Of course, the Nobel Prize was awarded anyway. 13+ billion Euros have to be
justified, as well as more than 20 years building the CERN LHC. Now, they
need a larger LHC to find out what such boson actually is.

Some facts:

1) Theorized 60 years ago, the Higgs boson and the Higgs field are required to
complete the Standard Model.

2) Once theorized as the boson that gave MASS to every other particle, now
it's only considered for particles more massive than electrons. Actually, the
Higgs boson (measured as 125 times more massive than a proton) is not that
important. What really matter is the Higgs field that the boson creates,
because the whole universe depends on it. Particles gain mass by traveling
through the Higgs field. It means that such field HAS TO BE everywhere.

3) It has been CALCULATED that the decay time of the boson is 10E-22 s,
but it CAN'T BE MEASURED. Also, there are no theories (or there are tens
of thousand theories) about which particles emerge from such decay. It's
believed that even "dark matter" particles can be part of the decay.

4) The Higgs boson is the particle that gives all other fundamental particles mass, according to the standard model of particle physics. However, despite the work of thousands of researchers around the world, nobody has been able to figure out exactly how it does that or why some particles are more massive than others. It's suggested that there are MANY TYPES of Higgs
boson, maybe one per elementary particle. It has been "observed" that
PART OF THE DECAY are two muons, but nobody knows why.

5) The mystery of why particles have different masses remains completely unanswered. Nevertheless, experimental results have been entirely in line with the standard model. “We have removed scenarios, but we don’t have an explanation yet,” says Blekman. “But this is what particle physics is about – we have tens of thousands of predictions, and we have to eliminate them.”

6) "We" know that the Higgs boson HAS NO SPIN. It's the only elementary
particle without spin. This is ESSENTIAL for the spacetime fabric of the
universe TO BE RELATIVELY STABLE......

7) The Higgs boson behaves as special relativity dictates.

Physicists have a massive problem as Higgs boson refuses to misbehave
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2251285-physicists-have-a-massive-problem-as-higgs-boson-refuses-to-misbehave/

10 years after the discovery of the Higgs boson, physicists still can't get enough of the 'God particle'
https://www.space.com/higgs-boson-discovery-10th-anniversary

And this is what parasitic physics is: a bunch of crooks that make Einstein
to appear as a Saint.

And they want MORE MONEY. 23 billion Euros, actually.

Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> Of course, the Nobel Prize was awarded anyway. 13+ billion Euros have to be
> justified, as well as more than 20 years building the CERN LHC. Now, they
> need a larger LHC to find out what such boson actually is.
>
> Some facts:
>
> 1) Theorized 60 years ago, the Higgs boson and the Higgs field are required to
> complete the Standard Model.
>
> 2) Once theorized as the boson that gave MASS to every other particle, now
> it's only considered for particles more massive than electrons. Actually, the
> Higgs boson (measured as 125 times more massive than a proton) is not that
> important. What really matter is the Higgs field that the boson creates,
> because the whole universe depends on it. Particles gain mass by traveling
> through the Higgs field. It means that such field HAS TO BE everywhere.
>
> 3) It has been CALCULATED that the decay time of the boson is 10E-22 s,
> but it CAN'T BE MEASURED. Also, there are no theories (or there are tens
> of thousand theories) about which particles emerge from such decay. It's
> believed that even "dark matter" particles can be part of the decay.
>
> 4) The Higgs boson is the particle that gives all other fundamental particles mass, according to the standard model of particle physics. However, despite the work of thousands of researchers around the world, nobody has been able to figure out exactly how it does that or why some particles are more massive than others. It's suggested that there are MANY TYPES of Higgs
> boson, maybe one per elementary particle. It has been "observed" that
> PART OF THE DECAY are two muons, but nobody knows why.
>
> 5) The mystery of why particles have different masses remains completely unanswered. Nevertheless, experimental results have been entirely in line with the standard model. “We have removed scenarios, but we don’t have an explanation yet,” says Blekman. “But this is what particle physics is about – we have tens of thousands of predictions, and we have to eliminate them.”
>
> 6) "We" know that the Higgs boson HAS NO SPIN. It's the only elementary
> particle without spin. This is ESSENTIAL for the spacetime fabric of the
> universe TO BE RELATIVELY STABLE......
>
> 7) The Higgs boson behaves as special relativity dictates.
>
> Physicists have a massive problem as Higgs boson refuses to misbehave
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/2251285-physicists-have-a-massive-problem-as-higgs-boson-refuses-to-misbehave/
>
> 10 years after the discovery of the Higgs boson, physicists still can't get enough of the 'God particle'
> https://www.space.com/higgs-boson-discovery-10th-anniversary
>
> And this is what parasitic physics is: a bunch of crooks that make Einstein
> to appear as a Saint.
>
> And they want MORE MONEY. 23 billion Euros, actually.

