E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSPhysicists at CERN are expected to announce that they have observed a new subatomic particle that may be the long-sought Higgs boson. Derrick Pitts, chief astronomer at the Franklin Institute, talks about the boson on MSNBC.
So what's the Higgs boson, and why are people spending billions of dollars to find that god-danged subatomic particle? I've rounded up a variety of resources aimed at showing you why the hunt for the Higgs is a big deal.
First, a little context: The Higgs particle, and its associated field, were hypothesized back in the 1960s by British physicist Peter Higgs and others to fill a weird gap in the Standard Model, one of physics' most successful theories. The model as it stood had no mechanism to explain why some particles are massless (such as the photon, which is the quantum bit for light and other types of electromagnetic radiation), while other particles have varying degrees of mass (such as the W and Z bosons, which play a part in the weak nuclear force). By rights, all particles should be without mass and zipping around freely.
The Higgs mechanism sets up a field that interacts with particles to endow them with mass, and the Higgs boson is the particle associated with that field — just as photons are associated with an electromagnetic field. For more than four decades, physicists have assumed that the Higgs field existed, but found no experimental evidence for it. It requires a super-powerful particle smasher such as the Large Hadron Collider to produce energies high enough to knock a Higgs boson into existence under controlled conditions.
But the heavy particles created in a collider exist for just an instant before they decay into lighter particles. The LHC's physicists have been looking for particular patterns in the spray of particles that match what they'd expect to see from the decay of the Higgs boson. They've collected data for roughly a quadrillion proton-on-proton collisions, and on Wednesday they'll announce the status of the Higgs search based on those conclusions. (Tune in the webcast.)
The teams at the LHC's ATLAS and CMS detectors are likely to say they're pretty sure they see a new type of particle with Higgs-like characteristics, but will need more time to nail down those characteristics completely. If that's the case, physicists can then go on to find out if the Higgs mechanism works exactly the way they expected it to, or whether there are unexpected twists. Some of the theories about how the universe is put together are pretty far-out — for example, suggesting that there are several dimensions in space that we can't perceive directly, or that there are huge troops of subatomic particles that we haven't yet discovered. Following the tracks left behind by the Higgs could reveal whether there's any truth to those theories.
Analogies, please!
For decades, experts have been trying to come up with analogies to illustrate how the Higgs mechanism works. One of the best-known was proposed in 1993 by David Miller, a physicist at University College London. Imagine looking down from a balcony in a ballroom, watching a cocktail party below. When just plain folks try to go from one end of the room to the other, they can walk through easily, with no resistance from the party crowd. But when a celebrity like Justin Bieber shows up, other partygoers press around him so tightly that he can hardly move ... and once he moves, the crowd moves with him in such a way that the whole group is harder to stop.
The partygoers are like Higgs bosons, the just plain folks are like massless particles, and Bieber is like a massive Z boson.
The Guardian's Ian Sample demonstrates a variant of this analogy in a 4.5-minute video: Imagine a tray with ping-pong balls scattered on it. The balls roll freely around the empty tray. But then, if you spread a layer of sugar over the tray, the balls sitting on the piled-up sugar don't roll so easily. The grains of sugar introduce a kind of inertial "drag," and that's the kind of effect that the Higgs field supposedly has on particles with mass.
In a 60-second shot of science written for Symmetry magazine, Howard Haber of the University of California at Santa Cruz uses a livelier comparison to a high-speed bullet plowing through a vat of molasses.
What good is it?
Particle physicists try to avoid forecasting the applications of an experimental advance before the actual advance is confirmed, but in the past, advances on a par with the discovery of the Higgs boson have had lots of beneficial applications, and some that are more questionable. The rise of nuclear power and nuclear weaponry is a prime example of that double-edged sword.
The discovery of antimatter is what made medical PET scanning possible, and antimatter propulsion could eventually play a part in interstellar travel, just like on "Star Trek." Particle accelerators have opened the way to medical treatments such as proton eye therapy — as well as advances in materials science, thanks to neutron scattering.
