New data presented at a conference in India shows no new signs of the Higgs. The signal was probably just a statistical fluctuation."

Has anyone considered that the Higgs may actually be just a statistical fluctuation, a mathematical artifact required to both satisfy the symmetry of the fundamental particle structure and at the same time insure the uncertain nature of... well, nature.

I know this may sound like (and it may actually be) a silly question, but I am serious in asking it.

We have had to learn to deal with (if not fully understand) the dual particle/wave nature of light. Could we be looking for something that has a similar duality, only in this case of being both a mathematical construct but one that while having no physical existence still may mediate in physical ways with special particles like quarks?

Could such a thing exist (if exist is the correct term), even if the Higgs is not such a thing?

I'm not looking for religious based replies, I'm just considering the possibility (or not) of such a strange duality of an interacting but non physical thing existing (being present without physical existence?) and possibly even being measured, much as we do with the things we accept as having rather strange dual natures, like light.

Sorry for the probably poorly expressed concept, but it's the best I could do --if you can see what I'm trying to formulate a description of, and have any insights into the condition I'm trying to describe, I'd really like any edification anyone can offer --except religious explanations. I'm just looking for thoughts on the scientific possibility of could such a dual nature interacting concept (not a thing, just a concept of a thing mathematically expressible to a useful enough degree to make falsifiable predictions about, existing). The language is not helping me at all --how does one express the possible existence of a non existing, but interactive thing?

You make an interesting point. I'm guessing the fineprint when you signed up said you handover "non-exclusive, worldwide royalty free" permission to /. to use as they please (or suchlike). So essentially this is the only copy of you work, and you already have one licensee to it. But you cannot get rid of this work, and you cannot unlicense it.

Exactly the way I saw it... I am but one of /.'s million monkeys and even if I 'own' my post, I can never issue a takedown... How odd to think of myself as just another monkey, exactly like the ones in TFA --but then I agreed to this state of affairs and the monkeys are simply unaware (of such human foolishness). But they sure look happy --possibly there is a lesson we should pay attention to, lurking somewhere in this...

That brings up a question I've always wondered about --at the bottom of every /. page it says:

"Trademarks property of their respective owners. Comments owned by the poster. © 2011 All Rights Reserved. Geeknet, Inc."

If a poster can not edit or remove his post, how can he possibly own it?

Much like the monkey I may 'own' this post, but exactly like the monkey I have no say in it's future after I hit the submit button. So who really owns it? I don't think it's me...

Even basic things, like fairly well established 'net conventions have not penetrated very far. For example, many local Gov. officials send all caps emails (but then so does a fairly large % of the local populace).

Nevada in general, and Pahrump in particular, are among the nations lowest ranked in education. The Nevada educational systems are in desperate need of overhaul.

It is also worth noting that when arrested in his University of Nevada, Reno dorm, he had a stolen TV and equipment for making counterfeit drivers' licenses.

Here's a link to the local paper, with pictures and local comments; http://pvtimes.com/news/grade-change-scandal-rocks-pvhs/

A quote from the comments by "3rd year Engineering Student":

@Isaac- I don't know the kid so I can't comment on his actual personality in different situations. It is unusual to have a smile when being arrested for a felony charge. Also hacking a system is really just the same as getting a code to access it without authorization. He also "hacked" when he changed his GPA. Given he actually did these things, he would be considered a "Black Hat Hacker" which is the worst type of hacker(there are good hackers like web designers). You need to check the definition of a hacker.

I think "3rd year Engineering Student" may need to check some definitions himself... but the pathetic part is that no one questions his expertise, or the definitions he offers.

Pahrump is a nice place in many ways, but it's also a lot like stepping back in time in many ways. The population is about 35,000, and it's about 50 miles from Las Vegas.

I think it just sums up the situation succinctly:

"Nokia got trapped by that win32.elop.trojan."

Has look and feel of a Zero Day exploit, and is creating that sort of confusion as well.

One could easily say it's not Zero Day, but then all ZD's are developed quietly over time and simply 'sprung' on the unsuspecting and unprepared innocent victims one day. Pretty much what happened.

QT has merit, and if the merit is good enough, and I think it is, it will have a strong future... just probably not with Nokia. (and yes I am a GNU/OSS/FLOSS fan boy, just not a zealot about it).

Anyway much credit to "eMPee584" for such a fine summation (assuming he was not quoting some one else, without attribution).

As in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography

Well at least try, who knows what method (if any) he may have used.

Get rid of your mother-in-law and maybe collect insurance and big settlement because some sensor or CPU 'malfunctioned'.

Not saying the tech is there yet, but I'd wager it will be soon enough --and that someone will attempt it eventually (possibly successfully --how would anyone know?).