The Universe Should Not Exist

[SuburbanFarmer]

More evidence that we simply don't understand wtf we're talking about yet. Also, Newsweek for science articles? C'mon, man.

It would be fair to say that Newsweek was just reporting on a science article published elsewhere--in this case, Nature. Written by these 17 guys:

C. Smorra - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan, CERN, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland
S. Sellner - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
M. J. Borchert -RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Institut für Quantenoptik, Leibniz Universität, Welfengarten 1, D-30167 Hannover, Germany
J. A. Harrington -Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany
T. Higuchi - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan
H. Nagahama - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
T. Tanaka - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan
A. Mooser - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
G. Schneider - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Institut für Physik, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M. Bohman - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany
K. Blaum - Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany
Y. Matsuda - Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan
C. Ospelkaus - Institut für Quantenoptik, Leibniz Universität, Welfengarten 1, D-30167 Hannover, Germany Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, D-38116 Braunschweig, Germany
W. Quint - GSI - Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
J. Walz - Institut für Physik, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Helmholtz-Institut Mainz, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y. Yamazaki - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
S. Ulmer - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan

The abstract of the actual article provides:

A parts-per-billion measurement of the antiproton magnetic moment

Precise comparisons of the fundamental properties of matter– antimatter conjugates provide sensitive tests of charge–parity–time (CPT) invariance1, which is an important symmetry that rests on basic assumptions of the standard model of particle physics. Experiments on mesons2, leptons3,4 and baryons5,6 have compared different properties of matter–antimatter conjugates with fractional uncertainties at the parts-per-billion level or better. One specific quantity, however, has so far only been known to a fractional uncertainty at the parts-per-million level7,8: the magnetic moment oftheantiproton,μp.Theextraordinarydifficultyinmeasuringμp with high precision is caused by its intrinsic smallness; for example, it is 660 times smaller than the magnetic moment of the positron3. Here we report a high-precision measurement of μ p in units of the nuclear magneton μN with a fractional precision of 1.5 parts per billion (68% confidence level). We use a two-particle spectroscopy method in an advanced cryogenic multi-Penning trap system. Our result μ p = −2.7928473441(42)μN (where the number in parentheses represents the 68% confidence interval on the last digits of the value) improves the precision of the previous best μ p measurement8 by a factor of approximately 350. The measured value is consistent with the proton magnetic moment9, μp = 2.792847350(9)μN, and is in agreement with CPT invariance. Consequently, this measurement constrains the magnitude of certain CPT-violating effects10 to below 1.8 × 10−24 gigaelectronvolts, and a possible splitting of the proton– antiproton magnetic moments by CPT-odd dimension-five interactions to below 6 × 10−12 Bohr magnetons11.

But yeah, Newsweek picked it up, so hey, it's obviously crap.

That's a very, very long way from "The Universe Should Not Exist", which was indeed crap.

[heydaralon]

I would not be surprised if Deo is Young Earth creationist. He thought the Haydron Collider was a comet or some shit. Complete mockery of science that article.

You're just jealous that I found it before you.

He was too busy working on his Heydaralon Collider trying to find the Allah particle.

They found a high concentration of that particle in Europe I believe.

[heydaralon]

More evidence that we simply don't understand wtf we're talking about yet. Also, Newsweek for science articles? C'mon, man.

It would be fair to say that Newsweek was just reporting on a science article published elsewhere--in this case, Nature. Written by these 17 guys:

C. Smorra - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan, CERN, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland
S. Sellner - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
M. J. Borchert -RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Institut für Quantenoptik, Leibniz Universität, Welfengarten 1, D-30167 Hannover, Germany
J. A. Harrington -Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany
T. Higuchi - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan
H. Nagahama - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
T. Tanaka - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan
A. Mooser - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
G. Schneider - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Institut für Physik, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M. Bohman - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany
K. Blaum - Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik, Saupfercheckweg 1, D-69117 Heidelberg, Germany
Y. Matsuda - Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 153-8902, Japan
C. Ospelkaus - Institut für Quantenoptik, Leibniz Universität, Welfengarten 1, D-30167 Hannover, Germany Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, D-38116 Braunschweig, Germany
W. Quint - GSI - Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
J. Walz - Institut für Physik, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Helmholtz-Institut Mainz, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y. Yamazaki - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
S. Ulmer - RIKEN, Ulmer Fundamental Symmetries Laboratory, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan

The abstract of the actual article provides:

A parts-per-billion measurement of the antiproton magnetic moment

Precise comparisons of the fundamental properties of matter– antimatter conjugates provide sensitive tests of charge–parity–time (CPT) invariance1, which is an important symmetry that rests on basic assumptions of the standard model of particle physics. Experiments on mesons2, leptons3,4 and baryons5,6 have compared different properties of matter–antimatter conjugates with fractional uncertainties at the parts-per-billion level or better. One specific quantity, however, has so far only been known to a fractional uncertainty at the parts-per-million level7,8: the magnetic moment oftheantiproton,μp.Theextraordinarydifficultyinmeasuringμp with high precision is caused by its intrinsic smallness; for example, it is 660 times smaller than the magnetic moment of the positron3. Here we report a high-precision measurement of μ p in units of the nuclear magneton μN with a fractional precision of 1.5 parts per billion (68% confidence level). We use a two-particle spectroscopy method in an advanced cryogenic multi-Penning trap system. Our result μ p = −2.7928473441(42)μN (where the number in parentheses represents the 68% confidence interval on the last digits of the value) improves the precision of the previous best μ p measurement8 by a factor of approximately 350. The measured value is consistent with the proton magnetic moment9, μp = 2.792847350(9)μN, and is in agreement with CPT invariance. Consequently, this measurement constrains the magnitude of certain CPT-violating effects10 to below 1.8 × 10−24 gigaelectronvolts, and a possible splitting of the proton– antiproton magnetic moments by CPT-odd dimension-five interactions to below 6 × 10−12 Bohr magnetons11.

But yeah, Newsweek picked it up, so hey, it's obviously crap.

That's a very, very long way from "The Universe Should Not Exist", which was indeed crap.

The problem with the universe existing is that in parallelograms universes. You would see tesseracts and impossible papers claiming it was impssible for the universe "existing" instead of "nonexisting." Since we know of no such papers, we have to conclude the universe does not exist, unless we are attempting to cite the theoretical tesseract paper in an alternative universe. We have no such paper that is citable, thus bringing us to the conclusion that either a) the paper has not yet been written in crichton universe b) parallel paper universe plagiarized from wikipedia c) parallel paper is simply a cone or sphere, but we are unable to deduce its dimensions due to our limited paradigm of 3D.

[de officiis]

That's a very, very long way from "The Universe Should Not Exist", which was indeed crap.

It might have been, if it were reasonably taken to mean anything beyond a thought-provoking way of saying that there are things about how the universe came to be that we don’t fully understand. Or to use your words, “More evidence that we simply don't understand wtf we're talking about yet.”

[Speaker to Animals]

Deep Thoughts with Catballs.