It's conceivable that the discoveries made at the Large Hadron Collider will eventually point to new sources of energy, Michio Kaku, a physicist at City College of New York, told me during a discussion of the LHC's promise and peril. And if the discovery of the Higgs leads to fresh insights into the fabric of the universe, it's conceivable that we could take advantage of the as-yet-unknown weave of that fabric for communication or transportation. Who knows? Maybe this is how "Star Trek" gets its start.
Visualizing the Higgs
If one picture can be worth a thousand words, how much are six videos worth? Here are half a dozen videos that delve more deeply into the Higgs boson and its significance. Be sure to tune in CERN's webcast starting at 3 a.m. ET for the latest revelations.
PHD Comics explains the Higgs boson. (7:45)
Fermilab scientist Don Lincoln describes the nature of the Higgs boson.(3:27)
BBC Horizon highlights the hunt for the Higgs in an hour-long special. (59:06)
Cassiopeia Project explains the Higgs field. (5:37)
Ezra Klein previews the Higgs boson news on "The Rachel Maddow Show" on MSNBC. (3:21)
Associated Press video about the Higgs boson (2:06)
Silly and serious talk about the Higgs boson:
- Higgs-like leak? Video says new particle observed at LHC
- Here's how the famous Higgs particle gives things mass
- Contest for Higgs explanations: The Waldegrave Higgs Challenge
- Humor from the Borowitz Report: 5 questions for the Higgs boson
- Les Horribles Cernettes sing 'Hey, Mr. Higgs'
- National Geographic: The God Particle
- BBC: Science of the Higgs boson explained
- Berkeley Lab: What's up with the Higgs?
Some of the (other) blogs to watch for Higgs boson updates:
- ViXra.org: Physicist Philip Gibbs blogs about boson buzz.
- Not Even Wrong: Columbia physicist Peter Woit's blog.
- Resonaances: Adam Falkowski counts down to H-Hour.
- Cosmic Variance: Sean Carroll and company weigh in.
- Quantum Diaries: Aidan Randle-Conde tracks Higgs hunt.
- A Quantum Diaries Survivor: Tommaso Dorigo on the case.
- Of Particular Significance: Reality check from Matt Strassler.
Alan Boyle is msnbc.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.
Leave a Comment:
Very exciting indeed! Hope this discovery takes humanity to the next level of advanced technology in a positive way.
It’s a New and Exciting Week in Science,
We hope all is well.
The study of
electricity and electronics has always been a passion here at DAP ET,
considering electricity is the fundamental natural occurrence in ALL existence
in the universe, if you look at things from an atomic prospective?
A very interesting
topic in science has aroused itself, commonly called the “GOD Particle”, a name
given by a very influential physicist, also known as the Higgs Boson. Well what
is the God Particle??? To put it in simple terms, it is the alpha particle (or
primary particle) in an atom, which causes the particular atom defined by its
elemental characteristics (even the simplest atom) itself to behave in such a
manner and primarily the fundamental property of the atom which gives the atom
its mass and electrical properties.
Although DAP ET in MOST respects supports
this theorem, we do believe the behavioural aspects of ALL elements; from an
atomic prospective has some defining relations to the ENTIRE universe itself.
Our theorem is based upon simple elementary physics (although our model can be
decomposed into a more complex illustration),
which mostly reference the push and pull effects of like and unlike charges (particles)
and their similar behavioural aspects found in magnetised entities. What we
realize is that all entities have mass, without mass there is nothing (no
matter), simply a thought for example. We find it quiet interesting that scientist
propose that certain particles have no mass, although it may be an statement
based upon approximations based upon the measure of another entity with a MUCH
greater mass, we feel that nothing should be approximated especially when
studying tiny measurements.
The defining
observations made on the entire topic really ALL points at the following
question!
1. How is mass measured? (since it is the fundamental aspect
of discussion in realizing the Higgs Boson)
To my understanding of physics, based
upon data observed from NASA and text book research, that the mass of an object
on earth is different than the mass of an object placed on the moon, WHY?, We
all know it due to the Gravitational Force acting upon that object. Well What
is that Force? How is it made? We all know that is due to the Gravitational
Forces acting upon it from the earths iron and metal core (i.e. Earth’s
Magnetic Field). Well what caused the earth to start spinning, was it the sun
or was it another galaxy passing by and caused a rotational effect to occur, similar
to the effects of when you bring a metal object into a magnetic field, or is it
a composition of the two. How does the sun of our galaxy play its role in the
equation?, since it also has a magnetic field of its own, which is a why it has
an effect on earth and the different planets orbiting it.
