So the Higgs Boson Particle (might) have been discovered

[Flash]

Now that we have proof it exists, can we stop calling it a god particle?

how ironic
in any other context this would be an atheist's joke

[rtil]

that's because it is an atheist joke

[Timmy]

Tima Maria Lacoba ‏@FatimaLacoba
I'm sick of hearing about that Higgs- Boson thing. So what! Whoopy-chook! But Who created the God particle?

wow

[psi43]

We haven't had a successful quantum computer yet psi - but there has been successful components. There are 5 to 7 criteria to be met before we can call something a quantum computer and nothing has met them all yet!

Ahh okay, I've seen a computer which used a quantum processor and assumed that it would be a quantum computer. Compared to normal computers of our age it's really fucking huge though.

[Flash]

lmao sorry, i guess my very low conception of religious fundamentalists made me think that twitter was from one of them

[G3no]

  Higgs Boson 2,  NSFW (not that bad though) 

http://www.thebackalleys.com/forum/index.php?topic=11927.0;message=252413

[Blordow]

mathematical scientific lingo jingo big bang wang particles and atoms blah blah blah

[naturally]

http://twitter.com/derpparticle

aaa

the particle was originally referred to as the goddamn particle by leon lederman but in a publishing error changed the name of his book to "The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?" which is where the stupid term was coined in the first place.

referring to anything in science as god is asking for trouble and a lot of word-bending.

wow i have to stop editing so much

[Shida]

It wasn't a publishing error, but the publisher refusing to let it be called the 'goddamn particle'.

[dilly]

lmao can we please make journalists know of this significant fact?

BREAKING NEWS: NEW INFORMATION ON THE GODDAMN PARTICLE

see it has a very nice ring to it

[naturally]

It wasn't a publishing error, but the publisher refusing to let it be called the 'goddamn particle'.

oh hmm that makes more sense i just read it as some publishing problem. i still think they just should have called it the higgs boson and left it at that.

[psi43]

It wasn't a publishing error, but the publisher refusing to let it be called the 'goddamn particle'.

oh hmm that makes more sense i just read it as some publishing problem. i still think they just should have called it the higgs boson and left it at that.

It essentially was a publishing problem, but not an error. They couldn't call it the "god damn" particle and broadcast it on all the news shows or whatever, that's basically the reason as far as I know.