Possibly a deist god?
Please note, I am not saying that this does prove a god, I am simply asking a question. I am concerned about this particle being referred to as "The God Particle".
Why is it called The God Particle? Is this an attempt to be very misleading or is there some other reason it was called this?
RE: "Where on this earth have we ever observed something being created from nothing? Life from non-life? It is a logical absurdity."
Life from non-life? How about mud and breath? That sounds a bit absurd too, doesn't it?
As for something being created from nothing being a logical absurdity, the quantum world is filled with logical absurdities and particles pop in and out of existence all of the time. Possibly you've lived in a Newtonian world too long to realize that there's another world on the sub-atomic level that is far more bizarre than anything Lewis G. Carroll could ever envision.
On the other hand, if we were to consider the biblical creation story, from whence would we believe the material that makes up the universe came? Either there's a stockpile of universe building blocks stashed somewhere, or it arose from nothing, but magically of course --
Brindle, you are falling for a trap that many people fall for, the problem that you and everybody else interested in this subject face is that your brain/mind is ill equipped to discuss matters on a quantum scale, or to discuss situations in which causality breaks down.
"Where on this earth have we ever observed something being created from nothing?"
The word created is ill suited for this kind of subject as created/creation already implies a "creator". Regardless, as far as we know, virtual particles pop in and out of existence (in our dimensions) all the time.
"are we able to prove where the Higgs Boson originated?"
Proof to what degree of certainty? Can we proof that the Higgs-Boson did or did not originate from within our universe?
Suppose that I were to say that we don't know, or that you demand a certainty that science cannot provide, what is your point?
Thing is, Brindle, you aren't challenging my ideals in the slightest. I didn't need science to realize that Christianity was malarkey - all I needed was a bible.
Essentially, Christianity asks one to believe that Jesus loves the world so much that he would give his life for us - except, of course, he did not give his life. We, however, MUST believe that he did or he will burn us alive for eternity. I feel I would have better chances forwarding that e-mail that promises me great karma if I do and anguish if I do not.
Your religion contradicts itself but somehow you find validation for it in the fact that science admits the limitations of its knowledge. You look at that horizon and extrapolate the ignorance beyond it as validation of your ignorance of everything this side of it. That's it.
So take your proselytizing elsewhere - it is not welcome here, as specified in the forum guidelines.
It's not a problem within Atheism, Brindle, and your suggestion that it is only misleads and proselytizes. Atheism is not science and science is not Atheism. Science, unlike religion, does not claim to have all the answers. Find your horizon of knowledge in any direction, quantum or astrological, and point to it. In doing so you fail to make a case either for invisible skymonsters or against lack of belief in invisible skymonsters.
Again, if you want to know more about the Higgs boson, I recommend you find a forum of physicists willing to answer your question.
"You simply want to ignore the giant problem of origin within atheism."
You sir, are seriously misinformed about atheism. Atheism by itself is nothing more than the position that belief in god(s) is not properly justified due to a lack of evidence.
Thus, atheism is not a positive statement of belief, a person that is an atheist can also be a naturalist/materialist etc.
Whatever the problem is that you think your god "solves" let us hear about it so that we can discuss it.
@Heather - he/she (the profile doesn't say) is right - though subtly implying, he/she has never mentioned religion, and thus, has violated no forum guidelines.
@brindle - RE: "the giant problem of origin within atheism." - possibly YOU see one, WE don't. While theists feel that all of the answers to life, the universe, and everything (42) lie within the Bible, atheists are quite comfortable saying, "I don't know," because they know the answer is out there somewhere, and given time and a little luck, they'll find it - but even if they don't, they'll enjoy the search. Sometimes the journey is more important than the destination.
For atheists, Neil Degrasse Tyson said it best: "God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance, that gets smaller and smaller as time goes on."
There is zero expectation from the Atheist community that a future discovery will disprove the idea of a creator. There is also zero expectation from the Atheist community that a future discovery with disprove the idea of an invisible pink unicorn.
To compare faith in an invisible skymonster, as a world view, to the choice to limit accepted truths to those which can be tested and observed to be true as a world view, is insulting. You essentially try to inject the idea that your backward, anachronistic ignorance is somehow just as valid as my knowledge. It's disgusting and that is why you face contempt for it.
RE: "there is a degree of "faith" being taken by the atheist community in simply hoping for a future discovery to disprove the idea of a creator."
Here, Brindle, is where you're entirely off-base - no atheist I know of is waiting for this, we're waiting for the idea to be proven.
RE: "I did not anticipate such venom as a response to what I thought would be an interesting discussion."
Yeah, well, Heather - love her like a sister - tends to pack a little more piss and vinegar than some of the rest of us --
(please don't hurt me, Heather!)
So I have a large bladder - what of it?
What does Three Mile Island have to do with anything?