Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Francois Englert and Peter W. Higgs Awarded Nobel Prize For Boson Discovery

timothy posted 1 year,12 days | from the now-brew-some-boson-tea dept.

Medicine 83

The 2013 Nobel season is underway. Reader rtoz writes "Francois Englert and Peter W. Higgs won the 2013 Nobel Prize For Physics. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences cited the two scientists for the 'theoretical discovery of a mechanism that contributes to our understanding of the origin of mass of subatomic particles.'" Update: 10/08 13:18 GMT by T : More Nobel news: The New York Times reports that "Three Americans won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine on Monday for discovering the machinery that regulates how cells transport major molecules in a cargo system that delivers them to the right place at the right time." The three are James E. Rothman, Randy W. Schekman; and Dr. Thomas C. Südhof, of Yale, UC Berkeley, and Stanford, respectively.

cancel ×

83 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Huh, earlier than expected (0, Troll)

sandytaru (1158959) | 1 year,12 days | (#45068813)

I suppose since the Higgs boson has been more or less validated at this point (at least as close as we can with our feeble technology), the Nobel committee decided it was time to recognize them.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45068953)

Anyone who thinks the God particle is not worthy of a Nobel Prize is an idiot. Of course it won right away after validation. There are not many fundamental scientific discoveries that give us a glimpse right into the mind of the Creator of our universe.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (4, Informative)

cribera (2560179) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069003)

Anyone who thinks the God particle is not worthy of a Nobel Prize is an idiot. Of course it won right away after validation. There are not many fundamental scientific discoveries that give us a glimpse right into the mind of the Creator of our universe.

Please leave the religious stuff elsewhere, slashdot is not a fertile place for fairy tales.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069045)

slashdot is not a fertile place for fairy tales.

Unless the fairy tale contains Bill Gates, RMS or John McAfee. Slashdot loves these.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (0)

Requiem18th (742389) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069583)

Sometimes i wish there was a sue for defamation button on slashdot. Please stop posting things pulled out of your ass. It's dirty in there.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45070243)

Suck my dick.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | 1 year,12 days | (#45071245)

Unless the fairy tale contains Bill Gates, RMS or John McAfee.

I'd get Bill and John, nut how is RMS a fairy by any definition?

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

robthebloke (1308483) | 1 year,12 days | (#45075639)

Unless the fairy tale contains Bill Gates, RMS or John McAfee. Slashdot loves these.

You forgot bitcoin.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

Seumas (6865) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069213)

I like that you got marked down as "flamebait" for pointing out that this has nothing to do with the bullshit hyperbolic idiocy of "glimpsing right into the mind of the Creator of our universe". As so many have already said over the years, it was a completely mistake to apply that name to this and if they'd considered how it might be interpreted by the average moron who believes in alien abductions and angels, they would have named it more wisely.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069473)

ya moms a fertile place for fairy tails

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069523)

Ya mom is a fertile place for fairy tails

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45071543)

You do know that the reason it is called the 'God Particle' is that the publisher wouldn't print 'God-damned Particle' which is what they were calling it because of how hard it was to find.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,11 days | (#45076789)

Anyone who refers to the Higgs as the "god particle" is an idiot. That moniker was demanded by a publisher to sell copies, not by a physicist.

And while I'm on a soap box, it's pronounced "bOze-AWN", not "bozn".

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

Nivag064 (904744) | 1 year,11 days | (#45077717)

Anything that could create the Universe as we know it must be Awesome in both sophistication and power - so could not have come about by blind chance, so would have had to be created, and such a thing would need a creator...

So postulating a Creator of the Universe does not solve anything, it 'merely' defers the question.

Hence, the notion of God the Creator conflicts with Reality.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

cribera (2560179) | 1 year,11 days | (#45079861)

Anything that could create the Universe as we know it must be Awesome in both sophistication and power - so could not have come about by blind chance, so would have had to be created, and such a thing would need a creator...

So postulating a Creator of the Universe does not solve anything, it 'merely' defers the question.

Hence, the notion of God the Creator conflicts with Reality.

Let's use your same logic, if complexity needs to be created, ask yourself, how complex would such 'creator' be?

How come such complex creature, could come into existance, without a creator itself?

Then again, how complex would be the creator's creator? And we could go on into an infinite loop of creators? Do you get it?

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

Nivag064 (904744) | 1 year,10 days | (#45087869)

Please read my comment more carefully, you're the one that doesn't get it!