"Now, they
need a larger LHC to find out what such boson actually is."

They only plug the LHC in when reporters show up...

dats if they can remember where the cord is.

"Where do you plug it in????"

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
the unchallengeable.

And 126 years after the discovery of the electron, physicists don't know what is it, either.

EXCERPTS:

The Higgs boson also gets its mass from interacting with ITSELF. And measurements by the LHC have shown that the Higgs boson has a high mass as well: 125GeV, which is about 125 times more massive than one of the positively charged protons at an atom's core. (Thanks to Einstein's special relativity, particle physicists know that mass and energy are interchangeable.
......
The reason why the Higgs boson has no spin when every other known particle does is because of the nature of the Higgs field. Unlike the gravitational and electromagnetic fields, which have obvious sources such as an object's mass or an electric current passing through magnetic fields, the Higgs field has no source. It's just there, a non-localized part of the cosmos pervading everything. As such it is coupled to the 'vacuum,' the very fabric of space-time, and therefore the field shares the vacuum's properties.
........
However, the vacuum isn't inert. Particles fizz in and out of existence thanks to quantum fluctuations, raising the energy level of the vacuum above its lowest possible state. ..... What keeps the universe from succumbing to the inevitable urge to drop energy levels is the shape of what scientists characterize as the energy potential of the Higgs field.
.......
Physicists call our vacuum a 'false' vacuum, because it 'wants' to decay to a lower energy — a 'truer' vacuum. The valleys and hills of the Higgs field's energy potential are holding our universe in this false vacuum, long enough for planets, stars and galaxies to form.
.......
In addition to the Higgs boson's spin, researchers have spent the past decade trying to pin down its life span. The Higgs boson existence is fleeting; the standard model predicts that a Higgs boson survives for a tiny amount of time, just 10^–22 seconds, before breaking apart into more subatomic particles. However, this calculation hasn't been experimentally verified yet. "It happens so quickly," Martin said.
........

More imbecilities here:

https://www.space.com/higgs-boson-discovery-10th-anniversary

What is matter made of?

We know matter is made up atoms, and atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons. And we know that protons and neutrons are made up of smaller particles known as quarks. Would probing deeper uncover particles even more fundamental? We don't know for sure.

We do have something called the Standard Model of particle physics, which is very good at explaining the interactions between subatomic particles. The Standard Model has also been used to predict the existence of previously unknown particles. The last particle to be found this way was the Higgs boson, which LHC researchers discovered in 2012.

But there’s a hitch.

“The Standard Model doesn’t explain everything,” says Dr. Don Lincoln, a particle physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) near Chicago. “It doesn’t explain why the Higgs boson exists. It doesn’t explain in detail why the Higgs boson has the mass that it does.”

In fact, the Higgs turned out to be a heck of a lot less massive than predicted — theory had held that it would be about “a quadrillion times heavier than it is,” says Lincoln.

The mysteries don’t end there. Atoms are known to be electrically neutral — the positive charge of the protons is cancelled out by the negative charge of the electrons — but as to why this is so, Lincoln says, “Nobody knows.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics

On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
>
>
> What is matter made of?
>
> We know matter is made up atoms, and atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons. And we know that protons and neutrons are made up of smaller particles known as quarks. Would probing deeper uncover particles even more fundamental? We don't know for sure.

> We do have something called the Standard Model of particle physICS

The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
correct only within some range or another.

which is very good at explaining the interactions between subatomic
particles. The Standard Model has also been used to predict the
existence of previously unknown particles. The last particle to be found
this way was the Higgs boson, which LHC researchers discovered in 2012.
>
> But there’s a hitch.
>
> “The Standard Model doesn’t explain everything,” says Dr. Don Lincoln, a particle physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) near Chicago. “It doesn’t explain why the Higgs boson exists. It doesn’t explain in detail why the Higgs boson has the mass that it does.”
>
> In fact, the Higgs turned out to be a heck of a lot less massive than predicted — theory had held that it would be about “a quadrillion times heavier than it is,” says Lincoln.
>
> The mysteries don’t end there. Atoms are known to be electrically neutral — the positive charge of the protons is cancelled out by the negative charge of the electrons — but as to why this is so, Lincoln says, “Nobody knows.”
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics
>
>

whodat wrote:

> On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
>> What is matter made of?
>
> The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
> models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
> correct only within some range or another.

you fucking imbecile. The matter is made of fields. Models has nothing to
do with. You fucking imbecile.

