PDA

View Full Version : Time's Person of the Year



ZunarJ5
2012-Dec-06, 12:33 AM
This year the Higgs Particle and Mars Rover are up for consideration! Vote here http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2128881_2128882,00.html

Jens
2012-Dec-06, 12:42 AM
This year the Higgs Particle and Mars Rover are up for consideration! Vote here http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2128881_2128882,00.html

Interestingly, there was a blog entry (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/11/29/person-of-the-year-nomination-for-higgs-boson-riddled-with-errors/) on the Scientific American site pointing out that every sentence in the blurb on the Higgs has at least one serious mistake!

Durakken
2012-Dec-06, 01:05 AM
Interestingly, there was a blog entry (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/11/29/person-of-the-year-nomination-for-higgs-boson-riddled-with-errors/) on the Scientific American site pointing out that every sentence in the blurb on the Higgs has at least one serious mistake!

I can't believe that garbage is in a science magazine article thing... The logic of the "first error" commentary is shows their understanding of something is wrong.

The Mass of the atoms comes from the protons, neutrons, and electrons
And their mass along with photons comes from the strong force interacting with quarks...
and those quarks' mass (or whatever layer down it is) comes from the higgs field

It's like humans aren't mammals because there are several layers between the original mammal and humans v.v

John Jaksich
2012-Dec-06, 02:13 AM
I can't believe that garbage is in a science magazine article thing... The logic of the "first error" commentary is shows their understanding of something is wrong.

The Mass of the atoms comes from the protons, neutrons, and electrons
And their mass along with photons comes from the strong force interacting with quarks...
and those quarks' mass (or whatever layer down it is) comes from the higgs field

It's like humans aren't mammals because there are several layers between the original mammal and humans v.v

I, recently, have taken a greater interest in how average person (me --definitely!) perceives science. It does not appear that most people have an equal footing in the basic calculus and Diffe. Equations to even attempt a cogent explanation of the matter at hand.

Further inspection of the matter tells me--until a "basic standard" of calculus is adopted many of us will grope for the concepts at hand in a manner which may not be conducive for a basic understanding.

:o

SeanF
2012-Dec-06, 02:03 PM
This year the Higgs Particle and Mars Rover are up for consideration! Vote here http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2128881_2128882,00.html
They're stretching the definition of "person" again, I see. :)

Trebuchet
2012-Dec-06, 03:40 PM
I really hate Time's non-human and generic selections. Of course, if they really held to the original criteria of the person who'd done the most to influence the news in the previous year, the president of the US would win most of the time.

Buttercup
2012-Dec-06, 03:41 PM
Okay then, my nomination is Hostess Suzy-Q. :)

geonuc
2012-Dec-06, 04:52 PM
I really hate Time's non-human and generic selections. Of course, if they really held to the original criteria of the person who'd done the most to influence the news in the previous year, the president of the US would win most of the time.

I agree, although I think the criteria for selection can be such that an actual human is selected and it still not be the US president most of the time.

Durakken
2012-Dec-06, 04:57 PM
btw can someone say if i'm right or wrong... I'm pretty sure i'm right, but i'm willing to accept i'm wrong given the source and my lack of knowledge in the area...but that just seems like wrong that anyone, especially a science article should pick up immediately.

Strange
2012-Dec-06, 05:25 PM
btw can someone say if i'm right or wrong...

I would say you are wrong. :)

The point being made is that most of the mass of a proton, say, does not come from the quarks (and therefore not from the Higgs mechanism).

So your analogy might be more accurate as, "it is like saying that humans are not brains because there are all those other organs and parts of the body."

NEOWatcher
2012-Dec-06, 06:03 PM
Of course, if they really held to the original criteria of the person who'd done the most to influence the news in the previous year...
...then we'd get a list of celebrities like Lohan or Honey boo boo.

It all comes down to a popularity contest anyway. I don't think it has as much to do with "influence" as it is how much space were we able to allocate to it.

Gillianren
2012-Dec-06, 07:31 PM
In some years, it has definitely been about influence. (Which is why Hitler was Man of the Year once!) Not much recently, though.

Jens
2012-Dec-07, 12:56 AM
btw can someone say if i'm right or wrong... I'm pretty sure i'm right, but i'm willing to accept i'm wrong given the source and my lack of knowledge in the area...but that just seems like wrong that anyone, especially a science article should pick up immediately.

I read your comment, and in retrospect I would say it seems a bit nuanced to me. Here is the sentence: "Take a moment to thank this little particle for all the work it does, because without it, you’d be just inchoate energy without so much as a bit of mass." I think the criticism depends on how you interpret that. First, you could easily critique it by saying that there would be no "you" in the first place. But I think the argument was a bit different. The writer from SA was saying that most of the mass comes from elsewhere, whereas you are saying that without the proper mass of the quarks, the rest of the mass wouldn't be able to be created. So in other words, if quarks did not have mass, what would happen to the strong force? I'm not sure I can really answer that. But I think the SA blogger was reacting to the impression he felt Time gave that the Higgs is responsible for all mass.