Try researching the reason why the physicists arrived at the above probability before saying that it's a guess on their part....
( hint;....read up on standard deviation and what 1 to 5 sigma probabilities mean in this context )

Ignorant journalists perpetuate the use of the term "God Particle".

Most physicists and others involved with research into the Higgs boson don't particularly like the term.

Nor does collecting old radios.

Science and technology are two different animals. They've only become related in the past few hundred years.

Science use to be called natural philosophy, and was a liberal art, practiced by gentlemen (aristocracy and rich merchants). Like philosophy, in general, its purely the pursuit of knowledge. There was never any intent to use that knowledge for anything practical.

Technology is, in short, tool making. It is almost purely practical, and performed my craftsmen. Knowledge in these crafts are learned thru long apprenticeships, and advancement achieved, by the vote of the respective guild (of masters).

Galileo, a rich merchant, did the foolish thing of performing scientific experiments. He only avoided being burned at the stake, because a buddy just happened to be the Pope. A whole new breed of natural philosophers discovered that the science of the ancients (read Aristotle, and company) was pure garbage, and came up with a lot of new ideas. Many put to the experiment. They also came out with the radical idea, that everything, including what the craftsmen made, could be described by science.

In turn, the craftsmen, many of whom, were also rich merchants, discovered that some of these scientific findings, could also be put to practical application. In particular electricity and magnetism, in the 1st half of the 19th century. While they were trying to put a nice polish on theories related to them, craftsmen found that they could put them to work, and make a little cash. From then on, the craftsman/merchant would always take a peek at what science was doing, and see if some money could be had. Science could predict the future, and that was better than a lottery ticket.

And some would say that that is the advantage of basic research of this type. Unfortunately, however, that advantage tends to disappear quickly.
-John

Well, I would suggest that discovery of a previously unproven principal in natural physics has everything to do with collecting old radios...

For certain I'm not a Physicist, however, what seems to stick in my mind if the particle can be controlled what does it mean to the term "anti-gravity". Without mass there can be no gravity. Could mass can be transported? What is the relationship of the Boson to a positron, anti-matter?

IMHO the Higgs Boson only answers one question, its existence, I would think it asks a great deal more...

Time will tell...

Chas

so... I suppose next they will discover that the earth is not flat... I, for one, ain't buyin it!

The fact that it has been speculated that something else has to be there to account for gravity for years and that they seem to have discovered the existence of such a thing as a confirmation of the speculation is great. It cost a ton of money. Well spent? Well we will find out in the future if there are any practical implications for day to day life. Perhaps we just spent a lot of money to support the effort. I find it exciting none the less.
The search for electronic communications from outer space seems to me a much bigger waste of time although most is being done by private groups. Gee if we really do get some signal suggesting intelligent life out there, it was probably sent hundreds of thousand years ago. Are they still there? Will we be still here if we ever get a response?
Advancing our understanding of the workings at the atomic level is interesting but expensive but such things as tubes and transistors were also a part of understanding how particles work.
This discovery may prove invaluable in the future, perhaps the far future if we are still here on our little "green" planet.

Jerry

Haha, it's like the chinese doll inside a doll. So that's the secret of the universe?
We did better back in the '60s experimenting with substances. At least we ended up with a product--some really cool music

Fascinating stuff, sub-atomic particles. Check out this video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG8g5JW64BA Physicist John Ellis uses some interesting analogies (snow for example) to explain the basic concepts.

Note the equations on his T shirt, be sure to solve for y.

Jack

Beam me up Scotty and lets hit Warp 8

Carl

The vacuum sustained in the LHC is harder than anywhere in the Solar System by a number of degrees of magnitude.

Ron.

+1

Besides actual "stuff", there's also an abundance of exteme radiation permeating throughout space. Our atmosphere and magnetic field blocks a large percentage of it, while the (relatively) little bit of dirt on top of the LHC blocks even a little more.

Having the collider out in space versus underground on Earth would be like taking a tanning lamp to the beach on a UV 10 day... and trying to not get sunburned.