On 5/11/2023 5:25 PM, Domingo Vassilopulos wrote:
> whodat wrote:
>
>> On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>> What is matter made of?
>>
>> The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
>> models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
>> correct only within some range or another.
>
> you fucking imbecile. The matter is made of fields. Models has nothing to
> do with. You fucking imbecile.

You're so stupid that you don't know that a "field" is just
another model. No matter how much you play with yourself
that tiny peepee "field" of yours isn't going to get bigger.

whodat wrote:

> On 5/11/2023 5:25 PM, Domingo Vassilopulos wrote:
>> whodat wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>>> What is matter made of?
>>>
>>> The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
>>> models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
>>> correct only within some range or another.
>>
>> you fucking imbecile. The matter is made of fields. Models has nothing
>> to do with. You fucking imbecile.
>
> Y̶o̶u̶'r̶e̶ s̶o̶ s̶t̶u̶p̶i̶d̶ t̶h̶a̶t̶ y̶o̶u̶ d̶o̶n̶'t̶ k̶n̶o̶w̶ t̶h̶a̶t̶ a̶ "f̶i̶e̶l̶d̶" i̶s̶ j̶u̶s̶t̶ a̶n̶o̶t̶h̶e̶r̶
> m̶o̶d̶e̶l̶. N̶o̶ m̶a̶t̶t̶e̶r̶ h̶o̶w̶ m̶u̶c̶h̶ y̶o̶u̶ p̶l̶a̶y̶ w̶i̶t̶h̶ y̶o̶u̶r̶s̶e̶l̶f̶

models are human construction, you fucking uneducated imbecile. It has
nothing to do with the *_constitution_of_matter_*. You unskilled braindead
cretin. What a mouth on your face.

On 5/11/2023 6:02 PM, Domingo Vassilopulos wrote:
> whodat wrote:
>
>> On 5/11/2023 5:25 PM, Domingo Vassilopulos wrote:
>>> whodat wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>>>> What is matter made of?
>>>>
>>>> The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
>>>> models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
>>>> correct only within some range or another.
>>>
>>> you fucking imbecile. The matter is made of fields. Models has nothing
>>> to do with. You fucking imbecile.
>>
>> Y̶o̶u̶'r̶e̶ s̶o̶ s̶t̶u̶p̶i̶d̶ t̶h̶a̶t̶ y̶o̶u̶ d̶o̶n̶'t̶ k̶n̶o̶w̶ t̶h̶a̶t̶ a̶ "f̶i̶e̶l̶d̶" i̶s̶ j̶u̶s̶t̶ a̶n̶o̶t̶h̶e̶r̶
>> m̶o̶d̶e̶l̶. N̶o̶ m̶a̶t̶t̶e̶r̶ h̶o̶w̶ m̶u̶c̶h̶ y̶o̶u̶ p̶l̶a̶y̶ w̶i̶t̶h̶ y̶o̶u̶r̶s̶e̶l̶f̶
>
> models are human construction, you fucking uneducated imbecile. It has
> nothing to do with the *_constitution_of_matter_*. You unskilled braindead
> cretin. What a mouth on your face.

The only thing smaller than your peepee is your brain, and they're both
dead.

On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote:
> On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> >
> >
> > What is matter made of?
> >
> > We know matter is made up atoms, and atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons. And we know that protons and neutrons are made up of smaller particles known as quarks. Would probing deeper uncover particles even more fundamental? We don't know for sure.
> > We do have something called the Standard Model of particle physICS
>
>
> The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
> models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
> correct only within some range or another.
> which is very good at explaining the interactions between subatomic
> particles. The Standard Model has also been used to predict the
> existence of previously unknown particles. The last particle to be found
> this way was the Higgs boson, which LHC researchers discovered in 2012.
> >
> > But there’s a hitch.
> >
> > “The Standard Model doesn’t explain everything,” says Dr. Don Lincoln, a particle physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) near Chicago. “It doesn’t explain why the Higgs boson exists. It doesn’t explain in detail why the Higgs boson has the mass that it does.”
> >
> > In fact, the Higgs turned out to be a heck of a lot less massive than predicted — theory had held that it would be about “a quadrillion times heavier than it is,” says Lincoln.
> >
> > The mysteries don’t end there. Atoms are known to be electrically neutral — the positive charge of the protons is cancelled out by the negative charge of the electrons — but as to why this is so, Lincoln says, “Nobody knows.”
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics
> >
> >

