<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_15_2242248</id>
	<title>New Bounds On the Higgs Boson Mass</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1266234900000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>As the LHC continues to <a href="//science.slashdot.org/story/10/02/03/2319222/Europes-LHC-To-Run-At-Half-Energy-Through-2011?art\_pos=1&amp;art\_pos=1">run at half power</a> for the next year+, the US-based Tevatron continues to crank out results. Reader hweimer writes <i>"Three new papers in <em>Physical Review Letters</em> present the <a href="http://physics.aps.org/articles/v3/14">latest results for the Higgs boson mass</a> coming from Fermilab's Tevatron. The new data mandates that the Higgs boson mass within the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard\_Model">standard model</a> lies between 115 and 150 GeV."</i> A year back we discussed the Tevatron's <a href="//science.slashdot.org/story/09/03/13/156216/">previous shrinking of the search space</a> for the Higgs "God particle."</htmltext>
<tokenext>As the LHC continues to run at half power for the next year + , the US-based Tevatron continues to crank out results .
Reader hweimer writes " Three new papers in Physical Review Letters present the latest results for the Higgs boson mass coming from Fermilab 's Tevatron .
The new data mandates that the Higgs boson mass within the standard model lies between 115 and 150 GeV .
" A year back we discussed the Tevatron 's previous shrinking of the search space for the Higgs " God particle .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As the LHC continues to run at half power for the next year+, the US-based Tevatron continues to crank out results.
Reader hweimer writes "Three new papers in Physical Review Letters present the latest results for the Higgs boson mass coming from Fermilab's Tevatron.
The new data mandates that the Higgs boson mass within the standard model lies between 115 and 150 GeV.
" A year back we discussed the Tevatron's previous shrinking of the search space for the Higgs "God particle.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153468</id>
	<title>Please stop this "God particle" nonsense</title>
	<author>slb</author>
	<datestamp>1266315540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I doubt any physicist would refer to the Higgs boson as "God particle" and that's obviously not the case in TFA. So why kdawson is feeding this idiotic meme ?</p><p>Next time we speak about serious science are we going to refer the research subject's as "pixie dust" or "Satan ichor" ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt any physicist would refer to the Higgs boson as " God particle " and that 's obviously not the case in TFA .
So why kdawson is feeding this idiotic meme ? Next time we speak about serious science are we going to refer the research subject 's as " pixie dust " or " Satan ichor " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt any physicist would refer to the Higgs boson as "God particle" and that's obviously not the case in TFA.
So why kdawson is feeding this idiotic meme ?Next time we speak about serious science are we going to refer the research subject's as "pixie dust" or "Satan ichor" ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153702</id>
	<title>Re:I'm lost.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266319620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>particle physics for dummies</i></p><p>ALL (anti)matter, ALL forces, fields and waves and everything you can think of consists of particles. I'm not talking about neutrons and protons and the such, but even smaller particles known as subatomic particles or elementary particles. Most of us know the group of particles called quarks, but there are more groups of particle with cool names like leptons (an electron is a lepton) and bosons (a photon is a boson).</p><p>We know that a LOT of nature shows some kind of symmetry; this is the same in elementary particle physics. From this, it has been deduced that several particles not yet detected must exist in order to fill in the gaps in the symmetry. It is those particles we are looking for and they are predicted by the Standard Model, which is an enourmous collection of theories that together attempt to describe our entire universe (with the exception of gravity) (and to unify the newtonian and einsteinian physics).</p><p>Such particles have many hard-to-understand properties like spin, charge, mass etc. What we are looking for, however, is their specific energy. We do this by accelerating matter (protons typically) to incredible speed and then colliding it. In such a collision, enormous energies occur that cause elementary particles to cease to exist and create new elementary particles. All kinds of particles can sort of randomly be created during such a collision, but obviously the collision itself has to be powerful enough to reach at least the energy the particle we're looking for has. So we keep building more and more powerful particle accelerators in order to find these things. What we call the energy of such a particle is a bit complex; it sort of comparable to mass*speed, but that's not all there is to say about this; for example many particles have a fixed speed, namely the speed of light. Therefore, their mass is equivalent to their energy. That's the GeV number we're talking about here. Note that this is incredibly simplified; for example we don't really know the mass of the photon (except that it is 0 in rest, but photons don't exist in rest) but we DO know its' energy since we can measure that. Also, the charge is not factored into this equation. But, in general, elementary particle physicists think in "energy", not in "mass" or "speed".</p><p>Anyway, around the point of collision, enormous detectors have been built that attempt to trap the particles created in the collision. These detectors generate a small electric current comparable to the energy of the particle that collided, which is measured. Think about them as antenna's. After millions and millions of such collisions, patterns start to emerge and we can deduce a specific particle has been created in our collisions. For example, you see a lot of collisions with this energy and a lot with that energy, but none with energy such and so. The result is sort of like a spectrogram (but again, it's way more complex than that).</p><p>So in the case of the Higgs Boson, in this "spectrogram", we're looking for a peak somewhere between 115 and 150 GeV. This is obviously an incredibly simplified explanation, but I think this should make you understand just a bit more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>particle physics for dummiesALL ( anti ) matter , ALL forces , fields and waves and everything you can think of consists of particles .
I 'm not talking about neutrons and protons and the such , but even smaller particles known as subatomic particles or elementary particles .
Most of us know the group of particles called quarks , but there are more groups of particle with cool names like leptons ( an electron is a lepton ) and bosons ( a photon is a boson ) .We know that a LOT of nature shows some kind of symmetry ; this is the same in elementary particle physics .
From this , it has been deduced that several particles not yet detected must exist in order to fill in the gaps in the symmetry .
It is those particles we are looking for and they are predicted by the Standard Model , which is an enourmous collection of theories that together attempt to describe our entire universe ( with the exception of gravity ) ( and to unify the newtonian and einsteinian physics ) .Such particles have many hard-to-understand properties like spin , charge , mass etc .
What we are looking for , however , is their specific energy .
We do this by accelerating matter ( protons typically ) to incredible speed and then colliding it .
In such a collision , enormous energies occur that cause elementary particles to cease to exist and create new elementary particles .
All kinds of particles can sort of randomly be created during such a collision , but obviously the collision itself has to be powerful enough to reach at least the energy the particle we 're looking for has .
So we keep building more and more powerful particle accelerators in order to find these things .
What we call the energy of such a particle is a bit complex ; it sort of comparable to mass * speed , but that 's not all there is to say about this ; for example many particles have a fixed speed , namely the speed of light .
Therefore , their mass is equivalent to their energy .
That 's the GeV number we 're talking about here .
Note that this is incredibly simplified ; for example we do n't really know the mass of the photon ( except that it is 0 in rest , but photons do n't exist in rest ) but we DO know its ' energy since we can measure that .
Also , the charge is not factored into this equation .
But , in general , elementary particle physicists think in " energy " , not in " mass " or " speed " .Anyway , around the point of collision , enormous detectors have been built that attempt to trap the particles created in the collision .
These detectors generate a small electric current comparable to the energy of the particle that collided , which is measured .
Think about them as antenna 's .
After millions and millions of such collisions , patterns start to emerge and we can deduce a specific particle has been created in our collisions .
For example , you see a lot of collisions with this energy and a lot with that energy , but none with energy such and so .
The result is sort of like a spectrogram ( but again , it 's way more complex than that ) .So in the case of the Higgs Boson , in this " spectrogram " , we 're looking for a peak somewhere between 115 and 150 GeV .
This is obviously an incredibly simplified explanation , but I think this should make you understand just a bit more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>particle physics for dummiesALL (anti)matter, ALL forces, fields and waves and everything you can think of consists of particles.
I'm not talking about neutrons and protons and the such, but even smaller particles known as subatomic particles or elementary particles.
Most of us know the group of particles called quarks, but there are more groups of particle with cool names like leptons (an electron is a lepton) and bosons (a photon is a boson).We know that a LOT of nature shows some kind of symmetry; this is the same in elementary particle physics.
From this, it has been deduced that several particles not yet detected must exist in order to fill in the gaps in the symmetry.
It is those particles we are looking for and they are predicted by the Standard Model, which is an enourmous collection of theories that together attempt to describe our entire universe (with the exception of gravity) (and to unify the newtonian and einsteinian physics).Such particles have many hard-to-understand properties like spin, charge, mass etc.
What we are looking for, however, is their specific energy.
We do this by accelerating matter (protons typically) to incredible speed and then colliding it.
In such a collision, enormous energies occur that cause elementary particles to cease to exist and create new elementary particles.
All kinds of particles can sort of randomly be created during such a collision, but obviously the collision itself has to be powerful enough to reach at least the energy the particle we're looking for has.
So we keep building more and more powerful particle accelerators in order to find these things.
What we call the energy of such a particle is a bit complex; it sort of comparable to mass*speed, but that's not all there is to say about this; for example many particles have a fixed speed, namely the speed of light.
Therefore, their mass is equivalent to their energy.
That's the GeV number we're talking about here.
Note that this is incredibly simplified; for example we don't really know the mass of the photon (except that it is 0 in rest, but photons don't exist in rest) but we DO know its' energy since we can measure that.
Also, the charge is not factored into this equation.
But, in general, elementary particle physicists think in "energy", not in "mass" or "speed".Anyway, around the point of collision, enormous detectors have been built that attempt to trap the particles created in the collision.
These detectors generate a small electric current comparable to the energy of the particle that collided, which is measured.
Think about them as antenna's.
After millions and millions of such collisions, patterns start to emerge and we can deduce a specific particle has been created in our collisions.
For example, you see a lot of collisions with this energy and a lot with that energy, but none with energy such and so.
The result is sort of like a spectrogram (but again, it's way more complex than that).So in the case of the Higgs Boson, in this "spectrogram", we're looking for a peak somewhere between 115 and 150 GeV.
