Rumors of the Higgs discovery

[shunyadragon]

That is why it is irrational. How can't you get through an infinite number of turtles to get to the last one? You can't. And Shuny, there is a "last" turtle - that would be, by analogy, this present universe. Did you miss that?

I missed nothing. You are clueless concerning the math and physics concept of infinities. By the way I included a definition that addresses this. There is not a last turtle in an infinite progression of turtles nor an infinite progression of anything infinite. See the edited post with definition.

You may also provide a an academic source too if you can find one to support your assertion.

It is still nonsense - even today...

Your view is nonsense, especially today. Please provide some good math source to support your assertions.

[KBertsche]

It looks like they may release some more information on July 4:

CERN

Geneva, 22 June 2012. CERN will hold a scientific seminar at 9:00CEST on 4 July to deliver the latest update in the search for the Higgs boson. At this seminar, coming on the eve of this year’s major particle physics conference, ICHEP, in Melbourne, the ATLAS and CMS experiments will deliver the preliminary results of their 2012 data analysis.

© source where applicable

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/Press.../PR16.12E.html

[seer]

I missed nothing. You are clueless concerning the math and physics concept of infinities. By the way I included a definition that addresses this. There is not a last turtle in an infinite progression of turtles nor an infinite progression of anything infinite. See the edited post with definition.

You don't even understand what the woman was speaking to Russell about! The last turtle is this present universe, or the previous physical force that create this universe. With an infinite set of past turtles leading to this one. There is no infinite future that we know of so there clearly is a "last turtle."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down

"Turtles all the way down" is a jocular expression of the infinite regress problem in cosmology posed by the "unmoved mover" paradox. The phrase was popularized by Stephen Hawking in 1988. The "turtle" metaphor in the anecdote represents a popular notion of a "primitive cosmological myth", viz. the flat earth supported on the back of a World Turtle.

So there is a last turtle Homer...

You may also provide a an academic source too if you can find one to support your assertion.

No Shuny, if you think that infinite regression is rational please prove it. Not on paper, but what could actually happen in reality, how that could actually happen...






Your view is nonsense, especially today. Please provide some good math source to support your assertions.[/QUOTE]

[little_monkey]

It looks like they may release some more information on July 4:

CERN

Geneva, 22 June 2012. CERN will hold a scientific seminar at 9:00CEST on 4 July to deliver the latest update in the search for the Higgs boson. At this seminar, coming on the eve of this year’s major particle physics conference, ICHEP, in Melbourne, the ATLAS and CMS experiments will deliver the preliminary results of their 2012 data analysis.

© source where applicable

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/Press.../PR16.12E.html

I do hope that the SM higgs particle is confirmed. What will be interesting is if the data rules out any beyond SM theories, and which ones will remain standing. Scientific American has an interesting article on that:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...-lack-thereof/

[shunyadragon]

You don't even understand what the woman was speaking to Russell about! The last turtle is this present universe, or the previous physical force that create this universe. With an infinite set of past turtles leading to this one. There is no infinite future that we know of so there clearly is a "last turtle."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down

I disagree with what the woman is saying. Last turtle is an analogy that looks physically into the eternity of the past or physically into the infinite. In the reference you provided it does not refer to the future.

So there is a last turtle Homer...

Nope

No Shuny, if you think that infinite regression is rational please prove it. Not on paper, but what could actually happen in reality, how that could actually happen...

There is a sufficient explanation in the proofs of math. Your inability to conceive it is your problem of limited mental capacity.

It is a simple mental concept based on the definition of an infinite, and shown in the formula presented, regardless of whatever you conceive, whether a number or a turtle there is always one more. Infinities do not have a last anything by definition.

[seer]

I disagree with what the woman is saying. Last turtle is an analogy that looks physically into the eternity of the past or physically into the infinite. In the reference you provided it does not refer to the future.

Well Shuny you can disagree all you like that was what the analogy was about. And what Hume was speaking about - an infinite number of past events leading to this present universe, the last turtle is THIS present universe. Are you really this dense?

There is a sufficient explanation in the proofs of math. Your inability to conceive it is your problem of limited mental capacity.

It is a simple mental concept based on the definition of an infinite, and shown in the formula presented, regardless of whatever you conceive, whether a number or a turtle there is always one more. Infinities do not have a last anything by definition.

Again nonsense, show how it could be possible in reality. Hilbert’s Hotel is mathematically sound on paper but would be ludicrous in practice. A formula can be sound but have no application to reality, you have to show how infinite regression is physically possible.

[shunyadragon]

Well Shuny you can disagree all you like that was what the analogy was about. And what Hume was speaking about - an infinite number of past events leading to this present universe, the last turtle is THIS present universe. Are you really this dense?

No, I just turned it around to the perspective that it was intended. the first turtle supports our earth or our universe than 'turtles all the way down represents a analogy of an infinite past, there will always be another turtle beyond one you could imagine either in the time sense pr in the analogy of supporting our universe by a turtle.

Again nonsense, show how it could be possible in reality. Hilbert’s Hotel is mathematically sound on paper but would be ludicrous in practice. A formula can be sound but have no application to reality, you have to show how infinite regression is physically possible.

It is physically possible, there will always be one turtle or number beyond what you could imagine, and the formula reflects. The limits of your imagination do not reflect true limits on infinities.

[seer]

No, I just turned it around to the perspective that it was intended. the first turtle supports our earth or our universe than 'turtles all the way down represents a analogy of an infinite past, there will always be another turtle beyond one you could imagine either in the time sense pr in the analogy of supporting our universe by a turtle.

Then there was a LAST turtle in the the analogy. Which you denied. Yes, there is an infinite number of turtles supporting it - but like Hume suggested, that is irrational.

It is physically possible, there will always be one turtle or number beyond what you could imagine, and the formula reflects. The limits of your imagination do not reflect true limits on infinities.

What are you talking about? HOW is it physically possible? How could Hilbert’s Hotel be rational in reality, even though it is on paper? You wanted to look backwards with the turtle analogy - let's - if you started to walk down the infinite line of turtles would it be possible to reach all the turtles? Of course not, the idea is nonsense, even given an eternity of time. Yet you are willing to believe that we could go through an infinite number of past events to get to this present universe. No - it is just as nonsensical.

[OmniSkeptical]

I think discussing calculus would be more educational. Infinities are limits, not numbers by the way.

[Chrawnus]

I think discussing calculus would be more educational. Infinities are limits, not numbers by the way.

I've always thought of infinities as "unlimits".

[OmniSkeptical]

I've always thought of infinities as "unlimits".

Fair enough, but I like comparing them to the exact opposite zeroes.

[shunyadragon]

I think discussing calculus would be more educational. Infinities are limits, not numbers by the way.

correct!!!!

[lao tzu]

They're used in limits, but they're actually cardinals and ordinals.

[JimL]

If you think of infinity as being one thing rather than many things/turtles, then you needn't argue about there being a last one. It may be that, as I argued in another thread, that there is no such thing as nothing, or that empty space is what we refer to as nothing, and that this nothingness, this empty space is itself infinite.

[lao tzu]