Matter? RIKEN BNL Research Center, from US gov. affirm that:

- Matter is composed of atoms.
- Atoms are composed of electrons and the nucleon, and are electrically neutral.
- The nucleon is composed by protons and neutrons.
- Both of them are composed by three quarks, which are bonded together by the gluon force.
- The quarks in nucleon are rather loosely coupled by gluon, which increase its strength on any attempt to separate the quarks.
- This “Strong Force" is described through QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics). Such Strong Force "confine" quarks in the nucleon.
- This Strong Force has a property called “asymptotic freedom”. The force is relatively weak when quarks are close together, and becomes
stronger when they are further apart (Nobel Prize 2004, Gross, Politzer, and Wilczek). This property along with the prediction of “parity
symmetry breaking” (Nobel Prize 2008, Lee and Yang) are two of the foundations of contemporary particle and nuclear physics.
- Lattice QCD is an approach to solve the QCD theory of quarks and gluons. It is a lattice gauge theory formulated on a grid or lattice of
points in space and time. When the size of the lattice is taken infinitely large and its sites infinitesimally close to each other, the
continuum QCD is recovered.
- Lattice Quantum Chromodynamics (LQCD) models require enormous computing power in supercomputers to work. Current hardware,
which is specifically designed, reach 1,000 Teraflops (IBM), but it's not even close to what physicists are asking. Project with near
1 million cores from 16,000 GPU are being developed. The objective is to render, in real time, the process of lattice working.

- One group of physicists think that quarks are made by small particles (peons), which seems to be an endless proposal of infinitesimal
partition of "matter". Reasons are "just because", which is not very scientific.

Meanwhile, problems like how a bicycle works or why ice is slippery remain unsolved.

Who/what are you answering here? None of my text is included although
I am referred to at the top.

On 5/11/2023 8:07 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote:
>> On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> What is matter made of?
>>>
>>> We know matter is made up atoms, and atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons. And we know that protons and neutrons are made up of smaller particles known as quarks. Would probing deeper uncover particles even more fundamental? We don't know for sure.
>>> We do have something called the Standard Model of particle physICS
>>
>>
>> The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
>> models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
>> correct only within some range or another.
>> which is very good at explaining the interactions between subatomic
>> particles. The Standard Model has also been used to predict the
>> existence of previously unknown particles. The last particle to be found
>> this way was the Higgs boson, which LHC researchers discovered in 2012.
>>>
>>> But there’s a hitch.
>>>
>>> “The Standard Model doesn’t explain everything,” says Dr. Don Lincoln, a particle physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) near Chicago. “It doesn’t explain why the Higgs boson exists. It doesn’t explain in detail why the Higgs boson has the mass that it does.”
>>>
>>> In fact, the Higgs turned out to be a heck of a lot less massive than predicted — theory had held that it would be about “a quadrillion times heavier than it is,” says Lincoln.
>>>
>>> The mysteries don’t end there. Atoms are known to be electrically neutral — the positive charge of the protons is cancelled out by the negative charge of the electrons — but as to why this is so, Lincoln says, “Nobody knows.”
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics
>>>
>>>
>
>
> Matter? RIKEN BNL Research Center, from US gov. affirm that:
>
> - Matter is composed of atoms.
> - Atoms are composed of electrons and the nucleon, and are electrically neutral.
> - The nucleon is composed by protons and neutrons.
> - Both of them are composed by three quarks, which are bonded together by the gluon force.
> - The quarks in nucleon are rather loosely coupled by gluon, which increase its strength on any attempt to separate the quarks.
> - This “Strong Force" is described through QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics). Such Strong Force "confine" quarks in the nucleon.
> - This Strong Force has a property called “asymptotic freedom”. The force is relatively weak when quarks are close together, and becomes
> stronger when they are further apart (Nobel Prize 2004, Gross, Politzer, and Wilczek). This property along with the prediction of “parity
> symmetry breaking” (Nobel Prize 2008, Lee and Yang) are two of the foundations of contemporary particle and nuclear physics.
> - Lattice QCD is an approach to solve the QCD theory of quarks and gluons. It is a lattice gauge theory formulated on a grid or lattice of
> points in space and time. When the size of the lattice is taken infinitely large and its sites infinitesimally close to each other, the
> continuum QCD is recovered.
> - Lattice Quantum Chromodynamics (LQCD) models require enormous computing power in supercomputers to work. Current hardware,
> which is specifically designed, reach 1,000 Teraflops (IBM), but it's not even close to what physicists are asking. Project with near
> 1 million cores from 16,000 GPU are being developed. The objective is to render, in real time, the process of lattice working.
>
> - One group of physicists think that quarks are made by small particles (peons), which seems to be an endless proposal of infinitesimal
> partition of "matter". Reasons are "just because", which is not very scientific.
>
> Meanwhile, problems like how a bicycle works or why ice is slippery remain unsolved.
>

