In the case of the Higgs, physicists can only infer its existence and its properties from the more mundane particles it decays to produce—say, gamma-ray photons or pairs of electrons. The new particle has the right mass to be the Higgs and broadly decays as predicted, although a few ambiguities remain. Fortunately, more data are right around the corner. "We have only recorded one third of the data expected in 2012," ATLAS spokesperson Fabiola Gianotti of CERN said during her presentation. "This is just the beginning. There is more to come."
Both Gianotti and CMS spokesperson Joe Incandela of the University of California, Santa Barbara, were greeted by large outbursts of applause when they displayed the slides outlining the results of their Higgs search.
"There aren’t many discoveries like this," Columbia physicist Brian Cole told the group assembled on campus for the early-morning viewing party. "This trumps, I would say, everything in my physics career.…So I hope you all remember this for the rest of your lives."
Just before sunrise, four Columbia undergraduates made their way out of the library and back across campus. Only two of them were studying physics, they said—one was focusing on chemistry and another on math. But they all agreed that it had been worth staying up late to see history in the making.
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
87 Comments
Add Comment
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMany thanks for this careful and thoughtful reporting of the fact that the mystery resonance has been verified,and that it has some properties like that of the Higgs boson, but that its exact identity is still in question.
Robert L. Oldershaw
http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
Discrete Scale Relativity
We had a similar atmosphere of giddiness here in Seattle, where researchers shared the moments in a bar. Details at this link http://ow.ly/c12yf
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHappy day - the experimenters have achieved a milestone.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNice analogy:
"...the Higgs mechanism, hypothesizing the existence of a field permeating all of space, along with an associated particle. The field imparts particles with mass by exerting a sort of drag on them, slowing them down much like a human being slows down when she tries to walk through water instead of air."
A better analogy would have been have been that the principle particles imparted with mass during their creation, quarks and electrons, were emitted into and failed to propagate through the exceedingly dense early universe, thereby converting their propagation energy into the potential energy of mass. In comparison, particles emitted into the sparse conditions of the more recent universe have little or no mass (excluding those particles produced by the decay of already massive particles).
At any rate, happy day for the experimenters. However:
- The results actually indicate only that some particle of ~125 GeV mass decayed into two photons. Other than the decayed particle's apparent mass, no other characteristics can be inferred from this data. I hope that other data is available that might be used to at least infer other characteristics...
- Is there no possibility that the decaying particle is something completely unrelated to the hypothesized Higgs boson (that would indicate the decay of a particle's mass) - a previously undiscovered generation IV bottom quark, for example?
- What indicates that these observations of photon decay products confirms that the proposed Higgs mechanism imparted mass to some selected particles?
stephenreal: From what I understand, the ATLAS experiment, alone, consists of approximately 3000 researchers from far more countries than europe, including the US. I don't think the "students?" here are "seceding" from science for the Europeans.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@jtdwyer: I'm not a particle physicist so take everything I say with a grain of salt. But from my understanding, the way they detected the Higgs boson is by monitoring the other particles that are created after the Higgs boson decays. The results are consistent with the properties of the Higgs--chargeless, colorless, possibly spinless. If it was something else, e.g. a new quark, then the possible decays would be different (as quarks have charge and color). So the data is showing a very Higgs-like behavior. The mystery still remains if its a Higgs particle as predicted by the Standard Model or if its an exotic variant predicted by other theories such as supersymmetry, etc.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'll be surprised if today is July 4, 2012 announced the discovery of the Higgs boson. This will be the biggest fraud in the history of science.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI explain my position. In collisions of protons in colliding beams gives rise to a number of short-lived particles with different masses. They will try to announce that the discovered particle with mass equal to the mass of the Higgs boson. However, the proof that it is the Higgs boson will not be presented.
Illogic of the experiment at the LHC lies in the fact that the presence of the mass of the particle is not a short-lived situation. Massa is a stable and long-term state of a particle. The mass defect is associated with the emission of a photon but not emission of the Higgs boson. Thus, the Higgs boson has no relation to the process of forming the mass of the particle.
Higgs boson is contrary to Einstein's theory when the mass is formed as a result of the curvature of space-time.
Dr. Vladimir Leonov
http://www.blogger.com/profile/03427189015718990157
Speculation around the Higgs boson must be stopped. Higgs boson does not exist in nature. It’s impossible to find.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI explain the reasons for this paradox for those who still believe in the Higgs boson:
1. Higgs contradicts the theory of Einstein gravitation. If the Higgs boson is responsible for the formation of particle masses, he is responsible for creating the gravitational field. But the gravitational field arises from the curvature of space-time as Einstein taught us. Why it was necessary to introduce the Higgs field, when for the formation of gravity and mass of the particles is responsible the Einstein field?
2. Higgs boson does not have the electromagnetic properties. He cannot unite gravity and electromagnetism. This is contrary to Einstein's concept of unification of fundamental interactions.
3. Higgs boson is not a particle of time, and it does not have wave properties. He is not fit into the theory of quantum gravity.
4. Higgs boson is not the particle of space and space-time. He is not responsible for the creation of gravity and mass.
Thus, the Higgs boson is a hypothetical particle and it does not really exist because it contradicts Einstein's theory.
I understand it is very difficult to admit mistakes. But scientific truth is a top priority for scientist. You must be able to recognize their mistakes and not led by the nose the scientific community.
Standard Model cannot explain the nature of gravity. Higgs boson as the basis of gravity is not confirmed experimentally because contrary to Einstein's theory. The criteria for assessing the correctness of the theory of gravitation are an experiment to create artificial gravity. The LHC is not suitable for this role in a methodical plan.
Why ignore the achievements of other scientists who already have huge results in the creation of artificial gravity? It turns out that the corporate interests of managers the LHC and their employee is more important than scientific truth.
Necessary once again remind that I have created the theory of Superunification which is published in two editions:
1. Leonov V. S. Quantum Energetics. Volume 1. Theory of Superunification. Cambridge International Science Publishing, 2010, 745 pages.
2. V.S. Leonov. Quantum Energetics: Theory of Superunification. Viva Books, India, 2011, 732 pages.
Dr. Vladimir Leonov
http://www.blogger.com/profile/03427189015718990157
Thanks - your comment made me wonder exactly what is known about the new particle that has been detected. I did find a little more in the CERN announcement letter http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2012/PR17.12E.html
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRegarding the particle characteristics that have been determined, it quotes CMS experiment spokesperson Joe Incandela:
"The results are preliminary but the 5 sigma signal at around 125 GeV we’re seeing is dramatic. This is indeed a new particle. We know it must be a boson and it’s the heaviest boson ever found.”
The announcement also states:
"The next step will be to determine the precise nature of the particle and its significance for our understanding of the universe. Are its properties as expected for the long-sought Higgs boson, the final missing ingredient in the Standard Model of particle physics? Or is it something more exotic?"
The ATLAS experiment announcement http://www.atlas.ch/news/2012/latest-results-from-higgs-search.html
states:
"The Higgs Boson is an unstable particle, living for only the tiniest fraction of a second before decaying into other particles, so experiments can observe it only by measuring the products of its decay. In the Standard Model, a highly successful physics theory that provides a very accurate description of matter, the Higgs Boson is expected to decay to several distinct combinations of particles, or channels, with the distribution among the channels depending on its mass."
More specifically, it explains:
"The next steps for ATLAS, the LHC and the high-energy physics community are to measure the properties of this particle and compare these measurements with the predicted properties of the Higgs Boson. Already some of these properties match the predictions: the fact that it is seen in the predicted channels and at a mass favoured by other, indirect measurements."
