Higgs Bosen question

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

Is it reasonable to conclude that if the Higgs field exists that the components of the field are the hunted HBs and that they must travel thru space at speeds near C..

No a Higgs field is not composed of HBs much like an electromagnetic field is not composed of photons. When the field is perturbed through vacuum fluctuations the bosons come into existence.

Higgs bosons cannot travel at C as they have mass.

Regards

Steven

[avandonk]

Originally Posted by sjastro

Off topic but a story of human interest.

My sister who is a psychologist was appointed by the mangement of the Australian Synchroton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Synchrotron ) to deal with the collapsing work environment.

Horror stories abound such as particle physicists using the synchroton as a racing track for cars as a protest against management.

Still my sister claims it's easier to deal with particle physicists than mathematicians.

I have no idea where she got that idea.

Regards

Steven

Management as usual thought they should manage something they did not understand. The Scientists thought that management should manage the whole enterprise so that some science can be done!
Puerile and facile comments on both sides is what started this mess!

Bert

[renormalised (Carl)]

Mathematicians are too abstract....very hard to know what they're thinking

Unless, of course, you think in numbers

[CraigS]

Originally Posted by sjastro

Higgs bosons cannot travel at C as they have mass.

The thing Alex would seem to be looking for is the graviton .. the graviton would be massless, thereby avoiding the above problem, eh ?

Cheers

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

AND I have to check my numbers ....
IS not neutrino of considerably less mass than a HB?

If so does that not confuse the issue... as it would suggest particles exist with mass but of less mass than the HB... how could this be?

No it doesn't. Think of the velocity of the particle as contributing to the relativistic mass.

Regards

Steven

[CraigS]

Originally Posted by renormalised

Mathematicians are too abstract....very hard to know what they're thinking

Unless, of course, you think in numbers

Yeah … better off being an electrical engineer … keep things simple !!


Cheers

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by sjastro

No a Higgs field is not composed of HBs much like an electromagnetic field is not composed of photons. When the field is perturbed through vacuum fluctuations the bosons come into existence.

Higgs bosons cannot travel at C as they have mass.

Regards

Steven

Alex...think of a field in this way....imagine the flat surface of a pond being a field, stretching out in all directions. Doesn't matter if it's moving or not, the "field" is always there. Now, if you drop a stone in the pond and watch the ripples move out from their point of origin, the ripples can be likened to the particles, each ripple representing a particle and the size of the ripples representing different particles or different energy levels of the one type of particle. Once the disturbance dissipates, the particles disappear but the field remains.

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by CraigS

Yeah … better off being an electrical engineer … keep things simple !!


Cheers

Just like Anthony Peratt

[xelasnave]

Originally Posted by sjastro

Yeah sure Alex.

If so here are a few questions.

(1) What is the Lagrangian of your system?
(2) What is the symmetry group for the Lagrangian to be invariant?
(3) How does spontaneous symmetry breaking occur for the formation of push particle mass?

I'm sure the sentences are goobledygook but in it lies your answers as to what a Higgs field, mechanism, and boson are.
I'm afraid analogies as provided by Rob are as about as close as one can come to explaining the Higgs mechanism without going into the mathematics which makes GR look very simple.

Particle physicists are confident of finding the Higgs boson.
In a strange twist of fate the predictions of the standard model have gone beyond the Higgs boson.
The discovery of the W and Z bosons in the 1980s require the existence of the Higgs boson.
If there was a a "timeline of discovery", the Higgs boson should have been discovered before the W and Z bosons.
The Higgs mechanism predated electroweak theory which predicted the W and Z bosons.

Regards

Steven

Hi Steven thanks for your input.
I dont know that I can answer your concerns about the push system as everyone is out today and I am the only one working on the idea .

Answer to no. 1............P=P
answer to no. 2............P/S
answer to no. 3............You assume there needs to be a new particle for a push universe when there are many candidates (in my view). my simple P=P is really what we can hope to find in void like space and really P=E is my point...so simple that folk will not dwell upon the issues such uncovers.

But you are correct as the areas you cover I find difficult to understand... moreover I dont fully understand the idea of super symmetry and find the concept difficult to accept.

I am not sure I even have the general premise of SS correct but it seems to me the idea requires super partners to all particles in our universe..where these super partners exist I also dont understand but it seems the suggestion is they exist in some kind of other dimension or universe...well for what ever reason (ignorance presumably) I dont buy it.

But Steven I assure you I am trying to understand the language of math ...like the concept of symmetry breaking its not a big deal in my book and it seems trivial to think about... does it not simply mean variatio0n of conditions leading to change... the math has run away with a simple notion again ....maybe.