On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 10:28:25 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote:
> Who/what are you answering here? None of my text is included although
> I am referred to at the top.
> On 5/11/2023 8:07 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote:
> >> On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> What is matter made of?
> >>>
> >>> We know matter is made up atoms, and atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons. And we know that protons and neutrons are made up of smaller particles known as quarks. Would probing deeper uncover particles even more fundamental? We don't know for sure.
> >>> We do have something called the Standard Model of particle physICS
> >>
> >>
> >> The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
> >> models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
> >> correct only within some range or another.
> >> which is very good at explaining the interactions between subatomic
> >> particles. The Standard Model has also been used to predict the
> >> existence of previously unknown particles. The last particle to be found
> >> this way was the Higgs boson, which LHC researchers discovered in 2012..
> >>>
> >>> But there’s a hitch.
> >>>
> >>> “The Standard Model doesn’t explain everything,” says Dr. Don Lincoln, a particle physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) near Chicago. “It doesn’t explain why the Higgs boson exists. It doesn’t explain in detail why the Higgs boson has the mass that it does.”
> >>>
> >>> In fact, the Higgs turned out to be a heck of a lot less massive than predicted — theory had held that it would be about “a quadrillion times heavier than it is,” says Lincoln.
> >>>
> >>> The mysteries don’t end there. Atoms are known to be electrically neutral — the positive charge of the protons is cancelled out by the negative charge of the electrons — but as to why this is so, Lincoln says, “Nobody knows.”
> >>>
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> > Matter? RIKEN BNL Research Center, from US gov. affirm that:
> >
> > - Matter is composed of atoms.
> > - Atoms are composed of electrons and the nucleon, and are electrically neutral.
> > - The nucleon is composed by protons and neutrons.
> > - Both of them are composed by three quarks, which are bonded together by the gluon force.
> > - The quarks in nucleon are rather loosely coupled by gluon, which increase its strength on any attempt to separate the quarks.
> > - This “Strong Force" is described through QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics). Such Strong Force "confine" quarks in the nucleon.
> > - This Strong Force has a property called “asymptotic freedom”. The force is relatively weak when quarks are close together, and becomes
> > stronger when they are further apart (Nobel Prize 2004, Gross, Politzer, and Wilczek). This property along with the prediction of “parity
> > symmetry breaking” (Nobel Prize 2008, Lee and Yang) are two of the foundations of contemporary particle and nuclear physics.
> > - Lattice QCD is an approach to solve the QCD theory of quarks and gluons. It is a lattice gauge theory formulated on a grid or lattice of
> > points in space and time. When the size of the lattice is taken infinitely large and its sites infinitesimally close to each other, the
> > continuum QCD is recovered.
> > - Lattice Quantum Chromodynamics (LQCD) models require enormous computing power in supercomputers to work. Current hardware,
> > which is specifically designed, reach 1,000 Teraflops (IBM), but it's not even close to what physicists are asking. Project with near
> > 1 million cores from 16,000 GPU are being developed. The objective is to render, in real time, the process of lattice working.
> >
> > - One group of physicists think that quarks are made by small particles (peons), which seems to be an endless proposal of infinitesimal
> > partition of "matter". Reasons are "just because", which is not very scientific.
> >
> > Meanwhile, problems like how a bicycle works or why ice is slippery remain unsolved.
> >

I was replying to your post, adding more content.

My mistake that I didn't address it properly.