The CMS site includes a new page http://cms.web.cern.ch/news/cms-higgs-boson-search-results-2010-2011-data-samples
"The significance of the largest excess (at 124 GeV) has increased slightly to 2.1 standard deviations [5]. There is no substantive change in our conclusions: the question of the existence of the Standard Model Higgs boson can only be resolved with the collection of more data during 2012."
A best I can understand, most of the significance is attached to data regarding pairs of photons produced by the decay of a very heavy particle. While it's indicated that it has been determined that the decaying particle is a boson, I don't find how that was determined from the two photons...
if you say that the particles released from the decay will exibit consistent properties to the higgs then why would they have no spin if the higgs is a boson?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks for all those great articles. It will be really interesting to see what new things they will find out for their next update.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWith regards to how they determine that its a Higgs boson from two photons, there is a nice video from one of the scientists that work at CERN. It can explain better than I ever could how they know that the Higgs was created:
http://vimeo.com/41038445
A boson is any particle that has integer spin (i.e 0, 1, 2), while a fermion is any particle that has half-integer spin (e.g. electrons have spin-1/2). The standard model Higgs is a spin-0 particle.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlthough the Higgs has zero spin, the particles that decay from it don't necessarily have to have spin-0. They can have other spins as long as the "sum" of the spins from the decay particles add up to zero.
One final note, today's announcement didn't actually confirm that the particle they discovered had spin of 0 (as predicted by the Standard Model). It might actually have a different spin which would be really exciting since it would be consistent with the Higgs of other theories such as supersymmetry which go beyond the Standard Model.
I wonder if all those who trolled Higgs articles in the past claiming that the Higgs Boson was nothing more than fiction will be just as loud in their apologies. I somehow doubt it. If it had been up to them, we would never had made this discovery. Just another example of how the scientifically illiterate drag us down.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI should have also mentioned the very good Nature News article http://www.nature.com/news/physicists-find-new-particle-but-is-it-the-higgs-1.10932
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlas, the video looked cute but my 3 kHz tinnitus makes hearing the dialog among all the background noise of the CERN cafeteria problematic. Thanks, though...
tsukiyomii100,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks for that, I had forgotten the difference beween Bosons and Fermions.
Also I will back those at CERN again the doubters and demeaners in the posts here.
There are always those who cannot accept anything that is different to what they believe. We would still be in the Dark Ages if they were in charge
If particle detected is really Higgs boson, it will be really a landmark event in the history of Science particularly Physics. Electronic media in India has telecast this news as main news in news bulletin and daily newspapers have printed on front page. Electronic media in India has telecast special programms on Higgs Boson. In a way, media has created such a hype about this event to make the discovery as news of masses on streets. I presume this might have happened in other countries also.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHowever, from scientific perspective, I do not find much of the information. I want information on following points :
1) It is said that Higggs Boson is primarily responsible for imparting mass to matter particles - electron and quarks. What is the meaning of matter particle without mass ? Can an electron be treated as a matter particle without mass? It appears to me that Higgs mechanism brings matter particle into existence. So its significance lies in the fact that without it matter particles would not have existed. But how Higgs brings matter into existence and from what source remains a mystery.
2) Press releases only mentions 125 GEV as mass of Higgs Boson and silent on other properties
3) If Higgs Boson was responsible for endowing mass to matter in the universe, why its existence is so tranastiery that it exists for a millionth of a billionth of a sec only. It should have been a permanent boson particle like photon.
4) Physicists say that space is filled with Higgs field from where it sticks with the matter particles to provide mass. During the early periods of Universe, Most of the matter with mass was created. Now in universe we do not find incidents of matter creation. On the contrary, lot of mass is being converted into energy in stars thro fusion. In this manner, during early periods of universe, lot of Higgs Boson might have been consumed in matter/mass creation. So how Physicists say that space is still filled with Higgs Boson
4) What is the source of Higgs Field?
5) How Higgs Field is related to gravitation.
6) How Higg Field is related to GUF forces ( e.m+strong+weak). which one is more fundamental
I am distressed that even articles in eminent magazines like SA are not touching scientific aspects of Higgs Boson but only providing sketchy information like in daily new bulletins
I shall be thankful if anyone who has clarity of thought process could address above issues
If Higgs Boson is the particle that gives mass, then it has to be an extremely stable particle or it has to be produced continually to hold onto the field it produces. Then why did it decay so quickly in the experiment? It should have been more stable like the electron or proton.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I wonder if all those who trolled Higgs articles in the past claiming that the Higgs Boson was nothing more than fiction will be just as loud in their apologies."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNot that I count myself into the center of that group but you do target people like me. Got your gun ready and your feet bared? Here goes:
Have you read the CERN text through, REALLY and THOROUGHLY? Not with your untainted-by-objectivity fan glasses? Have you pondered everything the CERN people have said? And I mean, ALL the nifty little words that one's eye normally barely registers when a fan's heart is full of gratitude?
If you had you'd be scratching your head:
a) what they present as THE Higgs is nothing but something resembling it; it's like looking for a specific bird, then seeing a bird, then declaring that because it has the approximate weight and color it is the bird you were looking for; you'd be kicked out of biology for such amateurism; why do physicists get away with it? Because they keep their group so secluded, their vocabulary so fabulastic and their press releases so eggheaded that nobody dares speak up; whereas in reality they break a main rule in science defined by Rutherford, Einstein and Hawking: "if you can't explain it in simple terms, it's probably crap";
b) add up all the "possible, near certain, quite sure" etc vocabulary and what do you get? The physics equivalent of a Romney press release on solving the economic crisis; perfect spin job (yeah, I know, pun...)
c) CERN needs at least 5 billion Euros for its new sitting duck, a linear collider, which will be as "valuable" as the present ringie thingie, and which they want to start building end of this year; as in sports, no success stories, no sponsors; your head start bleedin from the scratchin?
They haven't found the Higgs. Because it doesn't exist. The Higgs appeals to modern physicists because they don't have any imagination; they are the most uncreative bunch of scientists on earth, except in matters of budget, pay and press dos. Physics today is dominated by people in love with equations. Einstein wouldn't even be allowed near CERN these days. Too creative.
The one good thing about this whole top-level hypocrisy is that they keep discovering stuff they would else not have found. But whatever that is, it is not worth the budget nor the crippling of intellectual ressources. It's a playmobil for some super-egotripping physicists who don't have the imagination required to take physics the quantum step forward towards an elegant standard model.
Sand in the eyes.
Keep scratchin!
"I wonder if all those..."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd the header of this article? "New Particle RESEMBLING..."
ts
"If Higgs Boson is the particle that gives mass, then it has to be an extremely stable particle or it has to be produced continually to hold onto the field it produces. Then why did it decay so quickly in the experiment? It should have been more stable like the electron or proton."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting questions. That's why I speculate that:
- the Higgs boson, if it exists, does not exist within a quark but rather is some aspect of a force field of mass encapsulating primarily quarks and electrons. If/when this mass field is separated from a particle (very difficult to do), its energy is manifested as an extremely unstable particle that 'immediately' decays.
- As I understand, quarks were all created in the very early universe, and have persisted to this day. As long as the quark and its field of mass remain in their required configuration they are both stable.
- The quark's force field of mass was imparted at the moment of particle emission or condensation in the very early universe - it reflects the energy density into which the quark was emitted. Electrons, emitted later, reflect the prevailing energy density at that time. Photons reflect the much more disperse energy density of later times. Call this the Higgs field if you like (I certainly can't do the math), but the required but unspecified particle-mass configuration selection provided by the Higgs field was a function of the temporal diminishment of universal energy density as particles were initially emitted.