You seem to have just read my first paragraph without understanding it, and ignored the last two. :-)

Note that my first paragraph implies an infinite lop of creators are required, if you buy into the Creationist Mindset.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

Elizabeth Huffman (2866409) | 1 year,11 days | (#45079819)

Funny thing both, both my atheist and religious friends were cheering on the higgs boson to win the award.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

painandgreed (692585) | 1 year,11 days | (#45082057)

Please leave the religious stuff elsewhere, slashdot is not a fertile place for fairy tales.

I'd say 'Please don't feed the trolls' but these discussions are why we come to /.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069005)

Quality troll is quality.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (2)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069541)

Please don't get confuse by a nickname that a particle happens to have. In this context, the "God Particle" is a pleasant PG-rated version of the original nickname "the Goddamn Particle." Your claim makes about as much sense as for example someone claiming that general relativity somehow supports moral relativism. Similar sounding words aren't automatically connected.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45070375)

It is an obvious troll. Are you seriously this stupid? Just let it languish. This is almost as bas as the idiots who still reply to GNAA spam. Unless of course you are karmawhoring....

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (2)

aiadot (3055455) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069173)

From my engineering and therefore amateur physicist POV, their works look very well written, have a HUGE impact and is the experiments confirm their hypothesis giving birth to a very solid theory. They deserve their recognition. Plus Peter Higgs is already 84 years old and he doesn't look in shape either, who knows how many years he will be with us. Better give his Nobel prize now than never. Even if there are some holes left, he deserves the Nobel prize more than certain politicians.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

Seumas (6865) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069189)

If you can win the Peace Prize without having done anything whatsoever (and then being a warmongering fascist), then you should be able to win any of the other prizes pre-emptively.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (4, Insightful)

sharknado (3217097) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069591)

I'm pretty sure their ages (Higgs is 84 and Englert is 80) also factored in to the decision to recognize them this year. Since the Nobel prize comes with money attached, it's better to award them now, while they are able to appreciate it.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (4, Informative)

Chris Mattern (191822) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069825)

Money aside, a Nobel *cannot* be award posthumously. It's one of the rules.

Re:Huh, earlier than expected (1)

sharknado (3217097) | 1 year,12 days | (#45074903)

Money aside, a Nobel *cannot* be award posthumously. It's one of the rules.

Good to know :)

Robert Brout (2)

dna_(c)(tm)(r) (618003) | 1 year,12 days | (#45074757)

In this Belgian journal article (dutch) [demorgen.be] , he mentions he is sorry his colleague Robert Brout can not share and celebrate with him. He died in 2011.

The Goddamn Particle... (5, Funny)

laejoh (648921) | 1 year,12 days | (#45068823)

The Goddamn Particle can now safely be renamed into The Belgium Particle :)

Re:The Goddamn Particle... (0)

Jade_Wayfarer (1741180) | 1 year,12 days | (#45068917)

Ugh... how rude! Such particle would lie on a whole new, previously unattainable profanity level!

Re:The Goddamn Particle... (1)

sconeu (64226) | 1 year,12 days | (#45071631)

I suppose one could always write a Serious Screenplay about it, though....

Re:The Goddamn Particle... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45068927)

Can I get it with blueberries and whipped cream?

Re:The Goddamn Particle... (0)

Threni (635302) | 1 year,12 days | (#45068977)

Well, yeah. For one thing, there actually is a Higgs Boson. And a B*lg**m (but no swearing please - this is a family website).

Re:The Goddamn Particle... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069185)

(but no swearing please - this is a family website).

Ah, that explains a lot. I was all the time assuming it was still a nerd website.

Re:The Goddamn Particle... (4, Funny)

Ken_g6 (775014) | 1 year,12 days | (#45068999)

At which point it will promptly be nicknamed the "bulgin' particle", because it makes all other particles more massive.

Re:The Goddamn Particle... (1)

Richy_T (111409) | 1 year,12 days | (#45073223)

Which in the US will briefly enjoy fame as the "French particle" before rapidly being renamed the "Freedom particle".

Nobel prizes are shit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45068943)

They gave the peace prize to that piece of shit nigger obama for christ sake.

