Stephen Hawking gets it wrong

Print

Stephen Hawking gets it wrong

3News NZ

Stephen Hawking (Reuters)

Stephen Hawking (Reuters)

By Brook Sabin

When 34-year-old Peter Higgs started the search for the mysterious “God particle” in the 1960s he was told his theory was ridiculous.

Even the world's most famous living scientist, Stephen Hawking didn’t think the discovery of the particle was likely. Today he told the BBC he bet $100 the Higgs particle would never be found.

“It seems like I have just lost $100,” he said on camera today.

But now it seems the particle has been proven, and Canterbury University is already using the very technology that helped find the Higgs boson to create colour x-rays.

It's a major breakthrough, but what does that mean?

“Better diagnosis, for example with heart problems or vascular problems, you can’t tell when you’ve got a plaque in your neck, whether it’s dangerous or likely to rupture,” says Professor Philip Butler of Canterbury University.

But colour x-rays will provide doctors with that information.

And as to whether other breakthroughs and inventions lie ahead because of the Higgs particle - don't bet against it.

3 News

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

12/12/2012 6:49:22 a.m.

JLM wrote:

I told a friend of mine that HB would be proven and that they ought to wait before going to far with there term paper. All those wasted trees! Oh well, I guess not every college drop out housewife like myself is as dumb as some claim we are.

9/07/2012 10:07:50 a.m.

Bruce wrote:

I certainly don't think Stephen would mind at all about losing a bet. He made a similar bet in the early 80s. That bet concluded with Stephen paying a years subscription to Penthouse magazine for one of his colleagues.. Such is with real science. Scientists just love being proven wrong. creation scientists on the other hand loath being proven wrong. You are likely to be ridiculed and abused, because creation science is fundamentally reliant on a pre-conceived outcome. Science should never be reliant on any pre-conceived outcome.