Bmpbmp1975

Just now, iNow said:

You likely have far less 

Thanks for the update 

1 hour ago, Ghideon said:

Here is a recent comment on the latest data:

Posted on 22 Feb 2020, source: http://www.astronomerstelegram.org/?read=13512. At the link more details are available about the specific measurements allowing the above statement to be made.

 

Do you think it would ever get as bright as before 

53 minutes ago, MigL said:

Sorry about your mom and your childhood.

If you mean that the Higgs boson was found to decay, SO WHAT ???
If you mean that a mass instability was found ( which no-one else has heard about ) and is about to cause vacuum decay, please START an appropriate thread and post the QUOTE and LINK to a reputable article.

( emphasizing all capitalized words, n case you don't understand )

open it so it can get closed no 
 

It doesn’t matter anymore 

we only have months to go 

7 minutes ago, MigL said:

I leave it up to you to decide which post was the lie.
( apparently the emoji didn't give you a clue )

But I notice you still haven't answered the question...

 what exactly was found at the LHC that would lead you to believe this ?

That the Higgs was found at an unstable condition

it dosent matter since vacuum decay is months away

and I am sorry responses to my posts are mixed with answers, jokes, insults and even at one point and insult about my mom not caring enough for me , btw my mom died when I was 6 months old so I never had the chance to actually know her 

5 minutes ago, MigL said:

So maybe start working to understand these simple things, before trying to understand the 'death' of the Universe.
Just a thought.

I am trying to learn but you just said we are months away from vacuum decay 

so I am right in saying it’s going to happen in our lifetime.

so your post before was a lie

So, not very possible, at all.
But what exactly was found at the LHC that would lead you to believe this ?

1 minute ago, MigL said:

Yes you are  .
Put your affairs in order and pray to you God(s).
And let's please move on.

I am not sure if your serious or being sarcastic 

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

 

 

By the way, you are right  .
There is a conspiracy, on this forum, to keep the truth from you, and that is why your threads on vacuum decay keep getting shut down.
The truth is the vacuum is only months away from decay, and it will destroy the universe.
But that won't matter to any of us, since Betelguese will go supernova next week, and destroy all life on Earth.

What? So I am right then ?

4 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

Here are a new forecast for Betelgeuse. Not much has changed. The statistics states, according to my interpretation, that the probability for brightening has increased slightly since yesterday. But it is still not conclusive.

Source, again, is https://twitter.com/betelbot

 

 

 

 

 

Because vacuum decay of the universe will occur long before we have moved this Betelgeuse discussion forward. You need to at least show some kind of attempt at analysing and understanding detailed answers from other members. This is off topic, please open another tread for discussing moderation. There is a separate section available.

What?

Because vacuum decay of the universe will occur long before we have moved this Betelgeuse discussion

Just now, Ghideon said:

It may be because we are on a discussion site. When the discussion is at a standstill and no progress seem possible the threads are sometimes closed. 

If you improve your ability to analyse members' answers and also to add content that actually contributes to the discussion of topic then more of the threads will remain open.

How was it at a standstill if I asked a question to a comment I didn’t understand 

So I am told to start a new post if I want to talk about vacuum decay and probability I do and the post get closed with no reason. 
 

i do not understand what is the issue or being hidden 

48 minutes ago, Sensei said:

e.g. you have one radioactive atom.

Probability of decaying it ever is 100%. But you don't know when it will happen. But again you can calculate probability of decay happening this second, the next minute, the next year, the next millenia (from half-life or mean-life).

You can take more radioactive atoms sample. And again you can calculate probability of decay of one, couple or the all atoms.

Replace radioactive atom by lottery balls or roulette.

On the roulette we have 37 fields (some US versions 38). If you will place a bet on one field you will have 1 per 37 chance of winning (2.7%). Place a bet on two fields and you have chance of winning 2/37=5.4%. Place a bet on x fields and you have x/37=2.7(027)%*x chance of winning in the next round. Place a bet on 37 fields and you have 100% chance of winning.

Similar calculations can be applied to everything. Probability of dying somebody today, dying caused by cancer caused by cigarettes, or working in mining industry, or burning fossil fuel (or the all three causes together), dying caused by car accident, dying caused by airplane accident, extinction caused by collision with asteroid, extinction caused by Gamma Ray Burst from star explosion. etc. etc. You seem to like such apocalyptic subjects.

Such calculations are done by insurance companies. If they will calculate probability of some accident happening incorrectly, they can bankrupt having to pay more money than they collected from their customers.

To be able to predict probability of something happening regardless if it is roulette or Gamma Ray Burst, you need to have enough information about the subject. In the second case you need a list of the all stars in galactic neighbourhood with distances, masses, ages, types of star (and workimg model of evolution of star) etc. From these data scientist can calculate probability of GRB event happening and arriving to the Earth in the next year, the next century, millenia, or the next million of years..

Even if we gathered the all data carefully there is chance that previous models were slightly incorrect and scientists forgot or were unaware about something essential. Models are reviewed and updated, as new data arrives.

e.g. hypervolicity star (supernova-to-be) or even hypervolicity black hole might end up many living beings civilizations which were previously prepared for cosmic scale extinction events..