This is obviously an incredibly simplified explanation, but I think this should make you understand just a bit more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150632</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266239400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But how does the mass of the Higgs boson compare to the mass of Dolly Parton's bosom?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But how does the mass of the Higgs boson compare to the mass of Dolly Parton 's bosom ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But how does the mass of the Higgs boson compare to the mass of Dolly Parton's bosom?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150582</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>CorporateSuit</author>
	<datestamp>1266239040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So 150 GeV would be just over 50 elephants!</htmltext>
<tokenext>So 150 GeV would be just over 50 elephants !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So 150 GeV would be just over 50 elephants!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150936</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266241920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wish summary articles were written so that most people could understand the terms used.</p></div><p>The trouble is that 10^-27 isn't a tremendously intuitive number. Even being extremely familiar with scientific notation, the magnitude is so small that it really defies any intuitive sense of scale. GeV may not be nearly as familiar as kg but eV (electron volts) are an appropriate unit when dealing with particle energies and so are used in most articles regarding accelerators. Given the choice, I would take eV so that people who are following the progress of the LHC and Tevatron colliders can compare between articles.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish summary articles were written so that most people could understand the terms used.The trouble is that 10 ^ -27 is n't a tremendously intuitive number .
Even being extremely familiar with scientific notation , the magnitude is so small that it really defies any intuitive sense of scale .
GeV may not be nearly as familiar as kg but eV ( electron volts ) are an appropriate unit when dealing with particle energies and so are used in most articles regarding accelerators .
Given the choice , I would take eV so that people who are following the progress of the LHC and Tevatron colliders can compare between articles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish summary articles were written so that most people could understand the terms used.The trouble is that 10^-27 isn't a tremendously intuitive number.
Even being extremely familiar with scientific notation, the magnitude is so small that it really defies any intuitive sense of scale.
GeV may not be nearly as familiar as kg but eV (electron volts) are an appropriate unit when dealing with particle energies and so are used in most articles regarding accelerators.
Given the choice, I would take eV so that people who are following the progress of the LHC and Tevatron colliders can compare between articles.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150626</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1266239340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure if the US cuts the funding, those scientists will get job offers elsewhere, and the United States will be well on the way to becoming a main provider of cheap labor for Mexico and Canada.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure if the US cuts the funding , those scientists will get job offers elsewhere , and the United States will be well on the way to becoming a main provider of cheap labor for Mexico and Canada .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure if the US cuts the funding, those scientists will get job offers elsewhere, and the United States will be well on the way to becoming a main provider of cheap labor for Mexico and Canada.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153598</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>somersault</author>
	<datestamp>1266317880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, no, no! That money should be going to GOD! He's a bit strapped for cash and forgot how to make more after his narcotics binge in the dark ages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , no , no !
That money should be going to GOD !
He 's a bit strapped for cash and forgot how to make more after his narcotics binge in the dark ages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, no, no!
That money should be going to GOD!
He's a bit strapped for cash and forgot how to make more after his narcotics binge in the dark ages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151734</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266250200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, electromagnetic waves are photons.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , electromagnetic waves are photons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, electromagnetic waves are photons.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150616</id>
	<title>Half power? Crank it up!!!</title>
	<author>DigiShaman</author>
	<datestamp>1266239280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More power Egor, more power!!! Yes, Yeesssss. ****maniacal laughter***</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More power Egor , more power ! ! !
Yes , Yeesssss .
* * * * maniacal laughter * * *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More power Egor, more power!!!
Yes, Yeesssss.
****maniacal laughter***</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31156538</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Maury Markowitz</author>
	<datestamp>1266343320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm sure if the US cuts the funding, those scientists will get job offers elsewhere, and the United States will be well on the way to becoming a main provider of cheap labor for Mexico and Canada.</p></div><p>But the same could be said of any science that's no longer fruitful. Yet the US continues to be the world leader.</p><p>Would you spend a billion dollars trying to measure another decimal place of the Stefan&ndash;Boltzmann constant? Probably not. However, Tevatron spent well over a decade, and hundreds of millions of dollars, trying to get extra decimal places on the top quark mass.</p><p>This number is basically useless, but they didn't have anything else to do. That's because HEP, at least the Standard Model, is mined out. It's a dead science. All that's been done since the 1980s is bookkeeping. LHC doesn't change that, unless it finds something new and interesting. The jury's out on how likely that is. So the justification, from the start, has been to find the Higgs. And if we do, so what? We already agree that we know what it is, what it does, and about how massive it is. Yet if LHC detects it, the HEP world will circle its wagons, grant some nobels, and talk about what a great job they're doing.</p><p>Of course we know that it's wrong. None of our current theories can *really* account for most of the interesting things we see in our telescopes (contrary to protestations on Ars) so even if we find something like the photino we're still not any closer to understanding the real universe. Dark Energy? Good luck.</p><p>I think there's a lot more physics, both theoretical and practical, in B-E's than LHC. There's still a lot of basic quantum theory to do while everyone got distracted by the big budgets an accelerator commands.</p><p>Maury</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure if the US cuts the funding , those scientists will get job offers elsewhere , and the United States will be well on the way to becoming a main provider of cheap labor for Mexico and Canada.But the same could be said of any science that 's no longer fruitful .
Yet the US continues to be the world leader.Would you spend a billion dollars trying to measure another decimal place of the Stefan    Boltzmann constant ?
Probably not .
However , Tevatron spent well over a decade , and hundreds of millions of dollars , trying to get extra decimal places on the top quark mass.This number is basically useless , but they did n't have anything else to do .
That 's because HEP , at least the Standard Model , is mined out .
It 's a dead science .
All that 's been done since the 1980s is bookkeeping .
LHC does n't change that , unless it finds something new and interesting .
The jury 's out on how likely that is .
So the justification , from the start , has been to find the Higgs .
And if we do , so what ?
We already agree that we know what it is , what it does , and about how massive it is .
Yet if LHC detects it , the HEP world will circle its wagons , grant some nobels , and talk about what a great job they 're doing.Of course we know that it 's wrong .
None of our current theories can * really * account for most of the interesting things we see in our telescopes ( contrary to protestations on Ars ) so even if we find something like the photino we 're still not any closer to understanding the real universe .
Dark Energy ?
Good luck.I think there 's a lot more physics , both theoretical and practical , in B-E 's than LHC .
There 's still a lot of basic quantum theory to do while everyone got distracted by the big budgets an accelerator commands.Maury</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure if the US cuts the funding, those scientists will get job offers elsewhere, and the United States will be well on the way to becoming a main provider of cheap labor for Mexico and Canada.But the same could be said of any science that's no longer fruitful.
Yet the US continues to be the world leader.Would you spend a billion dollars trying to measure another decimal place of the Stefan–Boltzmann constant?
Probably not.
However, Tevatron spent well over a decade, and hundreds of millions of dollars, trying to get extra decimal places on the top quark mass.This number is basically useless, but they didn't have anything else to do.
That's because HEP, at least the Standard Model, is mined out.
It's a dead science.
All that's been done since the 1980s is bookkeeping.
LHC doesn't change that, unless it finds something new and interesting.
The jury's out on how likely that is.
So the justification, from the start, has been to find the Higgs.
And if we do, so what?
We already agree that we know what it is, what it does, and about how massive it is.
Yet if LHC detects it, the HEP world will circle its wagons, grant some nobels, and talk about what a great job they're doing.Of course we know that it's wrong.
None of our current theories can *really* account for most of the interesting things we see in our telescopes (contrary to protestations on Ars) so even if we find something like the photino we're still not any closer to understanding the real universe.
Dark Energy?
Good luck.I think there's a lot more physics, both theoretical and practical, in B-E's than LHC.
There's still a lot of basic quantum theory to do while everyone got distracted by the big budgets an accelerator commands.Maury
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150778</id>
	<title>Re:To be clear what this means.</title>
	<author>Dachannien</author>
	<datestamp>1266240540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>These are bounds for the mass of the Higgs boson assuming it exists. If it doesn't exist, this data is meaningless.</p></div><p> <b>Film narrator:</b> Remember, it's up to us. Bigfoot is a crucial part of the ecosystem, if he exists. So let's all help keep Bigfoot possibly alive for future generations to enjoy unless he doesn't exist. The end!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>These are bounds for the mass of the Higgs boson assuming it exists .
If it does n't exist , this data is meaningless .
Film narrator : Remember , it 's up to us .
Bigfoot is a crucial part of the ecosystem , if he exists .
So let 's all help keep Bigfoot possibly alive for future generations to enjoy unless he does n't exist .
The end !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are bounds for the mass of the Higgs boson assuming it exists.
If it doesn't exist, this data is meaningless.
Film narrator: Remember, it's up to us.
Bigfoot is a crucial part of the ecosystem, if he exists.
So let's all help keep Bigfoot possibly alive for future generations to enjoy unless he doesn't exist.
The end!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31157272</id>
	<title>Re:I'm lost.</title>
	<author>chord.wav</author>
	<datestamp>1266345720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks mate. Not only you helped parent, but many of us who are legos in this matter. Thanks for taking the time to write it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks mate .
Not only you helped parent , but many of us who are legos in this matter .
Thanks for taking the time to write it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks mate.
Not only you helped parent, but many of us who are legos in this matter.
Thanks for taking the time to write it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151154</id>
	<title>Re:The LHC goes to eleven</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266244200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sometimes I feel that, if Tevatron succeeds in this task before LHC, it will be difficult to try to convince future politicians and administrators to finance such big science projects, like the LHC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes I feel that , if Tevatron succeeds in this task before LHC , it will be difficult to try to convince future politicians and administrators to finance such big science projects , like the LHC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes I feel that, if Tevatron succeeds in this task before LHC, it will be difficult to try to convince future politicians and administrators to finance such big science projects, like the LHC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152076</id>
	<title>i got the parts at</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266254460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>radioshack</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>radioshack</tokentext>
<sentencetext>radioshack</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150930</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630</id>
	<title>To be clear what this means.</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1266239400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>These are bounds for the mass of the Higgs boson assuming it exists. If it doesn't exist, this data is meaningless. What will presumably eventually happen is that we'll narrow the mass down to a very tiny bound (if it exists) which would be strong evidence for its existence. Or we might detect the Higgs boson using some other methods and higher energies, such as those at the LHC. Alternatively, if the Higgs boson doesn't exist then we may end up narrowing the upper and lower bounds until they cross each other. In that case the Standard Model will be wrong and we'll have an interesting day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>These are bounds for the mass of the Higgs boson assuming it exists .
