On 26/05/2018 09:29, Paul Schlyter wrote:
On Sun, 6 May 2018 19:54:54 -0700 (PDT), Gary Harnagel
wrote:
On Sunday, May 6, 2018 at 7:00:55 PM UTC-6, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 6 May 2018 13:44:35 -0700 (PDT), Gary Harnagel

There was no evidence for the Higgs particle before it was
found.* There
was only a theory that said it ought to exist.

Nonsense. There was a great deal of evidence, which is why so
much was
invested in the search. Again, you demonstrate profound ignorance
of
science.

No, sir!* There was NO evidence until it was actually detected.* You
are making a really bad show here, old boy.

There was a theory that made specific predictions about the mass range
and properties of the Higg's boson in theoretical papers written back in
1964 long before it was discovered experimentally.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_P...reaking_papers

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_pri...ggs-facts.html

That most fundamental particles have a non-zero rest mass is
circumstantial evidence for the Higg's field.

There were strong theoretical implications that the Higgs boson ought to
exist. They knew what they were looking for. Your phrase "NO evidence"
implies also the lack of these theoretical implications.

More fundamentally that most particles have mass requires the Higgs
boson or some other similar mechanism with an equivalent result.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_mechanism

--
Regards,
Martin Brown