The problem is that six physicists, working independently in three teams of two, proposed the mechanism. There are five still living, and they’ve been invited to Switzerland for this confirmation.
The Nobel Prize committees have always had a rule that no more than three individuals can share an award. That has a long history of slighting people and is more outmoded than ever these days. I wonder if this event is sufficiently massive to get them to change.
Am I missing a joke? That’s not comic sans.
On purpose? 
You betcha.
Ah, didn’t know that. So for the award for the structure of DNA, the committee wouldn’t have been able to award it while Crick, Watson, Wilkins and Franklin were all still alive. If Franklin had lived a decent lifespan that might have been 40-50 years after the discovery.
Leon Lederman wanted to call it the “goddamn particle,” but his publisher objected to this. Higgs himself does not care for the name “God particle,” because he thinks it might be offensive to religious people (though he’s an atheist himself).
I believe it is. There is a running joke among my friends at CERN that all the Italians give their talks in comic sans (the ATLAS experiment spokesperson who gave that talk is named Fabiola Gianotti).
Unless you rely on a different Wikipedia article, which says that the “goddamn particle” thing was a joke and that Lederman did come up with the name God particle.
That’s the way I’ve always heard it. “Goddamn particle” was essentially spin after there was criticism about calling it the “God particle” – Lederman said, hey, not my fault. The publisher made me call it that!
Oh, good grief. I had several windows open and was looking at a different page about the announcement. The right one does seem to be Comic Sans.
It might be overused, but I don’t hate it. In fact I think it’s quite nice in small doses.
Jee-sussss!
I had a feeling you would be here on this thread. I’m glad that you’re still around.
Thanks! Yeah, life sort of took over this past year (all in good ways) and I was going months at a time not even lurking the board, much less posting.
Well, it’s been my experience that that has never inhibited people on these forums from using such nomenclature.
Well, don’t worry about it. I intended to get back to you rather promptly, and look how much time has past.
It has been interesting to see the reaction of people both in a local discussion group I have been long involved in, and in one youtube.com video discussion.
In one post someone compared the Higgs field to the long discredited Ether Theory. I suppose I understand, since the field is supposed to be everywhere, although I am sure that “ether” was supposed to involve absolute space, making a key difference.
Another wanted to know what the immediate practical value was to something that took so much financial effort to resolve. While I think that large amounts money should always be something to consider carefully, I lose patience with the idea that an immediate, practical application of research is necessary.
On Independence Day members of our local Bertrand Russell set met at one of the founders homes for a reading of the Declaration and other, parallel documents. There was an interesting, timely discussion beforehand. Much of the speculation among the less scientifically oriented went like this: <<Does this mean that we can now overcome gravity?>> to which a rejoinder went something like this: <<But we already can, can’t we?>> (Of course, “overcoming” gravity as a routine matter depends on just what you mean by the word. I “overcome” gravity every day on staircases, and some days I really feel that something tremendous has happened. ) It just seems to me that people generally assume that a major closure of research (if the confirmation does indeed represent closure) must mean some kind of breath-taking immediate shift in the world. To give some people to the benefit of the doubt, perhaps some are merely thinking of spin-off theoretical work that could eventually produce something concrete.
I actually have some head-scratching questions about the subject, but that’s all for now.