If it does n't exist , this data is meaningless .
What will presumably eventually happen is that we 'll narrow the mass down to a very tiny bound ( if it exists ) which would be strong evidence for its existence .
Or we might detect the Higgs boson using some other methods and higher energies , such as those at the LHC .
Alternatively , if the Higgs boson does n't exist then we may end up narrowing the upper and lower bounds until they cross each other .
In that case the Standard Model will be wrong and we 'll have an interesting day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are bounds for the mass of the Higgs boson assuming it exists.
If it doesn't exist, this data is meaningless.
What will presumably eventually happen is that we'll narrow the mass down to a very tiny bound (if it exists) which would be strong evidence for its existence.
Or we might detect the Higgs boson using some other methods and higher energies, such as those at the LHC.
Alternatively, if the Higgs boson doesn't exist then we may end up narrowing the upper and lower bounds until they cross each other.
In that case the Standard Model will be wrong and we'll have an interesting day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150980</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266242340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>you seriously lack <b>imagination</b>.</p></div></blockquote><p>You misspelled "education."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>you seriously lack imagination.You misspelled " education .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you seriously lack imagination.You misspelled "education.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31155630</id>
	<title>Re:To be clear what this means.</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1266338580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not a good analogy. If we consistently got a specific mass range that was very narrow and we kept getting a consistent mass range that would be very hard to explain unless there was an actual object there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a good analogy .
If we consistently got a specific mass range that was very narrow and we kept getting a consistent mass range that would be very hard to explain unless there was an actual object there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a good analogy.
If we consistently got a specific mass range that was very narrow and we kept getting a consistent mass range that would be very hard to explain unless there was an actual object there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638</id>
	<title>Aw shucks...</title>
	<author>piemcfly</author>
	<datestamp>1266239400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So much for Europe being the new frontier for science.<br> <br>
Oh well, I suppose we can always turn the LHC into an expensive underground parking for the Genevans... <br>

500 park jobs per day at a cheap 10dollars an hour... with luck we'll have our money back somewhere around the year 7010...</htmltext>
<tokenext>So much for Europe being the new frontier for science .
Oh well , I suppose we can always turn the LHC into an expensive underground parking for the Genevans.. . 500 park jobs per day at a cheap 10dollars an hour... with luck we 'll have our money back somewhere around the year 7010.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So much for Europe being the new frontier for science.
Oh well, I suppose we can always turn the LHC into an expensive underground parking for the Genevans... 

500 park jobs per day at a cheap 10dollars an hour... with luck we'll have our money back somewhere around the year 7010...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152982</id>
	<title>Re:I'm lost.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1266352080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This would be a good start:<br><a href="http://btjunkie.org/torrent/TTC-VIDEO-Quantum-Mechanics/3952ebd7c605f10e9562955b4905c88b576299e71a57" title="btjunkie.org">http://btjunkie.org/torrent/TTC-VIDEO-Quantum-Mechanics/3952ebd7c605f10e9562955b4905c88b576299e71a57</a> [btjunkie.org]<br>(Very simplified, but as I said: A good start.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This would be a good start : http : //btjunkie.org/torrent/TTC-VIDEO-Quantum-Mechanics/3952ebd7c605f10e9562955b4905c88b576299e71a57 [ btjunkie.org ] ( Very simplified , but as I said : A good start .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would be a good start:http://btjunkie.org/torrent/TTC-VIDEO-Quantum-Mechanics/3952ebd7c605f10e9562955b4905c88b576299e71a57 [btjunkie.org](Very simplified, but as I said: A good start.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31155210</id>
	<title>The "particles" word is unfortunate</title>
	<author>Kupfernigk</author>
	<datestamp>1266336240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Physicists have adopted the word "particles" to mean all kinds of different things, and I think this is a lot of the problem. It made sense when electrons, protons and neutrons first were discovered, because they had a relatively familiar kind of pointlike behavior even though this was not really correct. I have a nuclear physics textbook from the 1930s, and it is really interesting to see the state of confusion they were in at the time. (Memo to global warming denialists: there was also a lot of discussion about whether this stuff was or was not "real" and whether the experiments meant anything. This came to a sudden stop around mid-1945, for some obscure reason. However, I digress.)<p>Most people use the word "particle" to mean a small solid object, and I think it is fair to say that quarks, gluons, and the Higgs can't meaningfully be categorised in this way. It is not surprising that early mathematical physicists often emphasised concentrating on the wave equations and not trying to assign physical meanings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Physicists have adopted the word " particles " to mean all kinds of different things , and I think this is a lot of the problem .
It made sense when electrons , protons and neutrons first were discovered , because they had a relatively familiar kind of pointlike behavior even though this was not really correct .
I have a nuclear physics textbook from the 1930s , and it is really interesting to see the state of confusion they were in at the time .
( Memo to global warming denialists : there was also a lot of discussion about whether this stuff was or was not " real " and whether the experiments meant anything .
This came to a sudden stop around mid-1945 , for some obscure reason .
However , I digress .
) Most people use the word " particle " to mean a small solid object , and I think it is fair to say that quarks , gluons , and the Higgs ca n't meaningfully be categorised in this way .
It is not surprising that early mathematical physicists often emphasised concentrating on the wave equations and not trying to assign physical meanings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Physicists have adopted the word "particles" to mean all kinds of different things, and I think this is a lot of the problem.
It made sense when electrons, protons and neutrons first were discovered, because they had a relatively familiar kind of pointlike behavior even though this was not really correct.
I have a nuclear physics textbook from the 1930s, and it is really interesting to see the state of confusion they were in at the time.
(Memo to global warming denialists: there was also a lot of discussion about whether this stuff was or was not "real" and whether the experiments meant anything.
This came to a sudden stop around mid-1945, for some obscure reason.
However, I digress.
)Most people use the word "particle" to mean a small solid object, and I think it is fair to say that quarks, gluons, and the Higgs can't meaningfully be categorised in this way.
It is not surprising that early mathematical physicists often emphasised concentrating on the wave equations and not trying to assign physical meanings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154702</id>
	<title>Re:Bounds are Complicated</title>
	<author>zero.kalvin</author>
	<datestamp>1266333060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Depending whether SuperSymmetry is correct or not. We need SS to allow the increase in mass(in addition to other things). Without SS it has to be between 115 and 150 (taking into consideration the data we have from SM only).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Depending whether SuperSymmetry is correct or not .
We need SS to allow the increase in mass ( in addition to other things ) .
Without SS it has to be between 115 and 150 ( taking into consideration the data we have from SM only ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depending whether SuperSymmetry is correct or not.
We need SS to allow the increase in mass(in addition to other things).
Without SS it has to be between 115 and 150 (taking into consideration the data we have from SM only).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151778</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151404</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Ambitwistor</author>
	<datestamp>1266246960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the Congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, April 17, 1969, regarding the justification for funding the then-unbuilt Fermilab:</p><p>Senator John Pastore: Is there anything connected with the hopes of this accelerator that in any way involves the security of the country?</p><p>Robert Wilson: No sir, I don't believe so.</p><p>Pastore: Nothing at all?</p><p>Wilson: Nothing at all.</p><p>Pastore: It has no value in that respect?</p><p>Wilson: It has only to do with the respect with which we regard one another, the dignity of men, our love of culture. It has to do with: Are we good painters, good sculptors, great poets? I mean all the things we really venerate in our country and are patriotic about. It has nothing to do directly with defending our country except to make it worth defending.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy , April 17 , 1969 , regarding the justification for funding the then-unbuilt Fermilab : Senator John Pastore : Is there anything connected with the hopes of this accelerator that in any way involves the security of the country ? Robert Wilson : No sir , I do n't believe so.Pastore : Nothing at all ? Wilson : Nothing at all.Pastore : It has no value in that respect ? Wilson : It has only to do with the respect with which we regard one another , the dignity of men , our love of culture .
It has to do with : Are we good painters , good sculptors , great poets ?
I mean all the things we really venerate in our country and are patriotic about .
It has nothing to do directly with defending our country except to make it worth defending .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, April 17, 1969, regarding the justification for funding the then-unbuilt Fermilab:Senator John Pastore: Is there anything connected with the hopes of this accelerator that in any way involves the security of the country?Robert Wilson: No sir, I don't believe so.Pastore: Nothing at all?Wilson: Nothing at all.Pastore: It has no value in that respect?Wilson: It has only to do with the respect with which we regard one another, the dignity of men, our love of culture.
It has to do with: Are we good painters, good sculptors, great poets?
I mean all the things we really venerate in our country and are patriotic about.
It has nothing to do directly with defending our country except to make it worth defending.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151810</id>
	<title>Aether</title>
	<author>Barncs</author>
	<datestamp>1266251160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How long will it take to realize that Aether theory had a lot of things right? I don't know much about anything, but I do have a feeling when things feel right. Up until Mr. Einstein, aether was it. The more I see the less I like, and I really wonder how long it will take before science realizes that we are, in fact, in the soup.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How long will it take to realize that Aether theory had a lot of things right ?
I do n't know much about anything , but I do have a feeling when things feel right .
Up until Mr. Einstein , aether was it .
The more I see the less I like , and I really wonder how long it will take before science realizes that we are , in fact , in the soup .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How long will it take to realize that Aether theory had a lot of things right?
I don't know much about anything, but I do have a feeling when things feel right.
Up until Mr. Einstein, aether was it.
