Asymmetry in the behavior of neutral B-mesons emerging suggests there is a preponderance of muons!

[Better Believe It]

Yippee!




Big News About Small Particles. And Why You Care
By Michael D. Lemonick
May. 20, 2010

Thanks to an asymmetry in the behavior of neutral B-mesons emerging from proton-antiproton collisions at Fermilab's Tevatron accelerator, the DZero collaboration has found what appears to be preponderance of muons over anti-muons in their detector.

Physicists are giddy.

The Fermilab team found that in the collisions they conducted, the number of muons (a sort of heavy electron) that resulted exceeded the anti-muons. The difference wasn't much — maybe 1% — but that might have been enough to get the universe started. Now, the Large Hadron Collider in Europe, designed to be even more powerful than the Tevatron, may be able to probe the phenomenon more deeply, leading to a brand-new, unconventional theory.

Read the full article at:

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1990758,00.html#ixzz0oUbBjh8w?hpt=T2

This is interesting and not as difficult to understand as the first paragraph might suggest. So please read the full article!

[leftstreet]

1. Personally, I welcome our new Muon Overlords n/t

[RandomThoughts]

2. An argument for imbalance as metaphor.

Claiming first that what is current is matter, and out of balance with what is bad antimatter. Note that they make up the antimatter.

If they want to talk about star trek drive, then it is not about matter antimater first off. Second ion drive is slow constant acceleration, like years of force over much time to reach high speed, so it would be easier to see effects as ion drive.

they also make the claim of right in imbalance, then claiming that balance would be destruction, but they speak of matter not energy.

Note that it was posted long ago that antimatter and matter do not destroy each other, so their use of that metaphor misses that part and is part of destruction doctrine. But what is worse is by thinking in terms of matter not energy they miss that light is a form of energy, as is other dark things. And in that construct, outside of matter thought, but in energy thought, light does not destroy but when in contact it turns dark to light. And most matter does not allow light inside, although some like water does.

Unfortunately they chose an analogy that puts imbalance of current system as if it is correct. And further postulated that imbalance is needed for existence and part of plan of existence, thinking in terms of matter not light

It is interesting spin, using a matter argument in areas of energy. It also shows where their mind frame is.

Note that they not only use labels in normal matter form, but they also talk of destruction in collision, and claim current existence is better by that imbalance. In light dark realities light turns dark to light, which is not a destruction doctrine.

[Better Believe It]

3. You took the words right out of my mouth!

:)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. lol, wut?

"Claiming first that what is current is matter"

Well, yes, considering that matter was discovered many thousands of years before antimatter, that makes sense.

"and out of balance with what is bad antimatter."

Well, I don't think any scientist is calling it "bad." That's your own editorialization. Given it's got the opposite charge and spin as regular matter, "anti" makes sense.

"Note that they make up the antimatter."

Make up as in imagine? No, antimatter is real.

"If they want to talk about star trek drive, then it is not about matter antimater first off. Second ion drive is slow constant acceleration, like years of force over much time to reach high speed, so it would be easier to see effects as ion drive."

In Star Trek the Next Generation, that big blue engine is explained to be powered by matter annihilating anti-matter. Of course, that's really got nothing to do with anything. Star Trek just likes to throw around scientificy words like "antimatter," "conduit," "dilithium," "reverse," and "polarity."

None of it really means anything.

"they also make the claim of right in imbalance, then claiming that balance would be destruction, but they speak of matter not energy."

Matter and antimatter destroy each other, and release energy. Not antienergy. Energy.

"Note that it was posted long ago that antimatter and matter do not destroy each other, so their use of that metaphor misses that part and is part of destruction doctrine. But what is worse is by thinking in terms of matter not energy they miss that light is a form of energy, as is other dark things. And in that construct, outside of matter thought, but in energy thought, light does not destroy but when in contact it turns dark to light. And most matter does not allow light inside, although some like water does."

Four-sided harmonic time cube.

"Unfortunately they chose an analogy that puts imbalance of current system as if it is correct. And further postulated that imbalance is needed for existence and part of plan of existence, thinking in terms of matter not light"

It's not an analogy.

"Note that they not only use labels in normal matter form, but they also talk of destruction in collision, and claim current existence is better by that imbalance."

In the sense that it makes the universe possible. But that shows their obvious bias towards existing.

[RandomThoughts]

10. As a single article you have a perspective in that view.

But within some larger contexts, it also makes another argument. Not saying the article is wrong, but in certain contexts it is wrong.

Not talking about that level of the article.



In some context not about the article it seems, or the poster...
With a little more thought on it, maybe out of boredom, not sure, a thought from a tangent.

A group of people that worked on a secret project, get put in their own creation, rules applied back.
I find that an interesting concept and a reason to think on justice, and not be part of the dark side, the dark side will let you fall and not hang on.


Bad stuff, can't recommend the cube.
Cube
http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi463470873/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LicU5IBRxk8



Ha that is where that guy is!!!!!! That is where he is at, been wondering about that video, nice to have it explained, guess it is better then him hurting people, maybe he will make it out.
Hot Chip - I Feel Better
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3heVyyQ5YIw

Notice he has a dalek like light beam. and the one guy has Zod laser eyes also, Zod being the thing that wanted people to worship the bad guy from krypton.

Zod Superman clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUORL-bvwA0

[slackmaster]

5. That's a fantastic analysis, RT

:hi:

[Manifestor_of_Light]

6. At DU we talk more about moron particles.

Or moran particles.

Or hugh moran particles.

[fadedrose]

8. Duh, hey dummy, post said nuons not morons..

Did you mean "huge moran" or "huge moron"? I knew Hugh Moran, but he died before your time from ingesting toxic particles.

[rug]

7. I always suspected that.

[Buns_of_Fire]

9. Damned Mutons get into everything.

Turn your back for a nanosecond, and there, laughing at you, are more Mutons! Just hanging around, talking smack, and gumming up the Hadron Collider. It's enough to make you cry.

Obviously, I'm on the anti-Muton side in this debate. I always root for the underdog.

[damntexdem]

11. Aha, I thought that a muon glut had grown around here!

Hey, I bet that explains Sarah Palin and Rand Paul!

Oh, wait! That's due to a moron glut.

;-)