To answer the question proposed
above which is “how is mass measured?” in the first place. One may define Mass
as the amount of matter in which an object contains. Mass is normally measured
in grams (g) or kilo-grams (kg), which basically defines how much something
weights, based upon the gravitational force applied to it. (Experimental
Analysis: Try measuring your own body weight using the same scale at different
heights, notice how that Gravitational Force acting upon you (a composition of
mass (atomic particles)) differing by your displacement from the earth’s core,
causes your weight to change. Basically weight a precision scale, you will
notice a difference in body weight / mass, if measured your weight from the top
of the grand canyon opposed to the very bottom of the grand canyon, considering
each position differs in physical displacement form the earth’s magnetic field.
So basically what gives an atom its
mass, (1) the environment or atmosphere is it placed in (the different forces
acting upon it) and (2) combining force within itself ( the unknown force that
causes the electrons to orbit the nucleus of an atom), which poses the ultimate
question I believe should be observed or studied is.
“”HOW and WHY do electrons orbits
the nucleus of an atom and why is an active force required to free an electron
from its orbit, and after is stripped away, why does the atom (positive ion)
missing the electrons requires a new electron to stabilize its elemental
structure?””
Follow my page on this very exciting topic, if you can realize my theory on this scientific breakthrough!
Sadly this is all just THEORY. Nothing has been proved and people have been spending billions on pointless research. They are no closer to the Higgs Boson now that they were in 1960. They have just wasted many BILLIONS that could have fed many needy families.
Robert-
If everyone thought the way you do, we might as well have stayed in the stone age and should still be using stone tools to hunt bison. However, scientific advancement and the sophistication of the human race requires a concerted effort (and money). Would you have said the same thing about electricity? I'll bet you'd rather have your electric lights rather than oil lamps. What about creating radio transmitters, which has progressed to current wireless and cellular technology? You have no idea how much this discovery will help the human race. In fact, this discovery may be key to a multitude of other unfathomable advancements in the future.
incredible brilliant minds at work..I just hope if they dont believe in God thats fine..but they themselves want to play God...I hope their on the good guys side even if they are not as bright as they are...
The worst and most obvious of many big errors in your post.
Mass is, by definition, the same everywhere. You are confusing mass and weight, which DOES vary depending on which planet (or plan-not) you are near.
and to add to michaels comment.
Mass is related to the forces that objects have against each other, whereas weight is a function of the gravitational pull that is exerted on an object. That is weight is actually more accurately described as a force.
Robert has a point...if mankind wasn't extorted (taxed) by the state through force and threats of kidnapping (prison), how much of that capital would have been allocated via donations and market preferences? It might have been less...or it might have been more.
WE shouldn't let a small group of people make decisions for the whole group, as they will invariably misjudge what makes the most of us happy. The state is supposed to be at best a "necessary evil", with which society obstensibly kills less people, rapes less women, and maximizes happiness and limits pain of the collective group. If it doesn't do those things, it's pretty pointless as an entity, all "inevitability arguments" aside. It would cease to be both necessary (to maximizing human happiness and reducing human suffering) and beneficial...but would remain very evil.
We allow this small group of rulers to make decisions for the group that the group would never make for themselves. We constantly decry this...we call it "tyranny". What people ever voted itself democratically into a war of aggression? How about self defense, for that matter? What people ever decided by referendum to nationalize their banking system, or centralize via pseudo private entities? And so it follows, how can those "elites" tell us what we want to purchase, demand, etc...???
The will screw it up. They utility in society will not be maximized. Distortions caused by their interventions lead to bubbles, bubbles lead to crashes, social parts of society are affected like the financial. If not for the state...
...we'd have cured diseases that many people had, saving the most lives, as opposed to having spent money are rare diseases some lobbyist decided he wanted cured on the behalf of his rick employer whose grandkid had this very same disease (incidentally, of course), which indeed led to a small interest group of people getting cured...while many suffered and died. The point is more died than should have because the state subverted the actual market demand.