The more I see the less I like, and I really wonder how long it will take before science realizes that we are, in fact, in the soup.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151358</id>
	<title>Re:Aw shucks...</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1266246420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you are talking about the LHC, then Europe won't be the new frontier of the science, will be its event horizon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are talking about the LHC , then Europe wo n't be the new frontier of the science , will be its event horizon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are talking about the LHC, then Europe won't be the new frontier of the science, will be its event horizon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154304</id>
	<title>Recycling colliders</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1266329760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>every single one of these colliders will be recycled and reprocessed into long term and far more useful gear like wind turbines</p></div><p>
You are right in the first part of that statement, the colliders are being recycled.  However I am not aware of any being turned into wind turbines.<br> <br>
I know someone on the D0 group at Fermi, and was talking about collider fate with him recently.  He pointed out that many of the facilities that are now serving as synchrotons (or high-energy light sources, such as <a href="http://www.chess.cornell.edu/" title="cornell.edu">Cornell's CHESS</a> [cornell.edu]) which make significant contributions to structural biology.  Currently we have less than 10 synchrotrons in the US - and many more structural biologists - so increasing that total can help a lot.<br> <br>
However your assertion of "far more useful gear" is a statement of opinion.  High energy physics creates a lot of jobs, and a lot of valuable research for the public good.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>every single one of these colliders will be recycled and reprocessed into long term and far more useful gear like wind turbines You are right in the first part of that statement , the colliders are being recycled .
However I am not aware of any being turned into wind turbines .
I know someone on the D0 group at Fermi , and was talking about collider fate with him recently .
He pointed out that many of the facilities that are now serving as synchrotons ( or high-energy light sources , such as Cornell 's CHESS [ cornell.edu ] ) which make significant contributions to structural biology .
Currently we have less than 10 synchrotrons in the US - and many more structural biologists - so increasing that total can help a lot .
However your assertion of " far more useful gear " is a statement of opinion .
High energy physics creates a lot of jobs , and a lot of valuable research for the public good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>every single one of these colliders will be recycled and reprocessed into long term and far more useful gear like wind turbines
You are right in the first part of that statement, the colliders are being recycled.
However I am not aware of any being turned into wind turbines.
I know someone on the D0 group at Fermi, and was talking about collider fate with him recently.
He pointed out that many of the facilities that are now serving as synchrotons (or high-energy light sources, such as Cornell's CHESS [cornell.edu]) which make significant contributions to structural biology.
Currently we have less than 10 synchrotrons in the US - and many more structural biologists - so increasing that total can help a lot.
However your assertion of "far more useful gear" is a statement of opinion.
High energy physics creates a lot of jobs, and a lot of valuable research for the public good.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150930</id>
	<title>The LHC goes to eleven</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266241860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>but the tevatron does more at ten</htmltext>
<tokenext>but the tevatron does more at ten</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but the tevatron does more at ten</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150532</id>
	<title>first!!!!!!</title>
	<author>dezent</author>
	<datestamp>1266238740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>LOL!</htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152004</id>
	<title>Re:I'm lost.</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1266253380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At one level, all you need to know is that the Standard Model "needs" this particle - no Higgs Boson, and the Standard Model may fall. Finding the Higgs (and thus its mass) should also help in making predictions in other areas, such as cosmology.</p><p>As for <b>why</b> the Higgs Boson is needed, you might find <a href="http://www.hep.ucl.ac.uk/~djm/higgsa.html" title="ucl.ac.uk">this</a> [ucl.ac.uk] interesting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At one level , all you need to know is that the Standard Model " needs " this particle - no Higgs Boson , and the Standard Model may fall .
Finding the Higgs ( and thus its mass ) should also help in making predictions in other areas , such as cosmology.As for why the Higgs Boson is needed , you might find this [ ucl.ac.uk ] interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At one level, all you need to know is that the Standard Model "needs" this particle - no Higgs Boson, and the Standard Model may fall.
Finding the Higgs (and thus its mass) should also help in making predictions in other areas, such as cosmology.As for why the Higgs Boson is needed, you might find this [ucl.ac.uk] interesting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151778</id>
	<title>Bounds are Complicated</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1266250800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The new data mandates that the Higgs boson mass within the standard model lies between 115 and 150 GeV."</i></p><p>No, it doesn't. Look at <a href="http://physics.aps.org/view\_image/3381/medium/1" title="aps.org">this graph</a> [aps.org]. At a "3 sigma" level (and don't believe any new science that is not at the 3 sigma level or better), the mass of the Higgs (assuming it exists) is roughly between 115 and 225 GeV. To put it another way, a mass <b>greater</b> than the Tevatron exclusion zone at ~160 GeV is by no means ruled out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The new data mandates that the Higgs boson mass within the standard model lies between 115 and 150 GeV .
" No , it does n't .
Look at this graph [ aps.org ] .
At a " 3 sigma " level ( and do n't believe any new science that is not at the 3 sigma level or better ) , the mass of the Higgs ( assuming it exists ) is roughly between 115 and 225 GeV .
To put it another way , a mass greater than the Tevatron exclusion zone at ~ 160 GeV is by no means ruled out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new data mandates that the Higgs boson mass within the standard model lies between 115 and 150 GeV.
"No, it doesn't.
Look at this graph [aps.org].
At a "3 sigma" level (and don't believe any new science that is not at the 3 sigma level or better), the mass of the Higgs (assuming it exists) is roughly between 115 and 225 GeV.
To put it another way, a mass greater than the Tevatron exclusion zone at ~160 GeV is by no means ruled out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154392</id>
	<title>Obligatory Car Analogy</title>
	<author>Mattskimo</author>
	<datestamp>1266330840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The scientists are searching through a parking lot for a car that may or may not be there. The parking lot is 100ft tall and they have searched the lowest 60 feet of it. If the car exists and conforms to their understanding of what a car is then it will be found by searching the next 40 feet. However, they have ladders and the equipment to keep climbing past the top floor of the parking lot. If they find the car floating 30ft above the top floor of the parking lot they will have to redifine what a car is.

Yes that's right, you heard it here first; The Higgs Boson = flying cars. Let's make it happen people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The scientists are searching through a parking lot for a car that may or may not be there .
The parking lot is 100ft tall and they have searched the lowest 60 feet of it .
If the car exists and conforms to their understanding of what a car is then it will be found by searching the next 40 feet .
However , they have ladders and the equipment to keep climbing past the top floor of the parking lot .
If they find the car floating 30ft above the top floor of the parking lot they will have to redifine what a car is .
Yes that 's right , you heard it here first ; The Higgs Boson = flying cars .
Let 's make it happen people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The scientists are searching through a parking lot for a car that may or may not be there.
The parking lot is 100ft tall and they have searched the lowest 60 feet of it.
If the car exists and conforms to their understanding of what a car is then it will be found by searching the next 40 feet.
However, they have ladders and the equipment to keep climbing past the top floor of the parking lot.
If they find the car floating 30ft above the top floor of the parking lot they will have to redifine what a car is.
Yes that's right, you heard it here first; The Higgs Boson = flying cars.
Let's make it happen people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153792</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Alioth</author>
	<datestamp>1266321540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To make it understandable, the energy can be converted into a relative "human" form so a person can understand it.</p><p>For example, 1TeV is about the kinetic energy of a flying mosquito. While the equivalent of 15\% of the kinetic energy of a flying mosquito isn't much (150GeV) it is a LOT of energy for a single subatomic particle.</p><p>As a comparison, the Planck energy is about the equivalent of the energy released from burning a full tank of fuel in a typical family car. It shows that even our most powerful atom smashers are puny in comparison to some of what happens in the universe . . .</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To make it understandable , the energy can be converted into a relative " human " form so a person can understand it.For example , 1TeV is about the kinetic energy of a flying mosquito .
While the equivalent of 15 \ % of the kinetic energy of a flying mosquito is n't much ( 150GeV ) it is a LOT of energy for a single subatomic particle.As a comparison , the Planck energy is about the equivalent of the energy released from burning a full tank of fuel in a typical family car .
It shows that even our most powerful atom smashers are puny in comparison to some of what happens in the universe .
. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To make it understandable, the energy can be converted into a relative "human" form so a person can understand it.For example, 1TeV is about the kinetic energy of a flying mosquito.
While the equivalent of 15\% of the kinetic energy of a flying mosquito isn't much (150GeV) it is a LOT of energy for a single subatomic particle.As a comparison, the Planck energy is about the equivalent of the energy released from burning a full tank of fuel in a typical family car.
It shows that even our most powerful atom smashers are puny in comparison to some of what happens in the universe .
. .</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154522</id>
	<title>Great, finally I understand this:</title>
	<author>nem75</author>
	<datestamp>1266331920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <a href="http://xkcd.com/702/" title="xkcd.com">http://xkcd.com/702/</a> [xkcd.com] </p><p>Well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>... maybe not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //xkcd.com/702/ [ xkcd.com ] Well ...... maybe not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> http://xkcd.com/702/ [xkcd.com] Well ...... maybe not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154996</id>
	<title>Re:Aw shucks...</title>
	<author>hamburger lady</author>
	<datestamp>1266335100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i'd agree, but being from the country that shut down the SSC halfway through building, i can't talk. we probably would have already found the higgs by now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'd agree , but being from the country that shut down the SSC halfway through building , i ca n't talk .
we probably would have already found the higgs by now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'd agree, but being from the country that shut down the SSC halfway through building, i can't talk.
we probably would have already found the higgs by now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152756</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266262080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>African or Asian?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>African or Asian ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>African or Asian?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151426</id>
	<title>Re:To be clear what this means.</title>
	<author>telomerewhythere</author>
	<datestamp>1266247080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a question for you.  A real honest to goodness question that I didn't find a clear answer to in Wikipedia.  Are Supersymmetry and the Standard Model competing theories or complementary?  Or put another way, Do they describe the same thing differently or can both be true?  Thank you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a question for you .