Re:Nobel prizes are shit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069017)

But come on he's only killing brown skinned people in every mid-eastern country. I call that peace maker in the making. SD loves Obama and his hefty healthcare. Lets keep paying for lazy people who refuse to work, like the ones who post here. PS any of you supposed smart engineers making more than 25K a year are greedy 1%ers

Re:Nobel prizes are shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069391)

Actually, assuming two people earning $25,000 each for a household income of $50,000, this makes them 50%'ers.

Re:Nobel prizes are shit (5, Insightful)

cribera (2560179) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069023)

They gave the peace prize to that piece of shit nigger obama for christ sake.

Leaving racist rant aside, scientific Nobel pizes are serious, non-scientific prizes (peace, literature or even economy) are not in the same level of credibility, by any means.

Re:Nobel prizes are shit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069343)

>>>>Leaving racist rant aside, scientific Nobel pizes are serious, non-scientific prizes (peace, literature or even economy) are not in the same level of credibility, by any means.

Isn't that kind of like saying, "I don't like the Nazis, but you know some of the things they did are ok"?

Re:Nobel prizes are shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069425)

So what?
Do you know how much the nazis advanced medical research with their experiments?
And I don't see anyone saying we should scrap all the rocketry research we stole from them.

Re:Nobel prizes are shit (4, Insightful)

umafuckit (2980809) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069429)

>>>>Leaving racist rant aside, scientific Nobel pizes are serious, non-scientific prizes (peace, literature or even economy) are not in the same level of credibility, by any means.

Isn't that kind of like saying, "I don't like the Nazis, but you know some of the things they did are ok"?

No, it's more like saying "I'm going to rise above your trolling ass whilst correcting you"

Re:Nobel prizes are shit (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45072779)

Shocked, SHOCKED that that comment was posted anonymously. Coward indeed.

Unrelated note, nice little demo of the Streisand effect. No one would have seen that post had not cribera commented on it. Logical conclusion, of course, is that cribera posted the parent anonymously in order to vent some racist spleen and then repudiated it publicly to appear insightful.

Re:Nobel prizes are shit (1)

the gnat (153162) | 1 year,11 days | (#45076649)

Leaving racist rant aside, scientific Nobel pizes are serious, non-scientific prizes (peace, literature or even economy) are not in the same level of credibility, by any means.

They're not even awarded by the same organization or process. At least in the case of the Peace prize, anyway - that institution is in Norway, whereas the science Nobels are in Sweden. It's all coming from the same source in the end, but even in the cases where the science prizes were controversial (usually because someone got left out, or someone didn't deserve the award) there's been no evidence of political motivations, unlike the Peace prize.

Fun Englert Facts (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069141)

Interestingly Englert is a Holocaust survivor who teaches in Belgium and also at Tel aviv University.

Re:Fun Englert Facts (1)

BlackPignouf (1017012) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069177)

"fun fact"?

Elusive Higgs Boson ~~ elusive Peter Higgs (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069145)

I heard on NPR this morning that the shy Peter Higgs has dropped out of view (or at least is trying to). He left without his phone. Seems he is as elusive as his epynominous particle.

Sorry, no respect (-1, Troll)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069149)

On an intellectual level, I know that the Nobel science prizes have no relationship to the Nobel Peace Prize.

But on an emotional level, fuck the Nobels on general principles. They awarded a man a prize for no accomplishments. Anything labeled "Nobel Prize" has about as much meaning as an Emmy or an Oscar (both are insider 1%ers giving tribute to other insider 1%ers). To be quite frank, I have more respect for the Ignobel Awards or the Confucius Peace Prize. [wikipedia.org]

Sorry, but that's how it is, and that's how it has to be. And don't say the Nobel committee didn't know this when it awarded the Prize to an undeserving recipient. They knew exactly what they were doing and took great delight in giving the middle finger to the rest of us.

Re:Sorry, no respect (0)

BlackPignouf (1017012) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069183)

Also : Economy Nobel prize.
What a f***ing joke.

Re:Sorry, no respect (4, Informative)

Misagon (1135) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069277)

The Economy prize is technically not a Nobel Prize. It is a prize from Sweden's national bank that is just piggybacking on the Nobel prizes, leeching on its reputation.
The official title is "Sveriges Riksbank's Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel".

Re:Sorry, no respect (1)

BlackPignouf (1017012) | 1 year,11 days | (#45079795)

Good to know. Thanks for the info!

Re:Sorry, no respect (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069285)

The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences has no relation to the Nobel Prize. They just share a name and are awarded at the same time of year. Apart from that, they are completely separate things.