- I think that if a gravitational field were somehow separated from its object of mass its external energy field would dissipate, perhaps as an enormous cascade of ever more unstable particles...
RSchmidt.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"I wonder if all those who trolled Higgs articles in the past claiming that the Higgs Boson was nothing more than fiction will be just as loud in their apologies ..."
Apologize for what? Skepticism in the absence of the standard measure of proof? One might reasonably question the Scientific Beliefs of others in the absence of 5-sigma results.
"... I somehow doubt it ..."
As there was no reason to apologize, I too doubt I'll see much of those unwarranted apologies.
"... If it had been up to them, we would never had made this discovery ..."
Nonsense - or should I say 'nonScience'? Science thrives on skepticism.
"... Just another example of how the scientifically illiterate drag us down."
Remember "Cold Fusion"? LOL!
"This is the payoff," "This is what you do it for."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGarbage Science. The eternal search for more and more questions.
Create a particle? Who cares? How could that possibly help Humans and this planet?
A machine that creates gold, now that would be something else. Or maybe we could just build a machine that would do nothing, but we could filch gold out of people while getting them to believe the machine is going to answer all these darn questions we keep coming up with.
I remain skeptical that it is the Higgs that has been found. In fact, I predict that in the not so distant future that the alleged Higgs will be determined to be something else entirely. It will remain an important discovery, but for different reasons altogether.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI had to reread jtdwyer's post twice before I concluded that he had misspelled "principal" as "principle."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis particle, which seems to be the Higgs boson, marks the beginning of analysis with the Hadron. We now have to determine what the constituents and character of black matter and black energy is. These black components, after all, make up about 98% of the matter and energy of our universe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks, - it's not the first time & probably won't be the last time, either...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAn interesting fact emerges along a different track.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat, when something is around for long enough, praised enough, monopolized discussion enough, many are tempted to assume it must be the most efficient way of doing something or even is the only way of doing them.
There used to be times when collision experiments were used with antiparallel beams of antiparticles, usually electrons and positions. These completely annihilated, supposedly, and the resulting energy, presumably, could form any of a number of quantum stochastically rqandom particles. Proton-proton beam collisions supposedly produce new particles from excess energy of motion of particles, but often through various more exotic interactions of fields between quarks, and, then, only certain types of particles seem to be possible.
In a matter-antimatter collision, all the energy could be put to particles, and particles presumably of any type. In proton-proton collisions, not all the energy is converted to new particles. In fact, much of the energy is expended just in overcoming electrostatic repulsion, getting protons close enough for exotic interactions. Too, almost no particles should remain in annihilation collisions, whereas all the original particles or their fragments should remain in proton-proton collisions.
It can be a good question why the evidently less efficient proton-proton method is being used rather than the matter-antimatter method.
Congrats to all involved in this possibly significant observation of a new particle with the characteristics ascribed to Higgs.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is utterly appalling that a small typo can result in such a colossal misunderstanding on a global scale; so please allow me to set the record straight.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientists in Geneva like to unwind at a topless bar directly across from the CERN facility. One of the more endowed performers there is a Miss Lola Higgs.
What has been uncovered at that establishment is the Higgs BOSOM.
Whether the Higgs Bosom is Godly or an artifact of surgical science is still a subject of speculation. But scientists are determined to pursue their observations until the matter is resolved.
Eppur Si Muove, Higgs Particle YOK
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRegardless Of Whatever Whoever
Regardless Of Whatever Is Said By Whoever Says It -
Higgs Particle YOK.
S Hawking is simply wrong in accepting it. Obviously wrong.
Everyone who accepts the story of the Higgs particle is simply wrong.
Plain commonsense.
Singularity and the Big Bang MUST have happened with the smallest base universe particles, the gravitons, that MUST be both energy and mass, even if they are inert mass just one smallest fraction of a second at singularity. All mass formats evolve from gravitons that convert into energy i.e. extricate from their gravitons clusters into mass formats in motion, energy. And they all end up again as mass in a repeat singularity.
Universe expansion and re-contraction proceed simultaneously..
Dov Henis (comments from 22nd century)
http://universe-life.com/
http://universe-life.com/2012/02/03/universe-energy-mass-life-compilation/
To jtdwyer
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The quark's force field of mass was imparted at the moment of particle emission or condensation in the very early universe - it reflects the energy density into which the quark was emitted. Electrons, emitted later, reflect the prevailing energy density at that time. Photons reflect the much more disperse energy density of later times. Call this the Higgs field if you like (I certainly can't do the math)"
Above is exactly the issue facing Physicists. If quarks, electrons and photons were created from the same energy density, what made such a difference in theie characteristics. Quarks and electrons gained masses (though quite differently) while photons continued to propagate at constant c. Apart from mass, there is also difference in their other characteristics viz spin, charge and difference in their interaction properties. Was original energy density at rest or in continuous motion? What made the photons to propagate at c and what fixed the value of c? If quarks, electrons and photons are postulated to to be created from same energy density, some external Field or mechanism might have intervened to create particles of different characteristics. Challenge which lies before Physicists to understand that Field or mechanism.
A few things are certain and one is mass is energy and energy is mass. When we say particles have differing masses it is the same as saying they have differing energy. I do not know whether the Higgs boson has been detected but do hold some doubts. In any event, there must be a Higgs-like mechanism. It is required by the Standard Model to explain the mass/energy differences of detected or known particles.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI suspect there is a lower level of unknown particles that compose the standard model particles. When these are determined the widely scattered pieces of the grand physics puzzle should fall into place. The problems of mass, gravitation and several others will then be solved. I am suggesting the standard model particles are not elementary but composites. I for one have not thrown in the towel in the search for the theory of everything or TOE. The future looks very promising and I hope to add something to the hunt. Even if not I will be an engaged observer.
Dear Sci-Am !Thank you for this article and especially for the 29 comments. I have spent many hours in reading an crossreading the offered material. The main article and the 29 comments with the IP adresses. Every minute was worth it. Dr. Kamlander@aon.at
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI won't attempt to ansewr all your questions, but you seem to have missed the most critical feature of my suggested 'enhanced Higgs mechanism'. You ask:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"If quarks, electrons and photons were created from the same energy density..."
You apparently missed the paragraph that stated:
"- it reflects the energy density into which the quark was emitted. Electrons, emitted later, reflect the prevailing energy density at that time. Photons reflect the much more disperse energy density of later times. Call this the Higgs field if you like (I certainly can't do the math), but the required but unspecified particle-mass configuration selection provided by the Higgs field was a function of the temporal diminishment of universal energy density as particles were initially emitted."
In the expanding universe its generally considered that universal density must diminish as the universe expands. I suggest that the diminishing universal density was a critical factor in determining how much mass was acquired by particles emitted during that time. The mechanism would have to be complex to produce the masses assigned to categories of particles with specific masses, as density presumedly varied continuously, but there does seem to be a strong correlation between the mass acquired by particles emitted at various times and the density of the temporally developing expanding universe.
Here are two good short articles by experts on the meaning of the Higgs-like discovery at CERN. One is by physicist and Nobel Laureate Frank Wilczek. There are four different decay paths with differing end particles and not just the two photon decay path mentioned in earlier comments on this blog.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/blog/2012/07/thanks-mom/
The other article is by physicist Don Lincoln.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/blog/2012/07/higgs-fireworks-on-july-4/
I suggest you read both short articles as together they clear at least some of the fog. For those who do not have time to read both here is a short statement by Don:
"It is very important to stress that neither experiment team has claimed to have observed the Higgs boson. They have observed something without a doubt, but the Standard Model Higgs boson is a very specific thing. To be sure we’re seeing the Higgs boson and not a lookalike, we need to see it in all of the predicted decay modes."