A real honest to goodness question that I did n't find a clear answer to in Wikipedia .
Are Supersymmetry and the Standard Model competing theories or complementary ?
Or put another way , Do they describe the same thing differently or can both be true ?
Thank you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a question for you.
A real honest to goodness question that I didn't find a clear answer to in Wikipedia.
Are Supersymmetry and the Standard Model competing theories or complementary?
Or put another way, Do they describe the same thing differently or can both be true?
Thank you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152696</id>
	<title>Re:I'll say it again</title>
	<author>axonis</author>
	<datestamp>1266261240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you meant Watt's ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you meant Watt 's ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you meant Watt's ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152212</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151124</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Mitchell314</author>
	<datestamp>1266243960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But yet not the mass of a single library of congress.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But yet not the mass of a single library of congress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But yet not the mass of a single library of congress.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151520</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>kaini</author>
	<datestamp>1266248100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>see sig!</htmltext>
<tokenext>see sig !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>see sig!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832</id>
	<title>I'm lost.</title>
	<author>DJRumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1266251340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would imagine this is how my family and friends feel when I start speaking computer gibberish. I'd consider myself relatively competent to understand basic principles like gravity, mass, weight, etc, but can someone dumb this down?</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard\_Model" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard\_Model</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>I know that's probably a hopeless request without some sort of basis in this field, but can someone give the "particle physics for dummies" equivalent here?</p><p>I get the impression this is a hunt for some as yet unknown particle?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would imagine this is how my family and friends feel when I start speaking computer gibberish .
I 'd consider myself relatively competent to understand basic principles like gravity , mass , weight , etc , but can someone dumb this down ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard \ _Model [ wikipedia.org ] I know that 's probably a hopeless request without some sort of basis in this field , but can someone give the " particle physics for dummies " equivalent here ? I get the impression this is a hunt for some as yet unknown particle ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would imagine this is how my family and friends feel when I start speaking computer gibberish.
I'd consider myself relatively competent to understand basic principles like gravity, mass, weight, etc, but can someone dumb this down?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard\_Model [wikipedia.org]I know that's probably a hopeless request without some sort of basis in this field, but can someone give the "particle physics for dummies" equivalent here?I get the impression this is a hunt for some as yet unknown particle?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150600</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266239160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't you mean 1.6e-11 kg?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you mean 1.6e-11 kg ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you mean 1.6e-11 kg?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153052</id>
	<title>US voltage</title>
	<author>GerryHattrick</author>
	<datestamp>1266352800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>115 GeV?  Sounds like Fermilab is on half power too.  When Europe gets there at full power, it will surely be 240 GeV.  Ever heard of 'mains hum'?</htmltext>
<tokenext>115 GeV ?
Sounds like Fermilab is on half power too .
When Europe gets there at full power , it will surely be 240 GeV .
Ever heard of 'mains hum ' ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>115 GeV?
Sounds like Fermilab is on half power too.
When Europe gets there at full power, it will surely be 240 GeV.
Ever heard of 'mains hum'?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151454</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Seto89</author>
	<datestamp>1266247440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the contrary, everyone who has sufficient knowledge to understand the subject knows (and in this context prefers) these units. There is really no point in using kilograms in this context, unless you wanna account for the 11th grader creating a scale of mass...</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the contrary , everyone who has sufficient knowledge to understand the subject knows ( and in this context prefers ) these units .
There is really no point in using kilograms in this context , unless you wan na account for the 11th grader creating a scale of mass.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the contrary, everyone who has sufficient knowledge to understand the subject knows (and in this context prefers) these units.
There is really no point in using kilograms in this context, unless you wanna account for the 11th grader creating a scale of mass...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150918</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266241740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A serious lack of imagination indeed.  The research into the "wasteful science" will probably lead us to zero-pollution energy on a scale we can use.  Ahh, but that is not worth pursuing.  Now, if you want to get rid of wasteful science, I would strongly consider delaying any manned attempts at Mars for the next 50 years at least.  That is all a bunch of ego-driven nonsense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A serious lack of imagination indeed .
The research into the " wasteful science " will probably lead us to zero-pollution energy on a scale we can use .
Ahh , but that is not worth pursuing .
Now , if you want to get rid of wasteful science , I would strongly consider delaying any manned attempts at Mars for the next 50 years at least .
That is all a bunch of ego-driven nonsense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A serious lack of imagination indeed.
The research into the "wasteful science" will probably lead us to zero-pollution energy on a scale we can use.
Ahh, but that is not worth pursuing.
Now, if you want to get rid of wasteful science, I would strongly consider delaying any manned attempts at Mars for the next 50 years at least.
That is all a bunch of ego-driven nonsense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154214</id>
	<title>The rhic has also done some cool Science</title>
	<author>majortom1981</author>
	<datestamp>1266328380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just released yesterday I think. Some cool new stuff discovered at the rhic at brookhaven national labs.

<a href="http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/pubaf/pr/PR\_display.asp?prID=1074" title="bnl.gov">http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/pubaf/pr/PR\_display.asp?prID=1074</a> [bnl.gov]

"&ldquo;This research offers significant insight into the fundamental structure of matter and the early universe, highlighting the merits of long-term investment in large-scale, basic research programs at our national laboratories,&rdquo; said Dr. William F. Brinkman, Director of the DOE Office of Science. &ldquo;I commend the careful approach RHIC scientists have used to gather detailed evidence for their claim of creating a truly remarkable new form of matter.&rdquo;"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just released yesterday I think .
Some cool new stuff discovered at the rhic at brookhaven national labs .
http : //www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/pubaf/pr/PR \ _display.asp ? prID = 1074 [ bnl.gov ] "    This research offers significant insight into the fundamental structure of matter and the early universe , highlighting the merits of long-term investment in large-scale , basic research programs at our national laboratories ,    said Dr. William F. Brinkman , Director of the DOE Office of Science .
   I commend the careful approach RHIC scientists have used to gather detailed evidence for their claim of creating a truly remarkable new form of matter.    "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just released yesterday I think.
Some cool new stuff discovered at the rhic at brookhaven national labs.
http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/pubaf/pr/PR\_display.asp?prID=1074 [bnl.gov]

"“This research offers significant insight into the fundamental structure of matter and the early universe, highlighting the merits of long-term investment in large-scale, basic research programs at our national laboratories,” said Dr. William F. Brinkman, Director of the DOE Office of Science.
“I commend the careful approach RHIC scientists have used to gather detailed evidence for their claim of creating a truly remarkable new form of matter.”"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152062</id>
	<title>Re:I'm lost.</title>
	<author>dadjaka</author>
	<datestamp>1266254340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try <a href="http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard\_Model" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard\_Model</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs\_Boson" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs\_Boson</a> [wikipedia.org]

HTH</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try http : //simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard \ _Model [ wikipedia.org ] and http : //simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs \ _Boson [ wikipedia.org ] HTH</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard\_Model [wikipedia.org] and http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs\_Boson [wikipedia.org]

HTH</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152952</id>
	<title>Re:To be clear what this means.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1266351780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>that we'll narrow the mass down to a very tiny bound (if it exists) which would be strong evidence for its existence.</p></div><p>No it wouldn&rsquo;t. Because that would be like saying: We searched the whole world for Bigfoot, except for this little hut here. So he <em>must</em> be in that hut.</p><p>No he doesn&rsquo;t. Because you still haven&rsquo;t proven that he exists at all.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>that we 'll narrow the mass down to a very tiny bound ( if it exists ) which would be strong evidence for its existence.No it wouldn    t .
Because that would be like saying : We searched the whole world for Bigfoot , except for this little hut here .
So he must be in that hut.No he doesn    t .
Because you still haven    t proven that he exists at all .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that we'll narrow the mass down to a very tiny bound (if it exists) which would be strong evidence for its existence.No it wouldn’t.
Because that would be like saying: We searched the whole world for Bigfoot, except for this little hut here.
So he must be in that hut.No he doesn’t.
Because you still haven’t proven that he exists at all.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152404</id>
	<title>Re:Aw shucks...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266258180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hearing about all of the cool stuff still coming out of the older particle accelerators only makes me more excited about the LHC.  I can't wait to see what it will find out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hearing about all of the cool stuff still coming out of the older particle accelerators only makes me more excited about the LHC .
I ca n't wait to see what it will find out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hearing about all of the cool stuff still coming out of the older particle accelerators only makes me more excited about the LHC.
I can't wait to see what it will find out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31156602</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Maury Markowitz</author>
	<datestamp>1266343560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They're literally trying to understand what creates mass</p></div><p>No no no, they've already figured that out. Decades ago. You even know the name, "Higgs". We also roughly know the mass. There's very little we don't claim to know, and discovering that doesn't teach us anything.</p><p>The only success we should hope for at LHC is that they *don't* find the Higgs. Then the HEP world will have to face the fact that everyone knows but won't publicly admit, that the SM is almost certainly incomplete. But since we have no idea what would replace it, few are willing to come out and say so. Because then wouldn't be able to get the billions to build these devices, and people might have to get real jobs.</p><p>Maury</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're literally trying to understand what creates massNo no no , they 've already figured that out .
Decades ago .
You even know the name , " Higgs " .
We also roughly know the mass .
There 's very little we do n't claim to know , and discovering that does n't teach us anything.The only success we should hope for at LHC is that they * do n't * find the Higgs .
Then the HEP world will have to face the fact that everyone knows but wo n't publicly admit , that the SM is almost certainly incomplete .
But since we have no idea what would replace it , few are willing to come out and say so .
Because then would n't be able to get the billions to build these devices , and people might have to get real jobs.Maury</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're literally trying to understand what creates massNo no no, they've already figured that out.
Decades ago.
You even know the name, "Higgs".
We also roughly know the mass.
There's very little we don't claim to know, and discovering that doesn't teach us anything.The only success we should hope for at LHC is that they *don't* find the Higgs.
