That sucks, it's nice that the Standard Model is right and all, but we need something that ISN'T right so we can get a hint of new physics.
Heh, that attitude reminds me of the Professor's short on the Futurama season finally last year. The finally found the smallest particle ever (the pixel, haha) and after the initial elation of the discovery, the Professor was ready to commit suicide cause there were no more questions left.
There is so much good stuff on this thread that I miss because no new thread is made and it is buried in here... is there enough interest in this topic for sub forums or is that too much?
__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
- Aristotle
There is so much good stuff on this thread that I miss because no new thread is made and it is buried in here... is there enough interest in this topic for sub forums or is that too much?
Try the "first unread button" instead of "last page"
so.....the creation of higgs boson (which is a fundamental particle?) proves the existance of an 'overlaying field' (higgs field) which interacts with the other fundamental particles (electrons, neutrinos, quarks) and creates gravitational charge (which is mass). do I have this correct so far?
the creation of the higgs boson, was by slamming particles together in the accelerator at a specific speed (or energy) and measuring (over and over again) the energy output signature, which ended up matching the theoretical energy signature of higgs boson?
edit - so a boson is a subatomic particle (not a fundamental particle), but the higgs boson has no spin and zero electric or color charge.
edit2 - the overlying field is just a collection of higgs bosons (creating a scalar field) which react with fundamental particles to create gravitational charge (otherwise measured as mass). I think. If so, very cool.
__________________ Your CalgaryPuck FFL Div A 2008, 2009 & 2010 Champion.
Last edited by toonmaster; 07-05-2012 at 12:48 PM.
Actually reading the discovery it seems there's some wiggle room for new physics, so that's good. The quest continues.
It certainly opens to door to interesting things if we have discovered a fundamental explanation for the existence of mass and if this can be manipulated so can gravity and today, journalists are jumping at the idea that light speed travel may now be possible. More journalistic sensationalism or is there science behind this?
If E=mc^2 and you take mass out of the equation by manipulating the Higgs, suddenly you don't need infinite energy to accelerate something to 99.9% c anymore.
Hm.. well most of the mass from particles like protons and neutrons doesn't actually come from the component quarks' Higgs field interaction (like 1%), it actually comes from the energy binding the quarks together (or something like that, the energy involved in keeping the quarks together to create a proton or neutron anyway).
So blocking Higgs interaction wouldn't remove all (or even very much) of the mass. I think.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Hm.. well most of the mass from particles like protons and neutrons doesn't actually come from the component quarks' Higgs field interaction (like 1%), it actually comes from the energy binding the quarks together (or something like that, the energy involved in keeping the quarks together to create a proton or neutron anyway).
So blocking Higgs interaction wouldn't remove all (or even very much) of the mass. I think.
That's precisely the opposite they are saying.
You are still looking at mass as a web, theY are putting it down to a point.
You are still looking at mass as a web, theY are putting it down to a point.
I don't get what you mean.
Particles get their mass from interacting with the Higgs field, but energy itself creates a gravitational field but doesn't interact with the Higgs field, so even if you could turn the Higgs field off, energy would still distort spacetime (i.e. have mass), and 99% of the mass of a proton (99% of the deflection of spacetime that a proton makes) is due to energy, not Higgs field interaction.
EDIT: E doesn't just equal mc^2, it includes energy in its full form.
EDIT2: The quarks in a proton add up to a mass of 11 MeV, while the mass of a proton is 938 Mev. The extra 927 MeV comes from the energy in the gluons that hold the quarks together. Gluons don't have intrinsic mass (like photons) because they don't couple directly to the Higgs field. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton#..._of_the_proton
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Definitely a silly term (but silly terms are the ones that seem to stick for some reason. There's no bang in the big bang either).
The issue isn't with the term (which is silly and not used in a threatening way) it's with the subset of theists that take the term as a serious threat and make t-shirts about it.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