(Recall there are four predicted decay paths with differing end particles. It is important to observe all of them and more. Have fun reading ... KenKoskinen)
Thanks - great points! BTW, the discussions probably focused on the two photon decay path because that was the focus of CERN announcements. Both the CMS and ATLAS experimenters report success in detecting the two photons whose momentum indicates the decay of a ~125 GeV particle.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/07/at-long-last-physicists-discover.html
"CMS researchers also see evidence of the Higgs decaying into a pair of particles called W bosons or a pair of particles called Z bosons... Those massive particles convey the weak nuclear force in exactly the same way that photons convey the electromagnetic force."
kenkoskinen:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this'I suspect there is a lower level of unknown particles that compose the standard model particles.'
Fully agree. Or at the very least the mass producing process. Mainly a matter of a magnification that we are not yet capable of today. The true value IMO of the Higgs project is that its results will offer the basis of a coherent explanation of this level. Which might then lead to a SM with something approaching elegance.
Your comment quoting Wilczek and Lincoln MOST appreciated. Been exactly my point all along but then who am I? So seen their standing, one can't underrate both researchers' contribution to the present discussion.
In spite of the exuberance over the recent discovery, it is not yet definitively clear what has been discovered. Some web sites and blogs have been honest enough to admit this uncomfortable truth (although they remain in the minority). There is no question that something interesting has been found, but I am still betting that it is not the Higgs. Instead I think it reveals that there is a greater complexity to the space-time structure than has been previously conceived of. In fact it may be the first indication of evidence of a hierarchical stratification of the space-time geometry (which provides the extra-dimensional structure that is suggested by string theory, although with an inclusion of extra time dimensions). christina anne knight
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell said. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it could be a penguin. Must be budget time at LHC, a billion dollar bullshit container.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo would you like to address oldhopalong's statement and how it relates to your defense of it? Is that the critical skepticism you speak of? No unwarranted criticisms there? No "nonScience" uttered in that statement? You go ahead and stand behind that guy, we'll watch.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInstead of the Higgs it is possible that what has been found is an interstratum, intermediate boson that would fit in with a model of hierarchically stratified space-time geometry.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInstead of the Higgs it is possible that what has been found is an interstratum, intermediate boson that would fit in with a model of hierarchically stratified space-time geometry. In this model space-time consists of three strata comprising 12 dimensions (9 space and 3 time). Because of the stratum dependent variation in the constant c, there is a stratum dependent variation in the effects special relativity has on the the motion of particles as they oscillate through the tri-stratum structure. At the energies produced at LHC the strata are compressed and there is a brief synchronization between the strata that produces (very briefly) an intermediate boson that almost immediately decays.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOh, sorry. I forgot the first rule of polite conversation...never make fun of another man's religion.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think how comical it must be for 10th dimensional beings looking down on the 4th trying to describe a particle that exist out side of our realm.The real question here is how is the Higgs field any different than the space-time field?Are they one in the same?Will this data answer what space-time really is?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHIGGS-PARTICLE FOUND IS AN UNCERTAIN ANNOUNCEMENT.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJune 4 2012 CERN announced to have found the Higgs-particle (4.5 Sigma-certainty, not 4.9), which is not quite entitled to carry the predicate of discovery (therefore 5 Sigma-certainty is needed). A CERN physicist with knowledge (his name is not mentioned in the press-announcements!?) said: "The discovery was not necessarily definitive". So I start to be a little suspicious, because the announcement seems to feed the CERN-budgets and the 'fixed idea' of a Higgs-particle to exist. There is theoretically proof enough it might be something else. In one of my proposals I suggest, it might be a Higgs-Limited-Boson-Surface (Higss-LBS), which is not a singular Higgs-mass. The LBS-version combines a new equivalent particle by suggesting the inflation-field-particle (inflaton) and the Higgs-LBS (mass-creation) are united in one (new) "dark energy force". This new force enables to generate a 'limited force surface', which restores the symmetry between a left-and right-handed neutrino. This force explains the expansion of the Big Bang in a new cosmology, called the Double Torus Universe. Moreover, if SUSY-particles do not exist (super-symmetric particles in the never proved String-theory, as well as in the Standard Model of Particle Physics), then the singular Higgs-mass would be much larger than now theoretically is assumed. And what is the shocking case: In 2011 CERN confirmed there is not a single piece of evidence-certainty that SUSY particles exist. In this respect I think back of 2010, when Christopher Forbes (UK), PhD-Math and Physics, estimated the value in the range of 12.097 - 13.8674 TeV/c2.
Hence, why should I believe CERN now "discovered" the Higgs-particle in a lower range? This announcement looks like a mixture of 'politics and science', in favor of politics, instead of the integrity of science (as in the 20th century and earlier back in time). 'Politics', 'funds' and 'fixed idea' nowadays interfere. I need more proof for the Higgs-particle and so does the entire community!
Dan Visser, Almere, The Netherlands.
Reference: www.darkfieldnavigator.com
Independent Cosmologist
Your statement is correct but what I think is missing is that energy consist of a wave type pattern and a solid place of coherence (where it was observed). The other part of the puzzle is that the wave has components that may appear different from perspectives of the observer and that is a rats nest of data that may link quantum and relativity.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere is what I mean.
1) Energy has frequency which is cycles per time slice of the observer (subjective)even at the speed of light the red shift affects the apparent frequency.
2) Energy has amplitude (again somewhat subjective to the observer at least regarding angle of view)
3) Energy has direction which is the sum of the observer and the event in their approach towards each other. That means some see red, some blue and many gray. *Very subjective
4) Depending on position, momentum, spin and several other factors two different observers can see the same event in a different order which reeks havoc on cause and effect freaks.
Based on the above and because of some of the facts regarding gauge theory and the effects of other forces I still think gravity is an act of geometry based on the factors above. I also think that we need to consider amplitude as a constant more than frequency but I still stand by the fact that angle of view can skew the apparent size while the actual information would still be the same.
The fact that the internal information is constant is what interest me and gives a means to relate quantum and relativity and preserve the speed of light. People tend to act like the Universe is a static object and the pictures describing it that are based on photos from telescopes that really only catch the system as events meet at the focal point, means that in reality we cannot define the shape, size, direction or speed of the universe in real time which sure sounds like quantum to me.
Vladimir, da ty zhulik ot nayki :))
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI found a Higgs boson in my soup last night, complained to the management, got a refund, an apology, and a general attitude of disbelief.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScience, Physics in particular, has become itself a Religion. It is its own distinct world view while assuming a charade and having a system of dogmatic beliefs. There is a hierarchy of priests who must approve of anyone wishing to advance within the field. What gets studied also needs approval. They have a special language, an overly complex math, which is not hard to confuse people with, since it is based on some rather blatant paradoxes. They do nothing but dig for ever more 'questions,' which are not even the important ones mankind should be asking.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUnify Physics? Never under the current direction and heading, and especially not if the whole quantum/relativity conflict concept is basically just made up in the first place. The dilation of time at C runs paradoxically against any idea of a big bang.