Then the HEP world will have to face the fact that everyone knows but won't publicly admit, that the SM is almost certainly incomplete.
But since we have no idea what would replace it, few are willing to come out and say so.
Because then wouldn't be able to get the billions to build these devices, and people might have to get real jobs.Maury
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152132</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>daveime</author>
	<datestamp>1266255180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's really really really tiny, but it would hurt like crazy if you touched it.</p><p>Simplistic enough for you ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's really really really tiny , but it would hurt like crazy if you touched it.Simplistic enough for you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's really really really tiny, but it would hurt like crazy if you touched it.Simplistic enough for you ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31158868</id>
	<title>Re:I'm lost.</title>
	<author>Mike610544</author>
	<datestamp>1266351780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>can someone give the "particle physics for dummies" equivalent here?</p></div><p>I think you'll find that <a href="http://www.timecube.com/" title="timecube.com">this page</a> [timecube.com] makes it all pretty clear.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>can someone give the " particle physics for dummies " equivalent here ? I think you 'll find that this page [ timecube.com ] makes it all pretty clear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>can someone give the "particle physics for dummies" equivalent here?I think you'll find that this page [timecube.com] makes it all pretty clear.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150572</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1266238980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is 10 to the power of -27 kg...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is lame.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is 10 to the power of -27 kg... /. is lame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is 10 to the power of -27 kg... /. is lame.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153074</id>
	<title>The usual pathetic jinguistic slashdot lameness.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266353100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US-duhmerican's ego is apparently really hurt. How come every non-result of Fermilab is commented with some jingoistic bullshit. This is science, not some pissing contest, get over it. Only the unscientific morons at this site believe the detection Higgs-Boson is the main goal of LHC. You idiots know \_nothing\_ about how science works. Despicable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US-duhmerican 's ego is apparently really hurt .
How come every non-result of Fermilab is commented with some jingoistic bullshit .
This is science , not some pissing contest , get over it .
Only the unscientific morons at this site believe the detection Higgs-Boson is the main goal of LHC .
You idiots know \ _nothing \ _ about how science works .
Despicable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US-duhmerican's ego is apparently really hurt.
How come every non-result of Fermilab is commented with some jingoistic bullshit.
This is science, not some pissing contest, get over it.
Only the unscientific morons at this site believe the detection Higgs-Boson is the main goal of LHC.
You idiots know \_nothing\_ about how science works.
Despicable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151830</id>
	<title>You know whats going to happen ?</title>
	<author>axonis</author>
	<datestamp>1266251340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>These Colliders will make some nice wind turbines once they are reprocessed. What goes around comes around.</htmltext>
<tokenext>These Colliders will make some nice wind turbines once they are reprocessed .
What goes around comes around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These Colliders will make some nice wind turbines once they are reprocessed.
What goes around comes around.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152212</id>
	<title>I'll say it again</title>
	<author>axonis</author>
	<datestamp>1266255900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the spoils of war come tropheys, Mark my words, every single one of these colliders will be recycled and reprocessed into long term and far more useful gear like wind turbines. Lets consider the Niobium or Columbium used extensively in them. Remember who controls the science solar system and its definately not Physicists.

For the unitelligent and poorly educated, "God" is and will always be the most intelligent lifeform on this planet not some Chinese Wisper collection of stories collected by warriors --&gt; and today these poorly educated group of Disciples who have learned a Discipline in an artificially coined and extinct "universe"  or University --&gt; that means Catholic for you stupidly faithful.

Like i said what goes around comes around, and Chemists or alchemists have already made a far more significant long term mark on these continually failing humans, for example uses of Chlorine<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the spoils of war come tropheys , Mark my words , every single one of these colliders will be recycled and reprocessed into long term and far more useful gear like wind turbines .
Lets consider the Niobium or Columbium used extensively in them .
Remember who controls the science solar system and its definately not Physicists .
For the unitelligent and poorly educated , " God " is and will always be the most intelligent lifeform on this planet not some Chinese Wisper collection of stories collected by warriors -- &gt; and today these poorly educated group of Disciples who have learned a Discipline in an artificially coined and extinct " universe " or University -- &gt; that means Catholic for you stupidly faithful .
Like i said what goes around comes around , and Chemists or alchemists have already made a far more significant long term mark on these continually failing humans , for example uses of Chlorine ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the spoils of war come tropheys, Mark my words, every single one of these colliders will be recycled and reprocessed into long term and far more useful gear like wind turbines.
Lets consider the Niobium or Columbium used extensively in them.
Remember who controls the science solar system and its definately not Physicists.
For the unitelligent and poorly educated, "God" is and will always be the most intelligent lifeform on this planet not some Chinese Wisper collection of stories collected by warriors --&gt; and today these poorly educated group of Disciples who have learned a Discipline in an artificially coined and extinct "universe"  or University --&gt; that means Catholic for you stupidly faithful.
Like i said what goes around comes around, and Chemists or alchemists have already made a far more significant long term mark on these continually failing humans, for example uses of Chlorine ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150576</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Jonnty</author>
	<datestamp>1266238980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, 1.783 &#215; 1027 kg! Thanks for clearing that one up!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , 1.783   1027 kg !
Thanks for clearing that one up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, 1.783 × 1027 kg!
Thanks for clearing that one up!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150826</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>dissy</author>
	<datestamp>1266240900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds population</p></div><p>Do as you say, troll.</p><p>If you don't think computers are of any impact, then you should give yours away and get off the Internet.  Both are technology that exists because of science which as you say is pointless.</p><p>I guess to a troll, that statement pretty much is true.  One can be an asshole without the aid of any technology.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds populationDo as you say , troll.If you do n't think computers are of any impact , then you should give yours away and get off the Internet .
Both are technology that exists because of science which as you say is pointless.I guess to a troll , that statement pretty much is true .
One can be an asshole without the aid of any technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds populationDo as you say, troll.If you don't think computers are of any impact, then you should give yours away and get off the Internet.
Both are technology that exists because of science which as you say is pointless.I guess to a troll, that statement pretty much is true.
One can be an asshole without the aid of any technology.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153204</id>
	<title>Re:Unanswered questions still</title>
	<author>JimboFBX</author>
	<datestamp>1266311460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Likewise, does it get wet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Likewise , does it get wet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Likewise, does it get wet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151770</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266250680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said.  Fundamental knowledge about the most basic building blocks of reality are useless and a waste of money.  That money should have gone to the banking or auto sector.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said .
Fundamental knowledge about the most basic building blocks of reality are useless and a waste of money .
That money should have gone to the banking or auto sector .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said.
Fundamental knowledge about the most basic building blocks of reality are useless and a waste of money.
That money should have gone to the banking or auto sector.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151038</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266243000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>As opposed to wasting trillions of dollars to destabilize the middle east? Yeah, that's a useful expenditure of tax payer dollars. Perhaps next year we can pay to remove all references to electrons from the chemistry text books while we're at it.<br> <br>

Seriously, the applications for a lot of this stuff doesn't become apparent until after it's been discovered, I'm not sure what people thought they'd be able to do with Maxwell's equations, but I doubt very much that they thought we'd get super colliders and computers out of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As opposed to wasting trillions of dollars to destabilize the middle east ?
Yeah , that 's a useful expenditure of tax payer dollars .
Perhaps next year we can pay to remove all references to electrons from the chemistry text books while we 're at it .
Seriously , the applications for a lot of this stuff does n't become apparent until after it 's been discovered , I 'm not sure what people thought they 'd be able to do with Maxwell 's equations , but I doubt very much that they thought we 'd get super colliders and computers out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As opposed to wasting trillions of dollars to destabilize the middle east?
Yeah, that's a useful expenditure of tax payer dollars.
Perhaps next year we can pay to remove all references to electrons from the chemistry text books while we're at it.
Seriously, the applications for a lot of this stuff doesn't become apparent until after it's been discovered, I'm not sure what people thought they'd be able to do with Maxwell's equations, but I doubt very much that they thought we'd get super colliders and computers out of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552</id>
	<title>Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266238860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>From Wikipedia, 1 GeV/c^2 = 1.783 &#215; 1027 kg . I wish summary articles were written so that most people could understand the terms used.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From Wikipedia , 1 GeV/c ^ 2 = 1.783   1027 kg .
I wish summary articles were written so that most people could understand the terms used .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From Wikipedia, 1 GeV/c^2 = 1.783 × 1027 kg .
I wish summary articles were written so that most people could understand the terms used.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31205480</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>BOwara</author>
	<datestamp>1266580140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or if one would rather deal with temperature: divide 1 eV by the Boltzmann constant and use 11,605K.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or if one would rather deal with temperature : divide 1 eV by the Boltzmann constant and use 11,605K .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or if one would rather deal with temperature: divide 1 eV by the Boltzmann constant and use 11,605K.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266239700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>wasteful science at it's worst. trying to detect something we can't see, 99.999\% (at least) of the worlds population wouldn't care if it was found and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds population. the world of physics and physicists needs to take a good long hard look at itself... and try and work out what it's going to do when the funding runs out... next year</p></div><p>I'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about electromagnetic waves either, until we made radios and wireless and microwaves and cell phones<br>I'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about electrons either, until we made TVs and computer monitors (and electricity itself)<br>I'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about photons either, until we made lasers and optical fibers to be the backbone of the Internet</p><p>They're literally trying to understand what creates mass. If you don't think anything useful or cool can come out of that, you seriously lack imagination. But since you're ACing I assume you're trolling and I just bought it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>wasteful science at it 's worst .
trying to detect something we ca n't see , 99.999 \ % ( at least ) of the worlds population would n't care if it was found and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds population .
the world of physics and physicists needs to take a good long hard look at itself... and try and work out what it 's going to do when the funding runs out... next yearI 'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about electromagnetic waves either , until we made radios and wireless and microwaves and cell phonesI 'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about electrons either , until we made TVs and computer monitors ( and electricity itself ) I 'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about photons either , until we made lasers and optical fibers to be the backbone of the InternetThey 're literally trying to understand what creates mass .