Re:Sorry, no respect (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45074927)

While technically true, how many note that distinction? You, me and a few more.

Re:Sorry, no respect (1, Insightful)

sandytaru (1158959) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069207)

Actually, I felt Obama finally earned that prize when we ended up not going to war in Syria. Had we been embroiled in another pointless war, I had hoped someone would take it away from him.

Re:Sorry, no respect (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069797)

Except he was the only one pushing for war with Syria. "Trying but failing to launch a pointless unprovoked attack" is still not grounds for a peace prize.

Re:Sorry, no respect (1)

Richy_T (111409) | 1 year,12 days | (#45073253)

To be fair, he didn't start out wanting to launch a pointless unprovoked attack, he just stupidly blundered into it.

Re:Sorry, no respect (2)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45070827)

We have British Parliament to thank for keeping us out of Syria. Their vote against military action in Syria was what turned the tide. It had nothing to do with Obama. I think British Parliament is worthy of a peace prize for their actions.

Obama got a Peace Prize before he took office (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069293)

I guess it'll be appropriate when they award JK Rowling the Literature prize for the Harry Potter sequel she's going to write in 2019.

Re:Obama got a Peace Prize before he took office (2)

camperdave (969942) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069491)

I guess it'll be appropriate when they award JK Rowling the Literature prize for the Harry Potter sequel she's going to write in 2019.

Well...I almost hate to say it, but the franchise is actually ripe for prequel stories: The Founding of Hogwarts (four books right there - one for each of the founding members); Tales of James and Lilly Potter, Dumbledore, Lucius, Snape, etc, when they were in school. Beauxbatons, and Durmstrang and how they got started.

Re:Obama got a Peace Prize before he took office (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069749)

(four books right there - one for each of the founding members)

Be careful you don't start a new religion that way, it's happened before...

Re:Obama got a Peace Prize before he took office (2)

RaceProUK (1137575) | 1 year,12 days | (#45071081)

You talking about the Books of John, Paul, George and Ringo? :P

Re:Obama got a Peace Prize before he took office (1)

HybridST (894157) | 1 year,12 days | (#45073405)

The Gospel according to Ringo: Groovy!

Re:Obama got a Peace Prize before he took office (1)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | 1 year,12 days | (#45073269)

I guess it'll be appropriate when they award JK Rowling the Literature prize for the Harry Potter sequel she's going to write in 2019.

This'd only be comparable to Obama if Rowling, after receiving the award in advance, would quickly ditch Harry Potter in favour of writing erotic Star Trek fan fiction set on fucking DS9 while all the time claiming this is in fact Harry Potter! Fuck you, Obama and all your little government goblins.

Sod it. Give Clapper the peace prize, and crown Obana as Miss World. That would only slightly less sense than Obama receiving the award for future services to peace.

Obligatory comment ... (1)

Misagon (1135) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069337)

Who's this Higgs boso?

Re:Obligatory comment ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45071073)

This Higgs bozo is some guy who wrote a paper about a Goddamm particle and then some idiot editor altered it to God particle and now every Bible thumper West of the Urals is claiming that the world is about to end and nature hates the LHC because some bird dropped a chunk of bread on a transformer.

Someone tell me about Obama's award? (-1, Flamebait)

erroneus (253617) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069367)

You know the one he got for being black? He certainly hasn't done anything to promote world peace beyond giving up on the Syria attack.

Re:Someone tell me about Obama's award? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45069531)

God, that was four years ago. This must be how conservatives felt when liberals went on and on about Mission Accomplished and The Pet Goat.

Re:Someone tell me about Obama's award? (1)

erroneus (253617) | 1 year,12 days | (#45070397)

The Nobel Prize is reserved for extraordinary people who have accomplished something extraordinary and/or highly significant. The award, if memory serves, was based on what? Intentions? I'm not clear on which intentions, but I am quite sure the long list of promises broken continues.

I am no fan of republicans. It's all crap to me. Please do not presume this is about flags and teams and "who wins or loses." Nothing either of them do benefits me.

This award is a big fail (4, Interesting)

Lawrence_Bird (67278) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069403)

and simply another political stunt by the Nobel committee. Higgs did not want the award. There were at least five researchers all with equally significant contributions to the eventual theory. Yet because the award can only go to at most three, they decided to drop the other three researchers (two alive). Some even claim the total should be six. One wonders if they had called the presumed particle "dog" whether Higgs would have been awarded the prize.