The all-pervasive fields reminds me of the Ether. A new face on an old concept?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisReally a stunning result for the humankind. However the data are to be analysed carefully whether it can support the evidence of so-called dark energy and dark matter.Thanks to all LHC-team and scientists from across the globe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo jdtwyer (34)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf masses of matter and force particles would have been the functions of only prevailing energy density in the developing universe, their masses, coupling constants would not have scattered by such huge amounts. If quarks and gluons reflect contemporary density of universe why gluons have zero mass and up quark has 2.2 meV mass. Even in the three generations of quarks, see the difference in their masses -- top quark having a mass of 171.2 GeV against 2.2 MEV of up quark. Is there any parallel? Then if electron family represented later period density than why tau flavor of electron has mass of 1.177 GeV against 2.2 MeV of up quark. Where is any parallel? There is no set pattern in the masses of fermions and bosons to establish the hypothesis that masses of matter particles are representative of prevailing energy density of universe
Further, if particles reflected prevailing energy density only, mass less gluons should have appeared after electron and nutrino but this does not appear to be the case. How soup of quark and gluons been created which led to the formation of nucleons? On disintegration, why electrons emit photons of e.m. radiations and not any force particle representing the then prevailing high density of universe from which it was created. I agree that prevailing energy density of universe may be one factor in fixing particle masses but there may be host of other factors.
I strongly suggest that energy density of universe which you are postulating to be the mother of all matter and force particles is different than e.m. forces and other strong or week forces. There is also no evidence to suggest that matter particles appeared first followed by massless force [articles
There's no all powerful force in the universe controlling my destiny.Haven't I heard this somewhere before?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisINCREDIDLE YET HUMBLE CONTEMPLATION, Salute to the WISDOM of Mr Peter Higgs ,Higgs mechanism, hypothesizing the existence of a " HIGGS FIELD ", permeating all of space, along with associated particle. The field imparts particles with mass by exerting a sort of DRAG DUE TO INVOLVEMENT OF " GRAVITO-MAGNETIC " A DRAG IN SYNCHRONISED PHASE-SPACE,during A CLASSICAL ORBITAL SYMMETRY.,Humanity's next Hunt!............
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe symmetry group can be discrete, such as the space group of a crystal, or continuous (e.g., a Lie group), such as the rotational sym in a Schrodinger's POTENTIAL OF LOWEST ENERGY DENSITY VACCUM OF SYNCHRONISED PHASE SPACE of the full HIGGS FIELD theory, although a classical solution may break a continuous symmetry, of space. However, if the system contains only a single spatial dimension,( 5 -DIMENSIONAL PHASE SPACE )then a CLASSICAL SOLUTION solution break a continuous symmetry.I The relevant FIFTH DIMENSION FIELD, which essentially dictates how a system behaves, can be split up into HIGEST KINETIC ENERGY OF SYNCHRONISED PHASE SPACE, and "SCHRODINGER'S EQ Lowet Energy of GRAVITATION ENERGY DENSITY POTENTIAL.
READ any other choice of θ would have exactly the same energy, implying the existence of a "MasslessNambu–Goldstone boson, ( The Nambu–Goldstone mode is a"Longwavelength fluctuation of the corresponding order parameter, the mode running around the CONNICITY at the minimum of this potential, and indicating there is some memory of the original symmetry in the Lagrangian
For ferromagnetic materials, the underlying laws are invariant under spatial rotations. Here, the order parameter is the magnetization, which measures the magnetic dipole density, which is spatially invariant, a Below the Curie temperature, however, the magnetization( GRAVITO-MAGNETIZATION)) acquires a constant nonvanishing value, which points in a certain direction (in the idealized situation where we have full "Equlibrium" translational symmetry gets broken as well).
Contd. Prior:Part of Read from 54.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe laws describing a solid are invariant under the full Euclidean group, but the solid itself spontaneously breaks this group down to a space group. The displacement and the orientation are the order parameters.
General relativity has a Lorenz symmetry, but in FRW cosmological models, the mean 4-velocity field defined by averaging over the velocities of the galaxies (the galaxies act like gas particles at cosmological scales) acts as an order parameter breaking this symmetry. Similar comments can be made about the cosmic microwave background.
For the electroweak model, as explained earlier, a component of the Higgs field provides the order parameter breaking the electroweak gauge symmetry to the electromagnetic gauge symmetry. Like the ferromagnetic example, there is a phase transition at the electroweak temperature. The same comment about us not tending to notice broken symmetries suggests why it took so long for us to discover electroweak unification.
In superconductors, there is a condensed-matter collective field ψ, which acts as the order parameter breaking the electromagnetic gauge symmetry.
ABOVE 54 & 55 is in Reference to 34. jtdwyer in reply to vinodsehgal1957@yahoo.com05:52 AM 7/6/12.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"If masses of matter and force particles would have been the functions of only prevailing energy density in the developing universe, their masses, coupling constants would not have scattered by such huge amounts."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm not claiming to have derived a complete theory - only that the prevailing energy density was the principal factor in determining particle mass. The 'force mediating' bosons are the most likely exceptions, I presume explained in quantum theory. As I understand, some rule can be derived to produce any series of numbers desired, but I expect that other unknown factors contributed to a complex mechanism.
As I understand, the relationship of universal energy density and the quantity of mass acquired by particle is most generally consistent with the big bang physical
cosmology, which specifies the order of development as:
- the Quark epoch
- the Hadron epoch
- the Lepton epoch
- the Photon epoch
As I've explained to you in excruciating detail offline, (don't ask again!) my conceptual suggestion is briefly as follows:
- Condensed energy particles emitted into the early universe were prevented from propagating by the extreme prevailing density (aka 'Higgs field'). They could also not be reabsorbed due to the extreme temperature.
- As a result, the kinetic directional propagation energy of emission was reconfigured as a encapsulating energy field, redirected to the particle at the field's interior, thus directionally opposing itself, producing an external potential energy field.
In a similar process, unstable increased mass generation II & III fermions (quarks & electrons) have only been detected in high energy cosmic rays and particle accelerator experiments.
As evidence for the suggested kinetic/potential energy mechanical reconfiguration in the early universe, I suggest that the generation II & III fermions are produced in higher velocity collider experiments when the velocity added by particle beam acceleration is halted by collision; that the added kinetic energy is reconfigured as incremental potential mass-energy just as emission propagation energy was reconfigured by the density of the early universe. Since this additional mass-energy cannot be maintained by the prevailing disperse 'Higgs field', the more massive generation II & III fermions quickly decay into the lower mass generation I fermions - those that are found in all atomic matter.
The same mechanism that produced greater particle mass in the early universe also temporarily produces increased particle mass in collider experiments.
"The CERN collider, the most powerful atom smasher in history, appears to have fulfilled its primary quest"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThen shut it down. Stop feeding the otherwise unemployable physicists. They're reduced to guessing now.
NO? Show me the Higgs. Where's the there there?