Richard Hertz wrote:
>
> On Thursday, May 11, 2023 at 7:23:23 PM UTC-3, whodat wrote:
> > On 5/11/2023 5:08 PM, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > What is matter made of?
> > >
> > > We know matter is made up atoms, and atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons. And we know that protons and neutrons are made up of smaller particles known as quarks. Would probing deeper uncover particles even more fundamental? We don't know for sure.
> > > We do have something called the Standard Model of particle physICS
> >
> >
> > The key word is "MODEL." The real answer is, "we do not know." All
> > models are predictive of behavior, nothing more. Models tend to be
> > correct only within some range or another.
> > which is very good at explaining the interactions between subatomic
> > particles. The Standard Model has also been used to predict the
> > existence of previously unknown particles. The last particle to be found
> > this way was the Higgs boson, which LHC researchers discovered in 2012.
> > >
> > > But there’s a hitch.
> > >
> > > “The Standard Model doesn’t explain everything,” says Dr. Don Lincoln, a particle physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) near Chicago. “It doesn’t explain why the Higgs boson exists. It doesn’t explain in detail why the Higgs boson has the mass that it does.”
> > >
> > > In fact, the Higgs turned out to be a heck of a lot less massive than predicted — theory had held that it would be about “a quadrillion times heavier than it is,” says Lincoln.
> > >
> > > The mysteries don’t end there. Atoms are known to be electrically neutral — the positive charge of the protons is cancelled out by the negative charge of the electrons — but as to why this is so, Lincoln says, “Nobody knows.”
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics
> > >
> > >
>
> Matter? RIKEN BNL Research Center, from US gov. affirm that:
>
> - Matter is composed of atoms.
> - Atoms are composed of electrons and the nucleon, and are electrically neutral.
> - The nucleon is composed by protons and neutrons.
> - Both of them are composed by three quarks, which are bonded together by the gluon force.
> - The quarks in nucleon are rather loosely coupled by gluon, which increase its strength on any attempt to separate the quarks.
> - This “Strong Force" is described through QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics). Such Strong Force "confine" quarks in the nucleon.
> - This Strong Force has a property called “asymptotic freedom”. The force is relatively weak when quarks are close together, and becomes
> stronger when they are further apart (Nobel Prize 2004, Gross, Politzer, and Wilczek). This property along with the prediction of “parity
> symmetry breaking” (Nobel Prize 2008, Lee and Yang) are two of the foundations of contemporary particle and nuclear physics.
> - Lattice QCD is an approach to solve the QCD theory of quarks and gluons. It is a lattice gauge theory formulated on a grid or lattice of
> points in space and time. When the size of the lattice is taken infinitely large and its sites infinitesimally close to each other, the
> continuum QCD is recovered.
> - Lattice Quantum Chromodynamics (LQCD) models require enormous computing power in supercomputers to work. Current hardware,
> which is specifically designed, reach 1,000 Teraflops (IBM), but it's not even close to what physicists are asking. Project with near
> 1 million cores from 16,000 GPU are being developed. The objective is to render, in real time, the process of lattice working.
>
> - One group of physicists think that quarks are made by small particles (peons), which seems to be an endless proposal of infinitesimal
> partition of "matter". Reasons are "just because", which is not very scientific.
>
> Meanwhile, problems like how a bicycle works or why ice is slippery remain unsolved.

Because it is, in the case of ice, when you stand on it.. the pressure
melts the ice a little bit so you get a sort of instantaneous
water surface on which you’re slipping. Because water expands when it
freezes, so the pressure tries to undo the expansion and melts it.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
the unchallengeable.

Richard Hertz wrote:
> Matter? RIKEN BNL Research Center, from US gov. affirm that:
> - Matter is composed of atoms.
> - Atoms are composed of electrons and the nucleon, and are electrically
> neutral.

lol, the nazi fictitious "ukraine" calls *_capitalist_america_* for
*_liars_*. Give me a break. All those milliards in
*_capitalist_dollars_$_*, for what??

*_Kiev_comments_on_Zelensky_Eurovision_speech_ban_*
https://%72%74.com/pop-culture/576171-zelensky-eurovision-speech-ban/

“The *_Times_information_does_not_correspond_to_reality_*,” Zelensky’s
spokesperson, Sergey Nikiforov, claimed in a Facebook post on Friday. “The
Office of the President of Ukraine did not address the organizers of the
Eurovision Song Contest to offer Vladimir Zelensky’s online performance
during the finals or at any other stage of the contest.”

In a statement published on its website on Thursday, the EBU said it could
not allow Zelensky to make any political statements during the event,
insisting that the Eurovision Song Contest is an entertainment show and is
non-political by nature.

“The request by Mr Zelensky to address the audience at the Eurovision Song
Contest, whilst made with laudable intentions, regrettably cannot be
granted by the European Broadcasting Union management as it would be
*_against_the_rules_of_the_event_*,” the statement said.