ANYWAYS you know my ignorance and help me address the things I should and I sincerely thank you for that..I really do appreciate your (and others) help.


alex

[avandonk]

The first time I went to the synchrotron in Chicago I had a very large argument about the size of their beam. It took four years before they agreed with me. That the beam size should be about the size of the crystal. Any extraneous xrays not hitting the crystal would just add noise!

When they finally agreed a few people had been moved sideways including number one.

The real loss was the time due to stupidity and stubbornness.

Bert

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by avandonk

The first time I went to the synchrotron in Chicago I had a very large argument about the size of their beam. It took four years before they agreed with me. That the beam size should be about the size of the crystal. Any extraneous xrays not hitting the crystal would just add noise!

When they finally agreed a few people had been moved sideways including number one.

The real loss was the time due to stupidity and stubborness.

Bert

Management never likes to be proven wrong, and it's even worse when management is made up of those scientists whose whole raison detre is the project you're working on. You showed them up and they resented it, so since they were in a position of power, they exercised it by shoving you sideways.

[avandonk]

I should have been more clear. It was not me that was moved. They sacked or moved #1 from the synchrotron in Chicago. Others were told to implement my ideas. The worst part was that they finally implemented all my ideas and then claimed them as a major breakthrough. Self delusion is rampant. Sad, Sad, Sad really.

Bert

[xelasnave]

Originally Posted by renormalised

Alex...think of a field in this way....imagine the flat surface of a pond being a field, stretching out in all directions. Doesn't matter if it's moving or not, the "field" is always there. Now, if you drop a stone in the pond and watch the ripples move out from their point of origin, the ripples can be likened to the particles, each ripple representing a particle and the size of the ripples representing different particles or different energy levels of the one type of particle. Once the disturbance dissipates, the particles disappear but the field remains.

Thanks Carl.
I can not imagine a field to be static. It may be the only way we can reduce the concept to manageable terms for math and human understanding but how could it be static... I can not prove this but I will bet that all fields produce their force by the movement of particles... if not we can only get a force by relying on magic..the magic of math which can quantify but does not explain the mechanics. What is happening in a magnetic field ( dont we need some bosens or something moving around?).. some would say its just a field but just play with a magnet and iron dust for hours and you get the feeling a field is no way static.... just my view and guys I know this is belief which does not count so dont worry about my digression.

All I am trying to understand however is how the HBs live and get around and although the math is the best way to understanding I am hopeful I can get a visualization of how it may all work.

alex

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by CraigS

The thing Alex would seem to be looking for is the graviton .. the graviton would be massless, thereby avoiding the above problem, eh ?

Cheers

I don't see the relevance here Craig. Alex was referring to the speed of HBs.

Regards

Steven

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

Hi Steven thanks for your input.
I dont know that I can answer your concerns about the push system as everyone is out today and I am the only one working on the idea .

Answer to no. 1............P=P
answer to no. 2............P/S
answer to no. 3............You assume there needs to be a new particle for a push universe when there are many candidates (in my view). my simple P=P is really what we can hope to find in void like space and really P=E is my point...so simple that folk will not dwell upon the issues such uncovers.

Come now Alex. This is what they do at the Tbolts forum. They don't understand the questions so they change the questions to give the appropriate answers.

In your own words explain what symmetry breaking is given that you see that it is "no big deal". Symmetry breaking is seen all the time in nature.
Think of a marble sitting on an inverted bowl......

Regards

Steven

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by avandonk

I should have been more clear. It was not me that was moved. They sacked or moved #1 from the synchrotron in Chicago. Others were told to implement my ideas. The worst part was that they finally implemented all my ideas and then claimed them as a major breakthrough. Self delusion is rampant. Sad, Sad, Sad really.

Bert

I'd have recorded all the arguing and such somehow, then when they claimed to have their "major breakthrough" I'd have come out and told it like it was

Or written a paper about it

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by sjastro

Come now Alex. This is what they do at the Tbolts forum. They don't understand the questions so they change the questions to give the appropriate answers.

Regards

Steven

It's called "Creation" Science

[sjastro]

Originally Posted by renormalised

It's called "Creation" Science

They are very sensitive about being called Creationists.

Regards

Steven

[Rob_K]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

AND I have to check my numbers ....
In fact I am sure there must be various particles with mass less than the HB... if so this suggests that it is the operation of the field that gives mass not the interaction between a hb and matter...the same as the push universe machinery

"In fact I am sure... if so this suggests... the same as..."

Love your work Alex, but you really should examine what you write more closely. What you have here is a conclusion based on an assumption based on a belief.

Cheers -

Rob

PS: Like I'd know anything, I thought a bosun was a member of a ship's crew...

[avandonk]

Steven in the USA they have this strange partitioning of expertise and responsibility. That way no one is guilty as it is distrubuted amongst the guilty.

I am not complaining as it was a great learning experience.

Bert