...we'd have not spent money on ego projects like some of the NASA stuff designed to beat another country at something that had zero to do with national defense. If it's for defense, real defense, not offense, then have at it, by all means. But much of it Presidents playing with really expensive toys. Sure, sure, there are always scientific gains made on these things...but at what cost? Never is an honest reckoning made of risk vs reward. Why Mars? Why not the moon again? Why either? Why not focus on building livable habitats in space? Again, we can all figure out what we all want, and what's best for us for ourselves individually. No one can better figure out how to meet your needs (or the needs of your small family unit) than you can.
...we'd of probably focused on few things more people want to explore. Maybe this project wouldn't exist, or maybe it would and then some. Is it really all that important if no one (en masse) wants it?
The fake argument that we would of stayed in the stone age if not for these misallocations of market resources against the wills of the consumers (in most cases) doesn't fit reality. Technology is proceeded by accumulated capital. Capital accumulates one of two ways...by force or by consent. There are many ways to force payments (taxes, mandates, monoplize an industry with the use of a state monosonizie all the demand for a service/good)...but only two ways to get voluntary payments; trade (including sales and purchases, gifts, etc.) and donation. So, since forced appropriation leads to inefficient allocation (by the "elite"), the capital accumulation process is most efficient when left unmolested. For centuries people had trade, donation, laws, defense, social support systems, and technology grew...all with a market, and without forced capital accumulation (the state's way of raising revenue). Once capital accumulates without force, it can be allocated most efficiently to re-investments aimed at making the productivity of workers go up, the cost pf production to go down, or both. Once workers are more productive via investments in labor saving and safety increasing technology, and/or the costs of production fall (via immigrant labor, outsourcing - taking the job to the immigrant, and types of technology), there are more profits. More profits means some incriment of compensation (accounted fori inflation) will be negotiated from the owner to the workers (who are more productive). This raises standards of living and expendable income for productive workers...who are also consumers. This boost in consumption leads to more profits, more hiring, and in the end, higher standards of living in an endless cycle (as long as resources are allocated fairly efficiently and we don't screw up and run out resources because we visited Mars instead of mining asteroids for needed materials...
My point is, we wouldn't be in the stone age without wasting a lot of extorted money on pet projects with little or no value as compared to alternative desires of society. We'd be either right where we are now, or further along. I'd suggest the latter, as the "elites" are ineficient at capital allocation...and without them we'd of had better allocation, logically.
You might be surprised at how often being relieved of the burden of responsibility for decision-making makes the most of us happy. You see, once people recognize the power of the group over the individual (and we can assume people have been recognizing that since we became people), they seem also to recognize that this power is largely instinctual in origin, and not very capable of directing itself by its own rational process. Systems of assigning leaders and followers have been with us from time immemorial; I believe they are intrinsic and inevitable in the formation of large groups. But all this is a real digression; I'm looking forward to more news about the Higgs boson, even though I have no physics knowledge.. it's actually kind of fun!
pro,
I would rather spend the money finding the higgs boson than spend the money killing others in senseless wars in the middle east.
How is that any different, a small group of people making decisions and moral statements for the rest of us.
I met a hoggs bison in a bar the other night!!!
Oh sorry wrong blog!!!
I found her for the price of a draft beer!
you can find one too!! stop at any bar ))))
@fb:
If you can read this comment, please explain to me -since I am from the old school- Is the Higgs particle created by the interaction of protons, or the protons have energy because the energy is a byproduct of the higgs paricle?
It's like what is first: the chicken or the egg?
We humans have the gift of communication and movement at the speed of light in the mind. There is a dimension that has no time or gravity or mass. We can communicate beyond the limits of thoughts.
There is a dimension of faith. If you find an angel, who appear as a form of living, communicating circular beings of white light. Then science has discovered a part of the spiritual dimension.
Steve- "If you find an angel, who appear as a form of living, communicating circular beings of white light. Then science has discovered a part of the spiritual dimension."
Did you forget to take your meds?
peaceful scientific pursuits > flat earth society
Nice article. It always helps to explain scientific minutia in ways that the average person can understand. While probably not at all close to being accurate, the analogies bring what is otherwise just "science" home to millions. When spending billions to build, and millions more to operate the equipment, the easy, if not exactly scientifically accurate, explanations are needed.