This is most definitely a case where giving no prize was more appropriate. They could even recognize the significance of the research by public statement and lament that it would be unfair to try to separate this group into winners and losers. But the committee better figure something out because this kind of problem is going to be the norm, not the exception. The age of one or two scientists making such an outsized contribution to standout from the rest of their (or other) research groups is over.

Re:This award is a big fail (3, Interesting)

c0d3g33k (102699) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069527)

All six should show up in Stockholm, accept the award together and explain why. That should give the Nobel committee a hint that things need updating.

Re:This award is a big fail (1)

Pikewake (217555) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069701)

I'm sure the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and the Nobel Committee appreciate your input. The intent and letter of Nobel's will might still be a bit more important to them, so don't be disappointed if they won't implement your updates immediately.
This is an award, not a paycheck or a sports trophy. If someone who is awarded a prize doesn't want it, they're free to refuse. If someone who thinks they deserve one doesn't get it... tough luck.

Re:This award is a big fail (3, Interesting)

Lawrence_Bird (67278) | 1 year,12 days | (#45070035)

I guess you never read the will?

The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an ideal direction; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.

So they have already moved from the person to the "up to three" persons.

Re:This award is a big fail (1)

Pikewake (217555) | 1 year,12 days | (#45070309)

Of course you're right.
I was sarcastic in both directions. The organizations responsible for the Nobel prize are not known to be overly flexible, and I thought it was funny to think that they would update the award because of a protest at the ceremonies, especially in comparison to the excellent points made by Lawrence_Bird in the first post.
I fail at snark. Sorry!

Re:This award is a big fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45071003)

They did introduce some changes to the Oscar awards after all the protests in 2009 over THE DARK KNIGHT being snubbed, so who knows, maybe something like this has some chance of success!

Re:This award is a big fail (2)

Lawrence_Bird (67278) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069715)

In this case, as the number is relatively small, that would probably work. Further, the two winners could establish a trust to accept their monetary price and split it out among the larger group. In any event, Nobel needs to figure out a way to handle large(r) groups. Perhaps a "group" category that gets the recognition but no monetary prize.

Re:This award is a big fail (1)

Pikewake (217555) | 1 year,12 days | (#45069929)

Right now "larger groups" are handled by security at the door.
Since members of the Swedish government and the royal family attend the ceremony I think crashing the party might prove a bit difficult. ;)

Re:This award is a big fail (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | 1 year,12 days | (#45074529)

The Nobel committee doesn't care. Hell, they thoroughly enjoy giving the middle finger to the rest of us. You didn't figure that out when Kissinger got the Prize in 1973? You surely should have gotten the message with FUCKING YASSER ARAFAT got the Prize in 1994. WTF?

Re:This award is a big fail (1)

the gnat (153162) | 1 year,11 days | (#45076683)

But the committee better figure something out because this kind of problem is going to be the norm, not the exception. The age of one or two scientists making such an outsized contribution to standout from the rest of their (or other) research groups is over.

I certainly agree with that, and there are many other instances where three was at least one too few - Doug Prasher comes to mind, and also the prize for ribosome structure where they easily could have picked out a half-dozen people whose contributions were essential. (On the other hand, I can also think of another case where I'm really glad they didn't "spread the wealth" around to someone who didn't deserve it.)

Feh (1)

seven of five (578993) | 1 year,12 days | (#45070437)

Get a load of my Higgs Field Nullifier gun!

Title wrong. (1)

meerling (1487879) | 1 year,12 days | (#45071111)

Sorry to be picky, but bosons were 'discovered' and named a LONG time ago, maybe even before those guys were born.
The title should not say 'boson', is should specify 'HIGGS boson'. (I don't care about the capitalization.)

Just imagine if there was a title like "The theory of Gravity has been proven invalid", when you really meant "The theory of Modified Gravity has been proven invalid".
See, that one word makes a big difference, STOP SCREWING UP A SIMPLE TITLE !
By the way, as far as I know, that theory hasn't been proven, or disproven, but it still isn't popular with physicists.

Fortunately most of the /. readers are smart enough about science to figure it out without reading the article, but there have been a growing number of others of late...

Boson discovery? (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | 1 year,12 days | (#45071707)

For a moment I thought it said "bacon discovery" and got really excited.

Misread the title (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 days | (#45072269)

For a second, I thought it said "Boston discovery".
My thought was "Hasn't MIT known about this all along?"

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?