Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Physics World: Planning the world's next collider[
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/indepth/2012/jul/26/planning-the-worlds-next-collider[/SIZE]
Comment.
The Sad Truth
If you cannot resolve the vacuum energy crisis,
if you cannot explain the fine structure constant,
if you cannot identify the dark matter,
if you cannot predict the masses of fundamental particles,
if you cannot explain why galaxies exist, or come in radically
different flavors like ellipticals and spirals,
then you do not know diddely-squat about the cosmos.
High-energy physicists are making it up as they go.
Here's a nice example: If you cannot find a free quark,
make it a "law" that they are hidden inside other particles (just so!).
It's all Ptolemaic epicycles in high-energy physics,
no matter how vociferously they sell it to a credulous public.
‘ In which reference frame the Higgs boson was found ? ‘
=.
Comment by Gary
=.
Hi Israel,
THAT is an excellent question. As members of this board,
we understand that there is no absolute reference frame.
But quantum mechanics assumes there is. I believe QM
is wrong in that respect. If the Higgs existed in an absolute
frame, then rest mass would vary with its speed relative
to that frame because of the Higgs field.
The same problem exists with virtual particles. The average
momentum of all those particles popping in and out of existence
must be zero, yes? So how could an observer in another frame
see virtual particles with zero average momentum, too?
There aren't any easy solutions to these problems.
‘ In which reference frame the Higgs boson was found ? ‘
=.
Comment by Gary
=.
Hi Israel,
THAT is an excellent question. As members of this board,
we understand that there is no absolute reference frame.
But quantum mechanics assumes there is. I believe QM
is wrong in that respect. If the Higgs existed in an absolute
frame, then rest mass would vary with its speed relative
to that frame because of the Higgs field.
The same problem exists with virtual particles. The average
momentum of all those particles popping in and out of existence
must be zero, yes? So how could an observer in another frame
see virtual particles with zero average momentum, too?
There aren't any easy solutions to these problems.
Gary
The standard model is Lorentz invariant, so there are no problems with reference frame. And rest mass is a Lorentz scalar so no need to make reference to a frame. Essentially all the so-called problems you mention are issues with quantum mechanics from the 1920s and is largely the reason for the develoent of quantum field theories, which answer all the problems you raise.
Below is a simplified, non-technical and humorous explanation to help clear up some of the confusion and to better understand the Higgs.
The first one is a recap (posted on Page 2) of what the Higgs boson is.
The second one covers mass - what it is and what it has to do with the Higgs boson.
The third deals with how particles are discovered.
And they've come up with a doozy:
maybe there isn't just one Higgs boson
(the as-yet-undiscovered subatomic particle believed to impart mass);
maybe, instead, there are five different versions,
with similar masses but different electric charges.
And they've come up with a doozy:
maybe there isn't just one Higgs boson
(the as-yet-undiscovered subatomic particle believed to impart mass);
maybe, instead, there are five different versions,
with similar masses but different electric charges.
Maybe now we have 5 bosons , . . . . maybe more . . .?
========.
I'm aware of that view. It's possible, but for now, it remains unknown. As I understand Cern's position at the present time, the particle suspected to be the Higgs needs to be confirmed with additional testing, and that's going to take more time. That could be another 2 or 3 years. Cern's position is that it appears to be the Higgs boson. However, it's still possible that it could be some other unknown particle that acts like the Higgs. That's why it needs to be confirmed with additional testing, to be sure it isn't something else. But even if it is something different than the Higgs. that would be pretty impressive as well, and would add one more particle to the inventory of knowledge.
It's possible there could be 5 varieties of the Higgs, presumably each with their own field. That would present quite a challenge to sort through. If the newly discovered particle is in fact a Higgs, and if there are 4 others, then the question turns to which one was announced earlier this month. It's hard to guess if the LHC has enough power to determine that. For all I know, that could take decades, if at all, with who knows how many collisions. Seems to me it's been difficult enough as it is just to identify one. I'm not so optimistic that the study will go beyond a single boson, leaving any others to remain experimentally unknown. Time will tell. There are a number of other studies on Cern's agenda for the LHC to wade through.
I'm aware of that view.
It's possible, but for now, it remains unknown.
As I understand Cern's position at the present time, the particle suspected
to be the Higgs needs to be confirmed with additional testing, and that's
going to take more time. That could be another 2 or 3 years.
Cern's position is that it appears to be the Higgs boson.
However, it's still possible that it could be some other unknown particle
that acts like the Higgs. That's why it needs to be confirmed with additional
testing, to be sure it isn't something else. But even if it is something
different than the Higgs. that would be pretty impressive as well,
and would add one more particle to the inventory of knowledge.
It's possible there could be 5 varieties of the Higgs,
presumably each with their own field.
That would present quite a challenge to sort through.
If the newly discovered particle is in fact a Higgs, and if there are 4 others,
then the question turns to which one was announced earlier this month.
It's hard to guess if the LHC has enough power to determine that.
For all I know, that could take decades, if at all, with who knows how many collisions.
Seems to me it's been difficult enough as it is just to identify one.
I'm not so optimistic that the study will go beyond a single boson,
leaving any others to remain experimentally unknown.
Time will tell.
There are a number of other studies on Cern's agenda for the LHC to wade through.
Now we have more 5 bosons , . . . . ! ?
5 different bosons with 5 different negative electric charges.
And they must have 5 different antibosons with 5 different
positive electric charges.
Physicists searched for one boson and found 5 different bosons.
And when they create bigger LHC they would found much more
different bosons.
It is good perspective.
It is very happy news.
I only think that this project is too expensive for normal man.
Now we have more 5 bosons , . . . . ! ?
5 different bosons with 5 different negative electric charges.
And they must have 5 different antibosons with 5 different
positive electric charges.
Physicists searched for one boson and found 5 different bosons.
And when they create bigger LHC they would found much more
different bosons.
It is good perspective.
It is very happy news.
I only think that this project is too expensive for normal man.
==...
I really wish you would use the font (and size) provided by C-D for the forum. All you have to do is start typing. It doesn't get easier than that. Lemme get my magnifying glass out so I can see what you wrote.
The idea that there might be more than one Higgs was around before the announcement, if that's what you mean. I've not heard of finding any others. It's possible there may be others, but there's no real cetainty about it. There have been some other particles found, but I'm not sure what they are. They aren't Higgs.
Well, yes, it's too expensive for a normal (average) man to buy something like that. I have to admit I don't know too many people with that kind of spare money laying around in their bank accounts. As far as I know, there isn't a lot that can be done with the Higgs in a practical way. Or at least not directly. But yes, it does give a much deeper understanding about the fundamental nature of the universe. It really is an incredibly remarkable accomplishment.
While the overall cost of it is enormous, it ultimately returns to the public in terms of jobs locally as well as countries around the world. So it's not as though it's all money down the drain. People had to do the construction work to build it, to make parts from around the world for it, provide all kinds of service and maintenance. The money does end up back in the pockets of people, average people.
==..
‘ HiggsOcean ‘ is a Frame of Reference.
Is ‘ HiggsOcean ‘ an ‘open’ or ‘closed’ system ?
Is ‘ HiggsOcean ‘ a ‘hot’ or ‘cold’ system ?
Does ‘ HiggsOcean ‘ have the cosmic microwave background
radiationparameter T=2,7K ?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I really wish you would use the font (and size) provided by C-D for the forum. All you have to do is start typing. It doesn't get easier than that. Lemme get my magnifying glass out so I can see what you wrote.