So your saying that vacuum decay will possibly happen in our lifetime 

sorry I am not understanding your statement 

Dosent matter when I ask I get made fun or or my post gets closed 

6 minutes ago, iNow said:

I have neither the time nor the crayons to clarify your continued misunderstandings 

What misunderstandings to questions that were never answered 

5 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

That kind of confirms my comment I guess.

No one is willing to answer anytime I ask about vacuum decay posts get closed or sent to trash and I still have no better understanding. 
 

not sure why it’s so taboo to ask questions about it
 

1 minute ago, Ghideon said:

There is a difference in science between ”can happen”, ”can happen at any time”, ”will happen” and ”is bound to happen soon”. Your posts seems to be confused about that.

Not sure what you mean 

14 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

 

Maybe because your comment looks like claims that vacuum decay may happen in the near future. But there is overwhelming scientific data in mainstream physics supporting that vacuum decay will not happen. 

 

But as discussed here all answers are really I don’t know 

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

Then you misrepresented yourself in the OP.

Because it’s dishonest to discuss one topic in order to bring up another, and because you haven’t demonstrated that you know enough to be able to discuss it at any depth.

I know that what lhc discovered was the Higgs was at an unstable state which can lead to vacuum decay, I know that it has been stated it can happen at anytime. But yet many say it’s not possible nor can happen in our lifetime but have never been explained why. 
Dr Hawking predicted it also. 
 

also in my this original post I mentioned the Higgs.

Just now, swansont said:

We aren’t discussing vacuum decay, or any particular bit of physics

That is what my post is about, 

why is  it anytime I mention vacuum decay everything gets hushed?

So vacuum decay may be real and happen in our lifetime with what they detected at lhc then?

6 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

 

It is also worth noting that a lot of interesting since is based on things that cannot be known, even in principle. So that the answer is "We will never know" is the correct answer. Random processes for instance. Caesium-137 has a rather well known half-life. But predicting exactly witch atom in a sample of Caesium-137 atoms to be the next one to decay is not possible AFIK.  

 

1: We do not, AFIK, have conclusive data that vacuum decay is even possible.
2: We do know that the universe seems to have been able to avoid decaying for more than 13 billion years.

Why would anyone draw the conclusion, given the above, that universe is running the risk of being destroyed in the near future? Isn't the logical interpretation of data that universe is likely to continue to exist in its current form for a long time? 

Note that there are many other bad things that can happen and that according to physics have some microscopic probability > 0 (rather than exactly mathematically zero). That does not mean that any of those things will likely ever happen in the lifetime of the universe.

What did we see that confirms a new state? 
 

 

Here the thing we don’t know what the previous state was, we have no way of proving that what science says is valid

Just now, Bufofrog said:

No, why do think the vacuum constant is going to change?

Not vacuum constant but if all our science is I don’t know then the whole concept that  vacuum decay can destroy the universe billions of years from now may be wrong. So what we saw with the level of the Higgs may be a newer state that means it can happen shortly ?

1 minute ago, Bufofrog said:

What can happen at any time?

Vacuum decay

12 minutes ago, swansont said:

Yes.

For some phenomena we don’t have a model. For other phenomena we lack data that would allow a definitive answer.

We don’t know if there is more to the standard model than the Higgs boson, and all the rest of that model. I’m afraid “is it all” is not descriptive enough.(I also suspect that your familiarity with the standard model doesn’t include much more than a bit about the Higgs)

We gain confidence by having experimental results match our models

We also find out if models are incomplete when we find results that don’t fit the models. 

So basically we are not sure our concept of vacuum decay Is right we found the Higgs at a dangerous level which means our concept of how long and when is pretty much possibly wrong? It can happen at any time?

So I am trying to understand the following and was told not to hijack a thread 

One of the most important (and hardest) lessons to learn in science is that "we don't know" is a valid answer. And often it is the only, or the best, answer we have.

All other answers have a level of uncertainty associated with them, so we rarely (if ever) know things for sure.

so my question is does this apply to everything we think we know about science or physics?

example: why we see about the Higgs bosom or Higgs field is it all just we don’t know and think we are right. 
 

how do we know our data if we have any is right?

how do we know we are right?

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

No. It doesn't apply to all science and physics. It is not even the "common thing". There are very many things that we know with a great deal of certainty (that is nearly all of science and physics).

There are some things which we are not completely sure about. And there are some things that we are really unsure about. The important point is to understand that in those cases, it is OK to say "we don't know". That is not the same as saying "everything is a guess".

I get it thank you 

so I am having trouble judging Betelgeuse they seems to be so many articles claiming different status. What I am seeing is it has been dimming for months now and now the dimming stopped and seems to be working on brightening

5 minutes ago, Strange said:

Look, there is a big difference between data, based on actual measurements, and guesses. 

For example, we can measure the distance to the Moon, just as easily as you can measure the size of a piece of paper. 

Similarly, we can measure the brightness of Betelgeuse. 

Because we can measure it, and gather data, it is NOT a guess.

A "guess" would be that the moon is the size of a penny and only about a metre away. A "guess" would be that Betelgeuse is as bright as the moon, or the sun or a candle.

But science does not use guesses. Science uses data based on measurements. Why is that so hard to understand.

There is a huge difference between "science uses data based on measurements" and "science is just a guess". Only someone who is  deliberately trying to start an argument would say something like that. 

[Edit: cross-posted with swansont's comment about this being off topic]

I am sorry just not understanding your comment about I don’t know being the common thing. Does that not apply to all science and physics then?