string/M Theory. Is that convenient or what?

OK, now back to the Higgs boson discovery, anybody want to place a bet on who gets the Nobel Prize in Physics this year?

I'll take Peter Higgs.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/6/2012 12:06:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/5/2012 11:12:02 AM, tBoonePickens wrote:
At 7/5/2012 5:23:55 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
In case you are wondering what the down side of all this is...

The primary bad thing about it is that it will lead to a ton of new interest in String and M-Theory and people will start making the astoundingly false claim that it in some strange way validates String and M-Theory, which it doesn't by any stretch of the vain imagination.
I'm with you on that one!

And that unfortunate development will mean that I will have to endure another round of all that unadulterated nonsense crap about String, and especially M-Theory, and I will have to spend the next couple years trying hard to hold back the associated gag reflex that this inane, pseudoscience, boatload of horse manure String and M-Theory nonsense brings about.
Lol! So you think that String Theories have NO place in physics at all?

Well, they do have a place in physics, they just need to be placed in the circular file.

By the way, are there any M-Theorists in here? In case you are wondering, I kind of have an opinion about it.

You know what they'll do (String Theorists): they will adjust the theory to fit this observation and then say, "this fits perfectly well with String Theory!"

LOL, great minds think alike, see the post I just did, they already did that back in April.

However, I am not convinced yet (and neither are the results official) that the Higgs has been found.

Oh, I'm sure they found it, you don't go and spend 10+ billion dollars building a large hadron collider specifically to find the Higgs boson and then not find it. The numbers are still a little rough around the edges, but they have a truckload of statistical sandpaper over there at CERN, trust me, they will sand it down till it's nice and smooth.

There's no doubt in my mind they found it...and there are over ten billion reasons to believe that :)

Any takers on that Nobel Prize bet?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/6/2012 9:40:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/6/2012 12:06:41 AM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 7/5/2012 11:12:02 AM, tBoonePickens wrote:
Lol! So you think that String Theories have NO place in physics at all?
Well, they do have a place in physics, they just need to be placed in the circular file.
I see what you mean, but wouldn't a Theory Of Everything be inherently circular?

You know what they'll do (String Theorists): they will adjust the theory to fit this observation and then say, "this fits perfectly well with String Theory!"
LOL, great minds think alike, see the post I just did, they already did that back in April.
Hahaha! It wasn't the first nor the last time they'll do this, however. I like to call M-Theory the ultimate exercise in Cherry Picking, mostly because it's true but the reaction I get is rabid insults and the like. I find it odd that M-Theory has so many dogmatic adherents.

However, I am not convinced yet (and neither are the results official) that the Higgs has been found.
Oh, I'm sure they found it, you don't go and spend 10+ billion dollars building a large hadron collider specifically to find the Higgs boson and then not find it. The numbers are still a little rough around the edges, but they have a truckload of statistical sandpaper over there at CERN, trust me, they will sand it down till it's nice and smooth.
Maybe, but they have been touting "we ALMOST found it" every 3 to 4 months since the LHC came on line at CERN. As far as I'm concerned, this is just another "we almost found it," just as the press release says. But you are right that there is a TON of data that needs to be analyzed.

There's no doubt in my mind they found it...and there are over ten billion reasons to believe that :)
"We shall see," said the Zen master. We shall see.

It is possible that the Universe works without the Higgs. There are many Higgless theories out there.
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
tBoonePickens
Posts: 3,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2012 1:15:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/13/2012 11:37:48 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
That collider is giving me a hadron
It wasn't that funny the first time...
WOS
: At 10/3/2012 4:28:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
: Without nothing existing, you couldn't have something.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/17/2012 1:28:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
@Tboone,
Oh, I'm sure they found it, you don't go and spend 10+ billion dollars building a large hadron collider specifically to find the Higgs boson and then not find it. The numbers are still a little rough around the edges, but they have a truckload of statistical sandpaper over there at CERN, trust me, they will sand it down till it's nice and smooth.
Maybe, but they have been touting "we ALMOST found it" every 3 to 4 months since the LHC came on line at CERN. As far as I'm concerned, this is just another "we almost found it," just as the press release says. But you are right that there is a TON of data that needs to be analyzed.

This. I could not agree with this more.