Particles are mandatory for carrying force and energy is a concept that's hard to agree with. There are phenomena like 'advance waves" ( or pilot waves) that carry information and, there is the phenomena of "quantum entanglement" whereby "action at a distance" ( without even having to have a field in between ) is acceptable .particle physicist's insistence that action-at-a-distance is unacceptable has lead to the search for "gravitons"( carriers of gravity ) another elusive particle; although physicists agree that gravity is nothing but curvature in space-time fabric .Higgs field is also created by ripples in space-time fabric. Higgs bosons might even be the discontinuities of an otherwise continuous space-time . When there are no discontinuities,space is smooth and movement through space-time could be resistance-less and [articles or waves or whatever can fly through at luminal or super-luminal speeds. Ripples slow down movement imparting the impression of resistance to motion or inertia or mass.Electromagnetic waves lie in the border-line between entities or waves that are slowed down by ripples in space-time ( becoming "matter" endowed with the quality of mass ) and waves that cannot be slowed down ( light waves ) and more energetic waves that travel at super luminal speeds . Why should a special type of " particle" need be postulated at all to give mass to matter is not understood when "ripples in space-time fabric" could do the job equally well .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the the eyes of particle physicists everything in the universe including space-time is digital, grainy ,not continuous and,made up of discrete particles only.Its like if you look through yellow glasses the whole universe would look yellow.In quantum field there are no 'objective' observation possible; all observations are subjective means observer-dependent so much so that its a truism that an "observer" could create the "observed" that he seeks to observe by a process of constant, continuous and consistent observation.Most of the subatomic particles are 'observed' after its postulated and scientists started "looking" for it to be observed ,before they start 'seeing' them materialize in due course.In this case too at 5 zigma distance from the norm so many other 'particles' than particles consistent with Higgs bosons were also "observed" which needs to be sorted out .Another question that is to be resolved is If Higgs Boson is the particle that gives mass to ordinary matter what gives Higgs boson its mass ( its almost 140 times heavier than a proton )?Again, if Higgs bosom is the consequence of nipples ( i mean ripples) in space-time what are ripples and how did they come about and crate Higgs boson, in an otherwise smooth and continuous non-grainy space time ? What caused space-time perturbations ? Going one step further ,we are obliged to seek answer to the question whether there is need for ' a cause " at all for everything to happen ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCant events in cosmos happen spontaneously without any cause or reason at all ?Quantum science does not mandate the need of causes for an occurrence .Quantum field transcend causative universe .There is no way we can pin down an effect to a particular cause like in economics or love . The same effect could be produced from even opposing causes or, same causes could produce even opposing effects .There are mine-fields of "uncertainties","chaos",'indeterminates","random fields","infinities","singularities"and"spontaneity" existing between causes and effects at quantum levels, that Newtonian one-to-one cause-effect relationship breaks down completely. Hence how is it that we can say that Higgs bosom is the CAUSE / CATALYST for matter acquiring mass,as these are all quantum field events? After offering inertial mass to matter-particle do the mass remain and continue to operate in the Higgs field? Could Higgs boson be gravitons itself or could both be just dimensional effects of ripples(energy vibrations or discontinuities)in the space-time fabric ?
After all,Higg's boson is basically a mathematical abstract entity trying hard to get materialized as a physical phenomena.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe possibility that it might have materialized cannot therefore be entirely ruled out,owing to the quantum-world -truism that one can create one's observations (phenomena) by one's constant ,continuous and consistent intention of observing it because the observer is also an inevitable ingredient of the observation!
Physicists trying to get some mileage for spending such a huge heavy funding, even inviting prof Higgs who is still alive to come over , verify and endorse their findings !
I take it with a pinch of salt only , for now ,at least !
But that does not count, I know.
We will hear a lot more on this from now on!
And , make physics and science more interesting for everybody .
and that counts !
Science do not offer answers ( thats the job of religion) , but every answer leads to more questions.
That's what makes science enchanting , attractive,enticing, bewitching,tantalizing,un-cloying, ever-green,challenging and worthy of pursuit !
And, in this case, without a doubt , through these controversial observational findings science has fulfilled its role to the maximum possible extent !
Very promising indeed !
Many thanks to scientists those who were busy to find the Higgs-Boson particle.We can discover many particles like this. These will depend on the applier, as which type of force will imposed on it. Because,during experiment, photons coagulated and brings new particle. All sub-atomic particles in an atom forms by some bunch of photons. Einstein equation E = mc^2 gives this idea. Higgs-Boson particle or other particles are not the creator of the universe, it helps to proceed to open the door for searching the universe. Photon is the ultimate particle to create all particles thus the universe. The calculated correct mass of a photon is 1.659x10^-54 gm. This comes out from a equation mentioned in the book Complete Unified Theory ( page- 424, 1998)written by me which is applicable to all fields. Scientists need to think deeply in this subject to find the real happening for the universe. Complete Unified Theory is single theory, we can find all from the particle to the universe to follow this theory. I am requesting all scientists that if you want to know the new world, please follow complete unified theory.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNirmalendu Das, Email: nirmalgopa@gmail.com
Dated: 08-07-2012
To anselm
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks for your comments 54, 55, and 56
I am non-Physicists and non-Scientist, as such, unable to appreciate the intricacies of mathematical formulations of Schrodinger Wave equation, though I studied QM way back in 1974-75 while studying Master in Physics. My interest in Physics and Cosmology was re-kindled partly in 2008 on learning about media hype about LHC experiment and partly from my long standing urge to understand the metaphysical and spiritual realities, over which I have been contemplating for about last 40 years, in modern scientific terms
In view of above all our queries are primarily governed by intuition, common sense and logical deduction, of course, based upon contemporary scientific studies. I understand response to such queries in this language only
As an illustration, I am placing below query on Higgs Boson :
When matter particles come into existence, don't they carry in-built mass with them? What is the need of a an external mechanism or Field to provide mass to matter particles? What is the meaning of matter particle without mass?
Even if some external field be required like hypothesized Higg Field, why it should be quantisized having a a boson of mass of 125 GeV. Higgs Boson has to endow mass to variety of matter particles with wide range of mass with nutrino having almost negligible mass, electron having 0.511 MeV mass to top quark having 171 GeV mass. Why nature should play in so weird manner that a boson having mass of 125 Gev will endow mass to all particles spanning a very wide range of mass spectrum. Non-quantization of Higgs Field or boson with varrying energy like photon or a boson with mass lower than the lowest mass of particle could have revealed direct, straight and simple behavour of Nature
Ref.59. Dadster & JtDwyer
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisa) Particle physicist's insistence that action-at-a-distance is unacceptable has lead to the search for "gravitons"?
b) Higgs field is also created by ripples in space-time fabric?
c)Ripples slow down movement imparting the impression of resistance to motion or inertia or mass?
d)In quantum field there are no 'objective' observation possible?
e)What caused space-time perturbations ?
f)could produce even opposing effects .There are mine-fields ?of "uncertainties","chaos","singularities"?
g)Hence how is it that we can say that Higgs bosom is the CAUSE / CATALYST for matter acquiring mass,as these are all quantum field events?
h)Hence how is it that we can say that Higgs bosom is the CAUSE / CATALYST for matter acquiring mass,as these are all quantum field events?
Ref the above Ques? in sequence-
a- Yes are right discovery of"Gravitons" is essential,for Physical & Experimentaladvancement, as GRAVITON speed is Relative to the space-time dimensions, in 5 -D space-time Gravitons speed is equivelant to C4 of the speed of light ,therefore in the combination 9-10-11 dimension space-time, the graviton speed will be c9. The speed of Graviton is guided by the Laws of INERTIA Gravity/TORQUE ENERGY DENSITY.
b)HIGG's Field is created by a Perfect,Pure,& Pristine Celestial Bodies "DYNAMICAL Geometrical Classical Symmetry"
c)resistance to motion or inertia or mass?Yes caused by the Field of Gravito-Magnetic charges.
d) 'objective' observation of a"Quantum Field", its Angular width is "Approx. 4.66 Degrees"'Clasical Symmetry at Fixed place at a fixed Time .
e)Space -Time perturbations is caused by the Conseved LOCKED ABSORBED ENERGIES OF INERTIA -GRAVITY---Released in PERIODICITIES.
Contd. prior 64 - Ref.59. Dadster & JtDwyer
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisf) Time-Reversal of Celestial Orbitals.
Read my Blogs on previous issues of SA- gives you a broader perspective.89 -85."In fact, something like an antigravitational force must exist to eliminate the singularities that plague General Relativity with regard to black holes..."
Yes you are Right,antigravitational force must exist, they are a Result of TIME REVERSAL, the "Planet JUPITER's MOON IO" is in Time Reversal Mode and has Properties of Anti -Gravitation..........Surrounding Io (up to a distance of 6 Io radii from the moon's surface) is a cloud of neutral sulfur, oxygen, sodium, and potassium atoms. These particles originate in Io's upper atmosphere but are excited from collisions with ions in the plasma torus (discussed below) and other processes into filling Io's Hill sphere, which is the region where the moon's gravity is predominant over Jupiter.