If you do n't think anything useful or cool can come out of that , you seriously lack imagination .
But since you 're ACing I assume you 're trolling and I just bought it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wasteful science at it's worst.
trying to detect something we can't see, 99.999\% (at least) of the worlds population wouldn't care if it was found and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds population.
the world of physics and physicists needs to take a good long hard look at itself... and try and work out what it's going to do when the funding runs out... next yearI'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about electromagnetic waves either, until we made radios and wireless and microwaves and cell phonesI'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about electrons either, until we made TVs and computer monitors (and electricity itself)I'm sure nobody technically gives a fuck about photons either, until we made lasers and optical fibers to be the backbone of the InternetThey're literally trying to understand what creates mass.
If you don't think anything useful or cool can come out of that, you seriously lack imagination.
But since you're ACing I assume you're trolling and I just bought it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151228</id>
	<title>can a Higgs Boson fly Southwest?</title>
	<author>YesIAmAScript</author>
	<datestamp>1266244920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or is it massive enough that it must purchase two seats?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or is it massive enough that it must purchase two seats ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or is it massive enough that it must purchase two seats?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31157442</id>
	<title>You're making it worse</title>
	<author>GameboyRMH</author>
	<datestamp>1266346320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously, the applications for a lot of this stuff doesn't become apparent until after it's been discovered, I'm not sure what people thought they'd be able to do with Maxwell's equations, but I doubt very much that they thought we'd get super colliders and computers out of it.</p></div><p>You just told the average idiot that the science they think is useless led to the invention of a giant money-wasting useless science machine, and a toy.</p><p>Here is the list of worthwhile results of science to the average moron:</p><p>Fire, as used in cooking<br>Paper, ink<br>Firearms<br>Automobiles<br>Cameras<br>Telephones<br>Computers (including gaming consoles), as used for facebooking, twittering, porn, gaming<br>Cell phones, particularly iPhones and Blackberries</p><p>Try to include some of these technologies into your justifications for scientific endeavors that don't yield immediate, tangible results. Be sure to mention some of them specifically, for example they won't understand integrated circuit -&gt; microprocessor -&gt; small computers -&gt; iPhone.</p><p>So, to fix your statement for you:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously, the applications for a lot of this stuff doesn't become apparent until after it's been discovered, I'm not sure what people thought they'd be able to do with Maxwell's equations, but I doubt very much that they thought we'd get <b>(redacted)</b> and <b>Xbox360s, facebook, twitter, internet porn and iPhones</b> out of it.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , the applications for a lot of this stuff does n't become apparent until after it 's been discovered , I 'm not sure what people thought they 'd be able to do with Maxwell 's equations , but I doubt very much that they thought we 'd get super colliders and computers out of it.You just told the average idiot that the science they think is useless led to the invention of a giant money-wasting useless science machine , and a toy.Here is the list of worthwhile results of science to the average moron : Fire , as used in cookingPaper , inkFirearmsAutomobilesCamerasTelephonesComputers ( including gaming consoles ) , as used for facebooking , twittering , porn , gamingCell phones , particularly iPhones and BlackberriesTry to include some of these technologies into your justifications for scientific endeavors that do n't yield immediate , tangible results .
Be sure to mention some of them specifically , for example they wo n't understand integrated circuit - &gt; microprocessor - &gt; small computers - &gt; iPhone.So , to fix your statement for you : Seriously , the applications for a lot of this stuff does n't become apparent until after it 's been discovered , I 'm not sure what people thought they 'd be able to do with Maxwell 's equations , but I doubt very much that they thought we 'd get ( redacted ) and Xbox360s , facebook , twitter , internet porn and iPhones out of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, the applications for a lot of this stuff doesn't become apparent until after it's been discovered, I'm not sure what people thought they'd be able to do with Maxwell's equations, but I doubt very much that they thought we'd get super colliders and computers out of it.You just told the average idiot that the science they think is useless led to the invention of a giant money-wasting useless science machine, and a toy.Here is the list of worthwhile results of science to the average moron:Fire, as used in cookingPaper, inkFirearmsAutomobilesCamerasTelephonesComputers (including gaming consoles), as used for facebooking, twittering, porn, gamingCell phones, particularly iPhones and BlackberriesTry to include some of these technologies into your justifications for scientific endeavors that don't yield immediate, tangible results.
Be sure to mention some of them specifically, for example they won't understand integrated circuit -&gt; microprocessor -&gt; small computers -&gt; iPhone.So, to fix your statement for you:Seriously, the applications for a lot of this stuff doesn't become apparent until after it's been discovered, I'm not sure what people thought they'd be able to do with Maxwell's equations, but I doubt very much that they thought we'd get (redacted) and Xbox360s, facebook, twitter, internet porn and iPhones out of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151038</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150678</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266239700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guess What - Your perfect world doesn't exist. whilst 99\% of the population may not care (I disagree with this statistic also, by the way) the discoveries made will be beneficial to the future populations of this planet.</p><p>You may not care about that; however you would not be on the internet, you would not have electric power, you would not have a motor vehicle, you would not have a large market full of goods from around the globe, you would actually have a pretty terrible life if it wasn't for early greek mathematicians Pythagoras, Euclid, Archimedes, to name a (very small) few.</p><p>You owe your current lifestyle to these men; and our future generations will owe their lifestyle to our mathematicians and physists - only if they get the funding they need, ney the funding the DESERVE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess What - Your perfect world does n't exist .
whilst 99 \ % of the population may not care ( I disagree with this statistic also , by the way ) the discoveries made will be beneficial to the future populations of this planet.You may not care about that ; however you would not be on the internet , you would not have electric power , you would not have a motor vehicle , you would not have a large market full of goods from around the globe , you would actually have a pretty terrible life if it was n't for early greek mathematicians Pythagoras , Euclid , Archimedes , to name a ( very small ) few.You owe your current lifestyle to these men ; and our future generations will owe their lifestyle to our mathematicians and physists - only if they get the funding they need , ney the funding the DESERVE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess What - Your perfect world doesn't exist.
whilst 99\% of the population may not care (I disagree with this statistic also, by the way) the discoveries made will be beneficial to the future populations of this planet.You may not care about that; however you would not be on the internet, you would not have electric power, you would not have a motor vehicle, you would not have a large market full of goods from around the globe, you would actually have a pretty terrible life if it wasn't for early greek mathematicians Pythagoras, Euclid, Archimedes, to name a (very small) few.You owe your current lifestyle to these men; and our future generations will owe their lifestyle to our mathematicians and physists - only if they get the funding they need, ney the funding the DESERVE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154664</id>
	<title>Re:To be clear what this means.</title>
	<author>zero.kalvin</author>
	<datestamp>1266332880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, SM wouldn't be wrong, however This extension of SM would be. I am not saying SM is perfect, there is a lot of problems with it, Mainly the mass problem. But not finding higgs wouldn't mean anything beyond the mechanism itself. SM is just the collection of theories dealing with the different forces. SM work in assuming we already have the mass.
Now from a person point of view, as a scientist I would rather not finding the higgs(or any mass-generation mechanism), because that would open the way to changing our entire perception of the subatomic world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , SM would n't be wrong , however This extension of SM would be .
I am not saying SM is perfect , there is a lot of problems with it , Mainly the mass problem .
But not finding higgs would n't mean anything beyond the mechanism itself .
SM is just the collection of theories dealing with the different forces .
SM work in assuming we already have the mass .
Now from a person point of view , as a scientist I would rather not finding the higgs ( or any mass-generation mechanism ) , because that would open the way to changing our entire perception of the subatomic world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, SM wouldn't be wrong, however This extension of SM would be.
I am not saying SM is perfect, there is a lot of problems with it, Mainly the mass problem.
But not finding higgs wouldn't mean anything beyond the mechanism itself.
SM is just the collection of theories dealing with the different forces.
SM work in assuming we already have the mass.
Now from a person point of view, as a scientist I would rather not finding the higgs(or any mass-generation mechanism), because that would open the way to changing our entire perception of the subatomic world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151144</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>tyroneking</author>
	<datestamp>1266244080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only thing I think will be useful to come out of this is the coincidental visit of Lexx (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVshOOG2hcc)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing I think will be useful to come out of this is the coincidental visit of Lexx ( http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = LVshOOG2hcc )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing I think will be useful to come out of this is the coincidental visit of Lexx (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVshOOG2hcc)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150840</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266241080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey bitch, just wanted to let you know you're a pathetic little shit and a cunt that will amount to nothing. The only thing you will probably accomplish in your life is get raped in your asshole by an elephant. You piece of fucking shit. Go fuck yourself you cunt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey bitch , just wanted to let you know you 're a pathetic little shit and a cunt that will amount to nothing .
The only thing you will probably accomplish in your life is get raped in your asshole by an elephant .
You piece of fucking shit .
Go fuck yourself you cunt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey bitch, just wanted to let you know you're a pathetic little shit and a cunt that will amount to nothing.
The only thing you will probably accomplish in your life is get raped in your asshole by an elephant.
You piece of fucking shit.
Go fuck yourself you cunt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151062</id>
	<title>Re:Aw shucks...</title>
	<author>hedwards</author>
	<datestamp>1266243240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Note, they possibly could still do it, it's not out of the realm of possibility that the higgs boson is going to require more than fermilab can throw at it. Additionally if it turns out that the higgs boson doesn't exist, you're probably going to want the LHC and possibly something bigger to really nail it down. Rather than just eliminate the larger sizes. I don't expect that this sort of research will really settle the question unless there's a positive result and somebody actually discovers it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Note , they possibly could still do it , it 's not out of the realm of possibility that the higgs boson is going to require more than fermilab can throw at it .
Additionally if it turns out that the higgs boson does n't exist , you 're probably going to want the LHC and possibly something bigger to really nail it down .
