Higgs Bosen

[xelasnave]

Like so many folk I hear about CERN and the quest to find the Higgs Bosen particle... all I want to know who lost the dam thing in the first place:D?

My question is will they find it or wont they:shrug:... and dont tell me to wait I have been waiting long enough and feel specualtion is now mandatory:P what are the chances of sucess and of failure... if failure how much of the current theory (cold dark matter theory it called I think) will have to go... everything or just rewind back to pe Higgs specualtion er theory (whatever) and substitute an alternative theory which does not require such a particle...

I gather the HB is sort to give mass to matter...is that all matter or to massless particles because they seem wanting...

Does anyone here (many I guess) follow the progress of CERN

alex:):):)

[sjastro]

Why should there a time frame?

The eightfold way theory of QM (a ridiculously simple mathematical theory) predicted the Omega Minus particle in 1962. The particle was discovered in 1964.

Quantum chromodynamics (an extremely difficult variant of QFT) predicted quarks in 1969. The first quark was discovered over 25 year later.

The moral of the story Alex is patience.:)

Regards

Steven

[Nesti]

That's right Alex, manifestation takes time.

Oh sorry Steven, I must have been distracted by the Rhonda Byrnes 'The Secret' post in the other thread. :D

[renormalised]

Yep, patience. Several billion dollars/euros worth of equipment, thousands of scientists and engineers, vast amounts of energy and sheer luck:D

Along with great theoretical insight:D

[Rhino1980]

Is CERN up and running again?

[xelasnave]

I demand it be done by next Thursday...
Think of the economices...mmm capital investement lets call that "C" er hang on change that (C is near worn out with all the workit got on the light experiments)..have to pick the next available letter...mmm I am sure that D follows C... so lets call that "D" (for dollar)..times the period of capital outlay lets call that O.. hang on O could be confused with zero so lets step back a letter and call that N... times the cost of capital..lets call that C (dam that C is always the letter doing all the work) ..mmm no lets call that..not C but F (to represent funding costs of capital) ..are you with me..so DNF gives us the answer...hang on DNF is race talk for DID NOT FINISH... look forget all that ..when when when... who is the boss? what are the workers doing? Where is the report on why the report on why we are not moving forward ..oh forget it...

What is the big deal here ..we have plenty of protons can we start banging a few together to get the hang of it...

Seriously has anyone any view , with confidential inside knowledge that will be our little secret, as to when they expect something...

AND what if we dont find it what are the ramifications..even if they are too horrible to place in print... how far do we have to go back to get started again?

alex

[Robh]

Seeing that this is in the General Chat section, I'd thought I'd ask the obvious. For us quantum illiterates (keep it simple), what exactly will be the significance of the discovery of this God particle, the Higgs Boson? I've read that it gives other particles mass. So???

Rob.

[renormalised]

Rob, this should make it easy to understand....Higgs Boson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson)

[Nesti]

Probably not much. You see, they're already using the theorised Higgs Boson and Field within the Standard Model. So really, apart from knowing a true value (TeV), it comes back to stamp collecting. Nothing much will change.

BUT, if the Higgs Boson is not found, wow, now that will signify that there is a problem in our current understanding of the particle zoo.

There are quite a few scientists at the LHC which, although want to find the Higgs, agree that the most exciting thing that could happen, is to NOT find the Higgs.

I personally believe that the best discovery would be Super Symmetry...that really would be something.

[xelasnave]

Jeez Mark I reckon it is easier to believe in God than to believe in SS... in fact I think one could muster more proof to prove God than SS.

I know math etc etc..but really I find the afront to common sence huge.
AND in fairness maybe I have misinterpreted the premise of SS but does it not propose a "super" partner for all particles in a "parrallel universe??? Put me straight please this is one case I hope I really have misinterpreted what I have read.
But I would be happy to have my views changed if there is any reasonable evidence besides what math running wild seems to have produced here.

alex

[Nesti]

No, you don't have to have parallel universes at all. Super Symmetry is simply that for every particle in the current zoo (excluding the photon), we have a sister particle. Yes, they are expected to be super-massive, and as such decay very rapidly. If we create high enough energies, we should see super-massive particles emerge.

What they provide, is circumstantial evidence that we're looking in the right direction, as to which way to advance certain theories in particle physics.

I'm hoping that they find a Graviton/Gravitino pair.

[xelasnave]

Thanks Mark I cant figure out whats going on in this Universe so I dont want to worry about any others.
alex

[Nesti]

Well, it's a good thing that you raised the point actually. I feel that most multiple (or parallel) universe theories are mostly coined so as to mute-out all of the possible quantum states (the super-position of all states) within the Schrodinger Wave Equation, and that also gets rid of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, in which a probability must be assigned to each and every outcome. Effectively killing two birds with one stone.

Put simply, multiple universe theories, or even Feynman's 'Sum Over Paths', try to remove the probability and super-positioning out of quantum measurement, so that we are left with an intuitively friendly deterministic path for every event.

Quantum computers contain an element of this.

[Robh]

OK, according to the Standard Model, the fundamental forces of nature are mediated by gauge bosons (Photons, W & Z bosons, Gluons), all of which have been confirmed. Mass is hypothesised to be created by the Higgs Boson and gravity mediated by the graviton. How does dark matter fit into all this?

Rob.

[renormalised]

Dark matter doesn't fit as there is no known particle predicted by the SM that fits the bill. So, DM is the spanner in the works

[Nesti]

It doesn't. Dark Matter is something completely different...nobody knows...everyone is guessing.