Mr jtdwyer,why do you want to eliminate "Singularities"
they are required to undertake important Gravitational Functions,in the 5th Dimension whose Volume is Governed by the SCHRODINGER's Equation -and the Extended Version's of all the, Einstien' Gravitational Equations.
Cosmology has proven the Physical black hole in space,in the midst of Galatic Structures,FERMILAB has recently published Photographic plate's of "Dark Matter", please verify & read all my previous Blogs on SA,it wil give you a broader Landscape of Nature's humblest Design and Rotations,Periodicities,Resonance,Spectrum's structure in inter- galatic space .
h)Hence how is it that we can say that Higgs bosom is the CAUSE / CATALYST for matter acquiring mass.
The "Majestic Monopole" acts as a CATALYST in a Classical Space-Time Symmetry, at a Fixed Location & a Fixed Time.
To anselm
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAfter reading and contemplating over your blogs, following understanding is dawning upon me:
a) At dimensionless point of singularity or a bit before singularity (in case space is discrete), TIME FREEZE take place. By Time freeze, I imply zero time OR lowest qunata of time
b) At TIME FREEZE, anti gravity appears which stops the intake of matter or energy in singularity.
c) At singularity, space-time breaks down. On the other side of singularity lies 5th dimension and higher dimension having dark matter starta.
d) In the 5th dimension, time reversal takes place and gravity of existing 3d dimensions behave as anti -gravity
e) Though in 5th dimension, time reversal and gravity reversal takes place, these reversal are with reference to our present 3d dimensions. With respect to 5th dimension, there is no reversal.
f) In 5th dimension, value of c and G changes.
g)Gravity, Time are common threads operating in all dimensions, however their behavior changes.
h) No e.m. signal transfer takes place between our 3 dimensions and 5th dimension due to lack of any transfer of energy or matter to 5th dimension
I wanted your confirmation regarding correctness of above understanding or if there are any gaps.
67. vinodsehgal1 Pl.Read my Blog No 89 & 90 in SA 29th June.The Communications Signals are Gravitons, Time Reversal into the 5th Dimension.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFinally found these notes taken during one of XY's ditties in 2008:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this... (very) simply, since all natural phenomena share a common basic logic (necessary for unification according to him), if one is careful enough one could attempt to transpose validated phenomena from other sciences to get an idea of how mass may be produced and managed in physics. First XY suggests to see bosons as force managers. Then he suggests that from a classical point of view one could indeed believe that mass and its 'manager' form one unit = a heavy-weight boson. But XY suggests to change point of view and wonder if this 'heavy boson' was not made of two separate components altogether which only form a _temporary_ unit looking as one 'from a distance'. This would mean that the weak force boson could be relatively massless but that it would have the power to manoeuvre and deliver any mass required by an entity's evolution on demand and just in time. Which would in fact be its raison d'être. Since evolution requires mass and that from XY's point of view the weak-force related boson manages this mass he calls it the evon, the mass-required-for-evolution-manager boson (and the alter ego of the weak-force fermion)... four main bosons: gluons (strong), photons (eletro-magnetic), gravitons (gravity) and evons (mass handling bosons), where mass results from the cooperation of a number of smaller particles and managed/coordinated by the light-weight evon.
See that as you wish but even if this this stuff is a few years old I still find it as fresh and as close to recent findings as anything else on the market.
General relativity breaks down at space-time singularity so we don't have a theory to describe what happens to gravity in a singularity. Time apparently stops or disappears altogether.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince the four dimensional space-time can curve. The 5th spatial dimension must necessarily exists mathematically following non-Euclidean geometry. But it is debatable if it exists in reality or just in theory.
In response to Dr. Strangelove The 5th spatial dimension must necessarily exists mathematically following non-Euclidean geometry.Yes Dr. thats supportive as already in my Blogs 54-55 -56-64- 65-66 -68-.The Communications Signals are Gravitons, Time Reversal into the 5th Dimension. on previous issues of SA- gives you a broader perspective Blog 89 -90 dt. 29th June.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisContd. from 71.Dr. Strangelove, & Dadstar , Part of Blogs in 71. a
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRef.Dr caleb_scharf 7:31 pm dt. 06/11/2012, Thanks and Appreciate this your write-up,-it was a Critical important Physical Mapping,required to Extrapolate, the Base- from where String Theory originates, to have a proper understanding of the Hierarchy of below the Planck scales & inverse Cascading to Cosmological Scale’s -the Time Scale instant can be Deciphered from this Geometrical Reflective Mirror image, by translating it into Higher Dimensions 9D,10D,11D, in simultaneous Parrallel’s under Tandem Time Lock.
The Unision of the study by,” The Ghez group”, showing the highly elliptical orbits around an unseen central mass ,There is plenty of other evidence too, from radio wavelength observations of the Galactic center, to X-ray data that reveal almost daily ‘flare’ events from this region – a possible signature of asteroid-sized chunks of matter getting shredded immediately outside the event horizon.” this research focuses on the depth of locating the path to a Keyway- that will direct the Focus to the simplicity of Nature’s secretive working’s.
the Entire Article is ,Mesmerize with the hidden dice , down the Alley and missed behind , is the fact that the Einstien’s Gravitational Equation is still incomplete and the Right Hand Side the important “””TORQUE “””of Angular Momentum of all CELESTIAL BODIES has not been Mathematically solved,by any body else, its the missing Link –which must be found to make a explicitly clarity painted breakthrough to unify the Quantum World and Gravitation, and locate the physical HIGGS FIELD,
The Graviton, Monopole.
The path of the Trace tracked by the Majestic Moon’s BEADED ORBIT & ROTATION,the Moons EXTREME deep CURVE, always Zig-Zagg and Bouncing with Saw tooth precision, coupling the earth and sun ,in a TUG TORSION,is an integral component to interlink & Couple the two Worlds– Macro (GRAVITATION) and Micro(Quantum).
“Blackhole_ appear CENTERING within our Solar System”,whenever the “DYNAMIC Stability” of our Planetary Systems GEOMETRIZED ORBITALS & ROTATIONS,-TENDS to dangerous levels of Obscure difficulties ,that threatens the BALANCE and stability-the POWERFUL INFINITE ENERGY TORQUE BLIP_BLIP_BLACKHOLE CONE SYNCHRONISED, Pulls back on C
Science isn't a religion. And no in polite conversation you shouldn't make fun of anyone or any belief, you should address it in a manner befitting a civilized human being. But we all see (twice now) that capability was beyond you now wasn't it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBetter stop using that computer until you're able to find someone to show the photons of light it uses.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisisn't your comment 74 contradicting the spirit of your comment 73?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisbut then 73 was already overstepping itself unless 73 was tongue in cheek?
unless you were imitating the guys at LHC explaining their newest discovery... can't be, that would be poking fun at them... which you would never do in a polite conversation... you're rather confusing... you ARE working at LCH, no? Naw, I'm just being impolite.
On a lighter note: A Higgs boson walks into a Catholic church. The priest says,”We don’t want Higgs boson in here”. The Higgs boson replies “Well, without me you can’t have mass!”
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnselm, Dr Strangelove, Dedster
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOn detection of gravitons, as communication signals with 5th dimension, and on breaking of 4D space- time by some similar process as happening at the center in a BH, scientists may enter 5th spatial dimension and "fix upon" dark matter. Till scientists master the art of piercing thru space-time or gravitons are detected, will dark matter remain all elusive? Scientists will listen to the sounds of dark matter in 4D space-time, thru diverse processes due to enhanced gravitational force, but unable to lay hand over it.