Rather than just eliminate the larger sizes .
I do n't expect that this sort of research will really settle the question unless there 's a positive result and somebody actually discovers it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note, they possibly could still do it, it's not out of the realm of possibility that the higgs boson is going to require more than fermilab can throw at it.
Additionally if it turns out that the higgs boson doesn't exist, you're probably going to want the LHC and possibly something bigger to really nail it down.
Rather than just eliminate the larger sizes.
I don't expect that this sort of research will really settle the question unless there's a positive result and somebody actually discovers it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31155592</id>
	<title>There is no stinkin' Higgs said the t-shirt</title>
	<author>sweetser</author>
	<datestamp>1266338400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hello:

Time for me to fight the LHC propaganda machine with my own efforts.  The unified standard model doesn't need the Higgs mechanism. <a href="http://www.zazzle.com/the\_stand\_up\_physicist\_said\_tshirt-235942932145293980" title="zazzle.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.zazzle.com/the\_stand\_up\_physicist\_said\_tshirt-235942932145293980</a> [zazzle.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hello : Time for me to fight the LHC propaganda machine with my own efforts .
The unified standard model does n't need the Higgs mechanism .
http : //www.zazzle.com/the \ _stand \ _up \ _physicist \ _said \ _tshirt-235942932145293980 [ zazzle.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hello:

Time for me to fight the LHC propaganda machine with my own efforts.
The unified standard model doesn't need the Higgs mechanism.
http://www.zazzle.com/the\_stand\_up\_physicist\_said\_tshirt-235942932145293980 [zazzle.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</id>
	<title>wasteful</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266239100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wasteful science at it's worst. trying to detect something we can't see, 99.999\% (at least) of the worlds population wouldn't care if it was found and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds population. the world of physics and physicists needs to take a good long hard look at itself... and try and work out what it's going to do when the funding runs out... next year</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wasteful science at it 's worst .
trying to detect something we ca n't see , 99.999 \ % ( at least ) of the worlds population would n't care if it was found and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds population .
the world of physics and physicists needs to take a good long hard look at itself... and try and work out what it 's going to do when the funding runs out... next year</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wasteful science at it's worst.
trying to detect something we can't see, 99.999\% (at least) of the worlds population wouldn't care if it was found and finding it would have zero impact on the worlds population.
the world of physics and physicists needs to take a good long hard look at itself... and try and work out what it's going to do when the funding runs out... next year</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153564</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>Tim C</author>
	<datestamp>1266317160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whenever anyone questions the value of a particular line of scientific enquiry I remind that we had lasers sat around in research labs for a long time before anyone thought of anything useful to do with them. Now the average person has a few at home, and they form part of the backbone of our entire communications network.</p><p>Just because we can't think of anything practical to do with it now doesn't mean it won't be life-changing at some point in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whenever anyone questions the value of a particular line of scientific enquiry I remind that we had lasers sat around in research labs for a long time before anyone thought of anything useful to do with them .
Now the average person has a few at home , and they form part of the backbone of our entire communications network.Just because we ca n't think of anything practical to do with it now does n't mean it wo n't be life-changing at some point in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whenever anyone questions the value of a particular line of scientific enquiry I remind that we had lasers sat around in research labs for a long time before anyone thought of anything useful to do with them.
Now the average person has a few at home, and they form part of the backbone of our entire communications network.Just because we can't think of anything practical to do with it now doesn't mean it won't be life-changing at some point in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151170</id>
	<title>Oh, you must be young.</title>
	<author>Singularity42</author>
	<datestamp>1266244320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Such idealism.  Problem is, the young don't vote as much.  They are also outnumbered by older people anyway.  I don't see the democracies that support the collider dropping funding anytime soon.  You'll grow up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Such idealism .
Problem is , the young do n't vote as much .
They are also outnumbered by older people anyway .
I do n't see the democracies that support the collider dropping funding anytime soon .
You 'll grow up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Such idealism.
Problem is, the young don't vote as much.
They are also outnumbered by older people anyway.
I don't see the democracies that support the collider dropping funding anytime soon.
You'll grow up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151746</id>
	<title>Re:Conversion to mass in kg</title>
	<author>Eudial</author>
	<datestamp>1266250380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree that GeV is the appropriate unit. Though it wouldn't hurt to have a paragraph explaining to people not well versed in physics how 1 GeV is roughly the mass of a hydrogen atom.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree that GeV is the appropriate unit .
Though it would n't hurt to have a paragraph explaining to people not well versed in physics how 1 GeV is roughly the mass of a hydrogen atom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree that GeV is the appropriate unit.
Though it wouldn't hurt to have a paragraph explaining to people not well versed in physics how 1 GeV is roughly the mass of a hydrogen atom.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150628</id>
	<title>Re:first!!!!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266239340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>LOL!</p></div><p>Dear Fermilab's Tevatron,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Thank you for announcing you got there first, and laughing in my face.  You big jerk.<br>Sincerely,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; LHC</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL ! Dear Fermilab 's Tevatron ,     Thank you for announcing you got there first , and laughing in my face .
You big jerk.Sincerely ,     LHC</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL!Dear Fermilab's Tevatron,
    Thank you for announcing you got there first, and laughing in my face.
You big jerk.Sincerely,
    LHC
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152118</id>
	<title>Higgs Boston Mass.</title>
	<author>CranberryKing</author>
	<datestamp>1266255000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Anyone else read it that way?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone else read it that way ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone else read it that way?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151912</id>
	<title>Unanswered questions still</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1266252360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Determining the mass is fine, I guess, but what about size - is it bigger than a breadbox?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Determining the mass is fine , I guess , but what about size - is it bigger than a breadbox ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Determining the mass is fine, I guess, but what about size - is it bigger than a breadbox?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150676</id>
	<title>Re:wasteful</title>
	<author>annex1</author>
	<datestamp>1266239700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I actually had to read your post 3 times, just to see if I could detect sarcasm.

The gene pool called and it would like you to GTFO.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually had to read your post 3 times , just to see if I could detect sarcasm .
The gene pool called and it would like you to GTFO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually had to read your post 3 times, just to see if I could detect sarcasm.
The gene pool called and it would like you to GTFO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154096</id>
	<title>Re:I'm lost.</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1266326820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I know that's probably a hopeless request without some sort of basis in this field, but can someone give the "particle physics for dummies" equivalent here?</i></p><p>No, probably not, but if you're interested, I heartily recommended<br><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060531096?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=bfc03-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;creativeASIN=0060531096" title="amazon.com">Warped Passages</a> [amazon.com] by Lisa Randall.  She spends first 80 or so pages reviewing physics in a manner accessible to those of us who took it in high school but need a refresher/update.  But it does take those 80 or so pages under your belt so you can understand the rest of her book. Hence my apprehension that a comment here could suffice.</p><p>It's a couple years old, so some of the information is probably dated by recent Tevatron and LHC results (IIRC some of the theories reviewed in the book were looking for Higgs to be at 600 GeV?) but the foundation allows current news to make sense.</p><p>Or just wait a couple years, it'll all be figured out by then (if the Euro doesn't collapse and send Europe into chaos...).  Understanding the multitude of theories used to shape the search isn't strictly necessary if it's found and plunked into the Standard Model.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know that 's probably a hopeless request without some sort of basis in this field , but can someone give the " particle physics for dummies " equivalent here ? No , probably not , but if you 're interested , I heartily recommendedWarped Passages [ amazon.com ] by Lisa Randall .
She spends first 80 or so pages reviewing physics in a manner accessible to those of us who took it in high school but need a refresher/update .
But it does take those 80 or so pages under your belt so you can understand the rest of her book .
Hence my apprehension that a comment here could suffice.It 's a couple years old , so some of the information is probably dated by recent Tevatron and LHC results ( IIRC some of the theories reviewed in the book were looking for Higgs to be at 600 GeV ?
) but the foundation allows current news to make sense.Or just wait a couple years , it 'll all be figured out by then ( if the Euro does n't collapse and send Europe into chaos... ) .
Understanding the multitude of theories used to shape the search is n't strictly necessary if it 's found and plunked into the Standard Model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know that's probably a hopeless request without some sort of basis in this field, but can someone give the "particle physics for dummies" equivalent here?No, probably not, but if you're interested, I heartily recommendedWarped Passages [amazon.com] by Lisa Randall.
She spends first 80 or so pages reviewing physics in a manner accessible to those of us who took it in high school but need a refresher/update.
But it does take those 80 or so pages under your belt so you can understand the rest of her book.
Hence my apprehension that a comment here could suffice.It's a couple years old, so some of the information is probably dated by recent Tevatron and LHC results (IIRC some of the theories reviewed in the book were looking for Higgs to be at 600 GeV?
) but the foundation allows current news to make sense.Or just wait a couple years, it'll all be figured out by then (if the Euro doesn't collapse and send Europe into chaos...).
Understanding the multitude of theories used to shape the search isn't strictly necessary if it's found and plunked into the Standard Model.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150592</id>
	<title>Fermilab Bastards.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266239100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The more I hear about Tevatron's new discoveries - and the slowing progress of the LHC; the more I think Fermilab had something to do with LHCs 'demise'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The more I hear about Tevatron 's new discoveries - and the slowing progress of the LHC ; the more I think Fermilab had something to do with LHCs 'demise'</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The more I hear about Tevatron's new discoveries - and the slowing progress of the LHC; the more I think Fermilab had something to do with LHCs 'demise'</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150840
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31156538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31158868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150980
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31205480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31157272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31156602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151124
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31155630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31157442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151038
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31155210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150936
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_2242248_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152696
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150664
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150980
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151144
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31156602
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151770
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150626
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31156538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31157442
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153204
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152404
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150936
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151746
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152132
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31205480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150582
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152756
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151454
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154702
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31158868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152062
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153702
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31157272
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31155210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31150778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31152952
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31155630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31151426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31154664
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_2242248.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_2242248.31153468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
