Is the Higgs field nonsense?

[alpal]

I like to read about cosmos theories.
I never understood the Higgs Field.

This author goes through the arguments against -
but you have to buy his book to get the full story of why the Higgs Field is true.

Here's one argument against -

https://profmattstrassler.com/2024/0...up-or-a-crowd/

Theoretical physicist Matt Strassler

2. Against Newton’s First Law of Motion

The phib violates Newton’s first law of motion — that an object in motion not acted on by any force will remain in steady motion. If the Higgs field slowed things down, it could only do so, according to this law, by exerting a force.

But Newton, in predicting the motions of the planets, assumed that the only force acting on the planets was that of gravity. If the Higgs field exerted an additional force on the planets simply because they have mass (or because it was giving them mass), Newton’s methods for predicting planetary motions would have failed.

Worse, the slowing from the Higgs field would have acted like friction over billions of years, and would by now have caused the Earth to slow down and spiral into the Sun.

cheers
Allan

[Atmos (Colin)]

I haven’t read anything on the Higgs field for many year and I only skimmed parts of his page BUT by interpretation of the phib would be slightly different. Everything in the universe would be moving at the speed of light if it wasn’t slowed down by mass (photons are massless and only have one speed)…. Barring refraction… snells law and all that.

From my brief read up on the Higgs Field, it’s what gives mass to other fundamental particulars which in the end, gives mass to the universe. Without doing some more research I’m not sure how gravitons interact with the Higgs field, one gives mass while the other gives gravity.

[alpal]

Originally Posted by Atmos

I haven’t read anything on the Higgs field for many year and I only skimmed parts of his page BUT by interpretation of the phib would be slightly different. Everything in the universe would be moving at the speed of light if it wasn’t slowed down by mass (photons are massless and only have one speed)…. Barring refraction… snells law and all that.

From my brief read up on the Higgs Field, it’s what gives mass to other fundamental particulars which in the end, gives mass to the universe. Without doing some more research I’m not sure how gravitons interact with the Higgs field, one gives mass while the other gives gravity.

I think the Higgs Field is nonsense but who am I to say?
It seems that every time an explanation is needed a new field is required.
Maybe we will never understand what mass really is?

[TrevorW]

Ok what if this HIGGS Field is the reason you cannot travel FTL by normal means ??

[Atmos (Colin)]

Originally Posted by TrevorW

Ok what if this HIGGS Field is the reason you cannot travel FTL by normal means ??

Theoretically if something doesn’t interact with the Higgs field it travels AT light speed. Or, if it interacts a a lot it’s at light speed and if it doesn’t at all it has instantaneous travel! All just postulation from me.

[TrevorW]

As someone famously said, "its beyond the laws of physics, Jimmy"

[alpal]

Originally Posted by TrevorW

As someone famously said, "its beyond the laws of physics, Jimmy"

I often wonder what Alien beings - if they existed - would think of our science
if they were say 1 million years ahead in technology?
We don't even know what causes Dark Energy or Dark Matter -
we are still struggling with the idea of mass.
A lot of our experiments seem to give the right answers but that could
be for the wrong reasons.

There could be a whole zoo of particles much smaller than say 1/1000th
the size of a proton that don't interact with normal matter
that we can't ever detect or see with any experiment?
We know about Neutrinos and they are very elusive particles.
Maybe that proposed zoo of particles are all from the same group as Neutrinos?

[Steffen]

Originally Posted by alpal

The phib violates Newton’s first law of motion — that an object in motion not acted on by any force will remain in steady motion.

That's a bit like saying Newtonian mechanics proves Einstein wrong.

But Newton, in predicting the motions of the planets, assumed that the only force acting on the planets was that of gravity. If the Higgs field exerted an additional force on the planets simply because they have mass (or because it was giving them mass), Newton’s methods for predicting planetary motions would have failed.

And today we know that gravity isn't actually a force, and that Newton failed to accurately predict Mercury's orbit.

[alpal]

Originally Posted by Steffen

That's a bit like saying Newtonian mechanics proves Einstein wrong.

And today we know that gravity isn't actually a force, and that Newton failed to accurately predict Mercury's orbit.

yes

https://aether.lbl.gov/www/classes/p...ionMercury.htm

Precession of the perihelion of Mercury.

[ChrisD (Chris)]

This Matt Strassler guy just confuses me. He has the qualifications to support the belief that he is an authority in the field yet his argument feels very "flat earther".

So here I am, with zero qualifications in particle physics, about to "Dunning Kruger" my way into this discussion. Here I go...

His basic premise, as stated in his blog, is:

• If an object moves, the Higgs field affects it by slowing it down, while

• If it doesn’t move, the Higgs field does nothing to it

and then his conclusion is that this violates the laws of motion and so physics is broken.


From what I've read, the term "Slowing Down", with regard to the Higgs field, is a METAPHOR physicists use.

Without the Higgs field, certain fundamental particles (like W and Z bosons) would be massless, like photons. Massless particles travel at the speed of light in a vacuum. The Higgs mechanism "endows" these particles with mass, meaning they can no longer travel at the speed of light. This reduction from light-speed is sometimes described metaphorically as being "slowed down" due to their interaction with the Higgs field.The Higgs field does not actively resist motion or apply a force that reduces the velocity of a particle. Newton's laws are not violated.

Chris

[alpal]

Originally Posted by ChrisD

This Matt Strassler guy just confuses me. He has the qualifications to support the belief that he is an authority in the field yet his argument feels very "flat earther".

So here I am, with zero qualifications in particle physics, about to "Dunning Kruger" my way into this discussion. Here I go...

His basic premise, as stated in his blog, is:

• If an object moves, the Higgs field affects it by slowing it down, while

• If it doesn’t move, the Higgs field does nothing to it

and then his conclusion is that this violates the laws of motion and so physics is broken.


From what I've read, the term "Slowing Down", with regard to the Higgs field, is a METAPHOR physicists use.

Without the Higgs field, certain fundamental particles (like W and Z bosons) would be massless, like photons. Massless particles travel at the speed of light in a vacuum. The Higgs mechanism "endows" these particles with mass, meaning they can no longer travel at the speed of light. This reduction from light-speed is sometimes described metaphorically as being "slowed down" due to their interaction with the Higgs field.The Higgs field does not actively resist motion or apply a force that reduces the velocity of a particle. Newton's laws are not violated.

Chris

Thanks Chris,
I just watched this video by Arvin Ash and it didn't help much:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7dsACYTTXE

Then this one from Matt O'Dowd went way over my head
and even people with Masters of Science degrees agree with me:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Q4UAiKacw

cheers
Allan