Scientific inquiry is, usually, a good thing, if it is done properly, without the intent to harm people. Even really, really expensive scientific research needs to be done, even at the short term cost of helping those less fortunate.
Jesus, the Christ, Mark 14:7.
Sometimes you need to look past the realities of today to the possibilities of tomorrow.
A lot of serious editorializing going on here (as usual, but usually not so verbose). But this scientific stuff is just too complicated. The bible is so much simpler, so lets just go with that. Life is just easier when we can stone the gays and quarantine the lepers (sarc). No offense intended dirp...your appreciation for science is refreshing.
Yes but physics requires you to use what you were born with,your brain Sanity.The one GOD wants you to use,so USE IT.God or whatever higher force that exists would want us to use the quantum computers that are given to each and every one of us to it's fullest extent;we would not be where we are now without it,and YES it is very refreshing!What I find amazing is how neural networks in ones mind very closely match how the universe looks from afar..indeed amazing
So the questions is this: What if they don't find it? What if some of their assumptions are wrong? When do you stop spending the money on chasing a dream and ignoring other phenomena you don't understand that just may be the key to that big break through? Like the Fleischmann and Pons effect can I get a witness? Anybody?
~God must be chuckling.
If God is chuckling it's because he's so amazed at how smart mankind has become. So smart that we don't need ancient mythologies to explain phenomenon like fire and lightning. So smart that we know what the Bible writers didn't; that disease is caused by germs and not demons; that the Earth revolves around the Sun and not vice versa; and that mass is the result of the subatomic Higgs particle, not magic.
This is an achievement to be celebrated!
Sounds like they're going to find it. But if they don't find it, and still don't find it after looking for a couple of years, that would suggest that someone should come up with a new theory. The effect would be like the Michelson-Morley experiment's effect on the luminiferous ether.
If they prove it doesn't exist or that it's not what they expected they learn plenty about their mistakes. Having results is what's important in the experiments, not what the results are. Whatever they are, we learn.
Bektemba, you understand that the Higgs Boson isn't the only kind of subatomic particle research that the Large Hadron Collider can carry out, right..?
Just announced - Higgs found with a mass of 125.3 GeV (±0.6), with a certainty of 4.9 σ (sigma)
NEVER. Don't you get it, we never stop searching for the evidence to answer our questions, to do so is to be ignorant.
And "god did it" is just a sad little shell people wrap themselves in when they quit asking the tough questions and expecting to understand the answer.
There is nothing tough about these questions. Our origins is something that no one will ever know 100 % for sure. There is no way science can show ours, Only assumptions and guesses keep the grant money's rolling in.
Belief in God is something perfectly acceptable. Even Richard Dawkins gives the slight chance of there being a God, but his real issue with not understanding God and has a hatred toward God itself. Which Is understandable for those who are not saved and do not posses the wisdom of Gods spirit to know the answers. I commend Richard though for atleast having that small % acknowledgement of God
The consensus among physicists is that NOT finding the Higgs boson would in fact be the MORE exciting and interesting result.
Marmaduke, I hope you realize that Richard Dawkins' view on the non-zero but tiny likelihood of god's existence is, in fact, the dominant, and most accepted view among scientific atheists. By far. If you are going to commend him individually for it, then you should commend all atheists for it, too.
The point with Dawkins is that , he at one time would never consider a God, but I think he knows deep down inside, the universe is impossible with out God. Since hes Agnostic, he may or may not believe in God, he doesnt care it seems, but Hes not some militant athiest who is saying there is NO possibility for God at all. That is what I commend him on.
Very exciting for the advancement of physics but can zany reporters please stop using this "God Particle" moniker? Yes, it's catchy but it adds absolutely nothing to the process of educating the general public about what the particle is and it promotes anti-intellectualism when dimwits read it and have an immediate negative, religious reaction and shut down rational thought on the subject thus reinforcing everything they think they know about elitist, atheist liberal professors in their ivory towers trying to "kill Gawd." Please stop the insanity.
Never mentioning the term 'god particle' will do absolutely nothing to stop the insanity. It really doesn't matter that the term is actually not really descriptive. On the other side of your point is the fact that calling it the 'god particle' brings the loons out of their holes so we can see who, and what, they are. And hey, if the Higgs has indeed been found and if it functions per the theory, then the world of matter could not exist without it, so 'god particle' is not too much of a stretch.