Are there some other techniques to enter 5th dimension and lay hand over dark matter
Ours is an ever-vibrant universe, where frequencies (and corresponding wavelengths) dominate and rule the realm, with every single frequency originating from the Cosmic Background Radiation (CBR); the long wavelength component of the CBR would be associated with the quantum gravity (and quantum antigravity) between material bodies; and the shortest(λn) with the constituent nucleons of the atomic nucleus; in the latter of which, isotropy of the CBR field becomes a crucial factor for the very existence of the nucleon, where even a momentay asymmetry would be the death of the nucleon.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThus, any nuclear entity with the speculated characteristics of any nuclear particle is a possibility in principle – if this isotropy on its nuclear surface is maintainable.
[Continued below]
[Continued from above:]
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this7.17 The Higgs Boson
Higgs bosons are certain hypothetical elementary particles also of modern physics theory. They are
speculated to be superheavy and of zero spin but lack a definite prescription for their mass. There is also
no empirical evidence for their existence to date, the current CERN results notwithstanding. And so, these are the giants on the extremely costly
agenda today for experimental verification.
In principle, in the mass-energy continuum of our analysis now, there is no upper limit to the size of a
particle of any nuclear matter, naturally occurring or artificially created. As long as the critical field intensity at
the nuclear wavelength λn is sustained isotropically around the nuclear surface without lapse in time or space, the
particle (though vibrant and breathing) would remain stable. In nature, however, high field intensities
capable of sustaining any artificially created large particle such as a Higgs boson may be found only in
the central regions of celestial bodies such as planets and stars.
In terrestrial space, today, such fields are only mimicked fleetingly in laboratory machines, the particle
Accelerators, such as the LHC. But, despite any large central region of high field intensity, the particles that get created in these extremely forceful beam impacts are obviously in a tight squeeze; the field is far from isotropic; and any particle therein will be found highly deficient in mass-energy under the squeeze, or ambient asymmetry.
Following impact and particle creation, the pressure on the particle body would also drop sharply. Thus, almost instantly, the field intensity at the central region becomes less supportive especially to
sustain a large nuclear particle; and spontaneous decay inevitably sets in. Therefore, it is a very delicate
balancing act indeed in these machines to create conditions for the production of a large particle. It becomes
even more challenging when, at the same time, the particle is required to have, say, the
characteristics of a Higgs boson - and with a lifetime long enough at least to detect it.
But, all of the above notwithstanding, the following statement can now be categorically made.
It is hereby predicted that a particle with any (suspected) properties of a Higgs boson should not be
hard to detect when field conditions are optimum: In the infinitude of probabilities, by the manipulation of
experimental parameters, the fleeting debut of any such scalar (spin-zero) particle of modern physics
theory would be almost a certainty - but at what cost and for what purpose now in the new light?
See also: http://www.sittampalam.net/Synopsis.htm
Thank you all for the time here. Cheers!
When electrons emit light e.g. in a heated wire - is the light due to the electrons friction against the Higgs
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisfield or is the light generated by some other means?
Does the heated wire s weight remain the same before and after heating?
Best wishes,
When electrons emit light e.g. in a heated wire - is the light due to the electrons friction against the Higgs
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisfield or is the light generated by some other means?
Does the heated wire s weight remain the same before and after heating?
Best wishes,
and now the latest from CERN, and it's horrible news:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"After 22 years on CERN's stages, 'Les Horribles Cernettes' will have a final megashow at the CERN Hardronic Festival, on Sat. July 21st... will have an exceptional performance, covering all of their repertoire based on antimatter, protons, colliders and... Higgs bosons! ...global webcast at the following address: http://livestage.mypressonline.com/Hardronic."
http://musiclub.web.cern.ch/MusiClub/bands/cernettes/
ever wanted to get close to the LHC tower of power? want to see the cernettes live and in full color?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://muzipod.free.fr/
print invitation, fill out and present at gate
This is in reply to comment 80, above. Thank you for a very good and pertinent question in fundamental physics. The short and simple answer here is: NO!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn principle, the mass (or quantity of matter), and thereby weight, of the heated wire will not be the same as the unheated wire; in fact, it will be MORE.
Electrons and nucleons, constituting atoms and molecules, and thereby all of matter, are indeed breathing entities. (And the sooner theoretical physicists realize this simple, fundamental fact of nature, the sooner will quantum physics be rid of its "weird," "bizarre," and :sounterintuitive" labels, ironically under which it now revels in the popular media to promote funding for its research work. No offence or disrespect to any intended.)
In the heated material of the wire, the constituent atoms and molecules exchange more vibrant energy between them, absorbing (inhaling) and emitting (exhaling), effectively trapping the energy - and thereby mass as per m=e/c^2 - among them over their breathing cycles.
In an an analogous situation, a given mass of ice at 0 Celsius will be less than the mass of the water it melts into on heating at 0 Celsius; that, is the heat of liquefaction of the ice may have remained mysteriously "latent" to us in the past, but it's right there in the more vibrant water molecules; and should be evident now in the mass difference we measure (hopefully, by some effective means today).
And so, these precise mass or weight measurements (with today's cutting-edge instruments to measure such relatively ultra-small changes) may be a good summer project for high-school to post-graduate students and even professors alike! Thank you all and Good luck! Cheers!
Eh, think of the laws of physics as being like a pachinko machine, except one without a glass front, so you cannot tell what is inside, it is a black box. You can shoot balls into the pachinko machine with some specified velocity, and you can observe the time it takes the balls to come back out the bottom, and their velocity. Now, tell me the arrangement of bumpers, pins, and widgets inside the machine that produces the observed correlations between entrance and exit velocities and time inside the machine.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course something like the LHC is really more like a shotgun for pachinko balls. We shoot a whole raft of them in at once and we see them coming out the other side. That's where statistics come into play, that is the ones like the "7 sigma signal at 125 GeV". Discovering the Higgs is like saying we've deduced the location of one or more of the pins inside the machine because we see a certain excess of balls exiting with certain velocities. You can model all sorts of possible pin arrangements. Only some types of arrangements explain observed phenomena.
Theories like the SM are statements about which arrangements are possible, and given certain values of free parameters produce accurate predictions of the observed behavior of the balls.
In essence it doesn't matter if you have the 'right' arrangement of pins in there. There's no 'right' or 'wrong' theory, only ones that predict observations better or worse. There could be a 100 ways the pachinko machine is put together, all we need to deduce is one of them.
Effectively SM works for a given range of initial ball velocities. It doesn't explain all the observed phenomena, and it only works in a given range (and we can only shoot balls in so fast too). We could think of it as a theory of the pin arrangement for a PART of the pachinko machine. Something like SUSY theories or string theory, etc would explain more, maybe even the whole machine.
Discovering the Higgs can give us a better handle on visualizing the rest of this machine, and provides one possible answer to why the balls come out in certain ways. That's all.
Remember, the Universe simply is what it is, and it is a black box. We think we can figure out A description of the insides. We can never know WHY it is like it is, or distinguish between equivalent descriptions. Those aren't goals that are within the purview of science, which is just about shooting balls into the black box to describe it.
Proving that a zero spin boson exsted at 125 GeV does not prove that it has the property to impart mass; proof of A does not automatically prove both B & C.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery succinctly put - thanks!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNot to downplay this machine, its designers and builders and those who put it to use, but the Machine I am waiting for is the one that defines the true nature of Space-time. For all of this Matter and Energy, in whatever form you choose to look at it, would not exist without Space-time providing it the playing field upon which to perform.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOkay, then what"gives" the Higgs ITS mass?