[Robh]

Nice one! Thanks, Carl.
Makes things rather interesting.

Regards, Rob.

[renormalised]

Glad to be of assistance:P:D:D

[xelasnave]

I was thinking..not drinking...and how about this...
Maybe dark matter is just little black holes..why.. because neither radiate er radiation..both can only be "seen" by drawing a gravitational conclusion (unless we agree that B H have Hawking radiation ...but a little one probably would not...)
So the Dark matter mystery is solved..what next?

Anyways it is nice to hear dark matter is a spanner in the works I never believed in it from an unconventional approach and to hear it is not within the current scheme of things makes me feel more confident in bagging it...
In fact may as well bag it a bit now... dark matter is a myth created to keep attraction in employment and that is one myth built upon another in my opinion....
alex

[sjastro]

Alex,

It's like groundhog day with you.

(1) What happens when the mini black holes merge?
(2) Explain the result of the Cavendish experiment of 1798 if gravity is not a force of attraction.

Here is the detail.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavendish_experiment

Regards

Steven

[DJDD]

hold on, alex, have you had an epiphany? when did you start believing in Black Holes? :eyepop: or have I missed something in this or another thread?

now my head will really explode... :lol:

[mithrandir]

Rereading Hawking, the temperature of a black hole is inversely related to its mass, so small black holes produce more HR and lose mass faster.

Eventually the mass of the BH would reduce to a point where "... the most reasonable guess is that it would disappear completely in a tremendous final burst of emission, equivalent to the explosion of millions of H-bombs."

If DM was actually small BH, would we expect to observe a few of these explosions, or is the universe not old enough yet?

Andrew

[xelasnave]

I dont believe in ghosts but I will use them to scare the kids:P

I have different views on black holes no doubt and yes I dont really believe they can not / can ....? exist for althought the math is available to say we can have them there is no math to show that they can not:D..yet.... and given DrA found them difficult to accept I would rather trust his instincts rather than another..scarred out of his witts working in a fox hole with shells exploding everywhere... would your mind not be driven to think of black holes... now my facts may be off but it seems our black hole inventer jumped on DrA's bangwagon and DrA being a mild decent man probably did not have the heart to crush the inventers ideas.

They dont add up ... the math results in many aspects that defy a reasonable "inteligently designed universe"... Dr A obsereved God does not play dice and if he was pushed he would have said God would not have created black holes to confuse humans.

To me their existence comes from an extrapolation that was allowed to run its course (same with big bang ..the Universe is expanding so it must have expanded from a single point) however I am dubious that nature would allow such... and although we have evidence that can support the concept via rays and apparent gravitational influence those seeking BH,s perhaps have not considered other things that could minic the black holes we have convinced ourselves are indeed a fact.

Certainly if black holes exist they will offer proof that the Universe works via push a fact obvious to all that considers the implications of the impossibiloity of escape from a black hole... It is a small point but lets think about how a message of gravity can escape from a black hole... If light can not how could a graviton or whatever other particle we invent for the job do so... the premise of a black hole is infinite gravity..I know there is no such thing as infinite in this context and I use the term to set an upper limit that we dont have to consider...

I also find it difficult to conceive that the massive jets we observe can be generated by a single object however a binary system would do such easily I feel... and in the push universe a fast rotating massive b inary system will produce the jets, the rays and an observational strong gravitational field... so I guess I like to see a galaxy like a CD or DVD solid with a physical hole in the center created by the binary such that one side of the universe can be pushed thru ...like water going down the plug hole if you like... now if this is so jets will probably appear to go in one direction ..in one side and out the other...
Still if we are to work with a single object notwithstanding the frame dragging thing I find it very difficult to see how the jets could be created...

Although I go on about the push universe I also have to consider the current science which still has a huge following... One could not ignore the Catholic Church if you were starting a new religion and not to respect their beliefs would not be a decent approach. And who knows they may have some useful info on how to run a religious organisation.

Dark matter has to be nailed down... I think it will prove to be a myth so to help I will suggest anything that it can not be.. so looking at them one needs to look around the Universe for other objects that do not radiate energy and give their prescence away by gravitational observation... well black holes spring to mind... and DM makes up a lot of the Universe unseen so it could be reasoned it is also very dense...

Who knows but until all are satisfied dark matter is not the answer attraction will continue to fool humans that it is a force worthy of inclusion in their science...

AND mostly any thoughts on dark matter is as good as any other until the whole matter stands on a sound basis with math proof and some sample jars full of dark matter in the lab.

alex:):):)

[xelasnave]

Andrew we cant use a reasonable guess in science I find that unacceptable;).

AS you say if such were so we would observe explosions not from dark matter necessarily but from a black hole that has reached that point in its life where it does what is guessed..er predicted.... but as you say maybe the Universe in not old enough...maybe so but 13.5 billion years is a decent time frame to think something would have happened by now..think of the life cycle of any star ..it is born and it dies.. why would a black hole..which is in fact a star in loose terms...
ANYWAYS we have room to speculate as to Dark matter... we have room to investigate the specualtions ... dark matter could be anything but as I have said before it will prove to be nothing which as we have already concluded will indeed be full of something.

alex

[KenGee]

Don't worry about dark matter not fitting the standard model well, Gravity itself doesn't. That's one of the fun bits of physic's these day (for sometime realy) If they don't find the higgs it makes SR/GR look even better.

Edit BTW the SM's leading cadidate for dark mater is accordign to the link provided is the neutralino .