Well-stated. I've never liked that name; makes for overreaction and bad philosophy, especially within the bounds of internet com-boxes (so I've come to learn).
I hope that the name disappears so that everyone interested can enjoy this. There will be those, unfortunately, who poorly represent their standpoints and beliefs (and in doing so hurt the reputation of *mine*), but nevertheless they'll be able to see it all working in whatever applications we find in the future.
This just feels like one of those things that it's a real blessing to be alive for. Who knows what comes next, assuming the Higgs is found?
Well, it's like finding a new clue in a mystery... Physicists will be busy for years trying to figure out what kind of Higgs it is, whether the Standard Model will have to be remodeled, and maybe whether there's an opening for a wormhole or two. (I made up that part about the wormholes.)
Thats because many of them dont understand that this has nothing to do with God. I think many might think that this particle created the universe or something. I find i all interesting but I know this doesnt explain origins ect ect
Agree to LP. Let's call the Higgs a subatomic particle. Better to focus how it benefits our welfare. Let us relate the findings of the energy produced from the higgs boson collision toward energy power, cancer treatment, etc. The higgs, as a god particle, may be the particle in eternity life, the unseen world. Nah, don't waste our precious time on this matter, we'll be there anyway.
I read the entire article twice and I still do not understand it. Thank God for scientists like Higgs. Does anyone else, besides me, wonder, when you die, you get the "ahah moment"? Everything is clear? Yes, there is a God, No God does not exist? The Bible is a bunch of lies? The Bible is the truth?
I am still working on my Weekly Reader!
I know,God particle...there may be MANY God particles..rofl...no,you are given one chance to get to do what you do here..when you die,well you never know,your sentience possibly exists in a field of energy at a frequency or level that we know nothing of as yet and may pass from one generation to the next,we at this int in time dont know.So,we need to know..maybe we will maybe we wont.As far as aha moments,well..all depends on ones personality.
justin bieber wasn't even born in 1993
Right, in the original example, the celebrity was Margaret Thatcher ... but I tried to update the analogy a little bit.
The Higgs particle is a joke. The statement that a particle gives mass to the universe is an absurd statement. There is space and mass moving through space. There is nothing else. So giving mass to the universe is a philosophical impossibility. What is the other stuff, not mass? No one seems to question the basic premiss of this "Higgs". I'm amazed everyone blows past this like zombies swallowing all the absurdities that follow.
Do you have a background in particle physics to back this statement up, David? Philosophy has nothing to do with this.
So David, how do YOU explain why some particles have mass and others do not?
We await your peer-reviewed paper with an alternative...
News Flash: The Universe does a lot of (demonstrable) things that are non-intuitive to human minds (Whatever goes up, must come down, right? Well, unless it's gong faster than 18 thousand miles per hour...).
Quantum Mechanics in general is full of utterly strange stuff, that no physicist would have anything to do with, were it not that experiment and observation pushes them that way,
Quite possibly the stupidest comment I've seen on newsvine.
And that's saying a lot.
Photons have no mass, yet you use them to see. How can that be in your over-simplified hypothesis?
I agree with David. there are simpler rational explanations for all these things and more. They really need to reevaluate - whether they find the Higgs or not. If they do find it, it does not mean that the mass is being caused by it.
See more in my posting history, I'm not going to waste my breath - let clowns be clowns, but lets confine them to their circus. The public needs to know that there are real answers to the fundamental principles of Physics that will actually be beneficial to society. Thats all.
Yes,why do we have gravity and electromagnetism?Particles with no mass?
Congrats to CERN for an aggressive, if not even openly obsessive search if the Higgs.
Of course, to date, there is evidence but still no proof... and we should always be sure to define and separate evidence from proof.
It is my hope that in the years to come, this facility will devote itself to more than a single discovery.
nice work. looking forward to future developments on this.
Relating to David de Hilster's comment above: The particle mediates mass, just as the photon mediates light. In a sense, the photon *is* light, but it also lights up other objects. I realize this is a hard concept to wrap one's head around. Definitely hard for me... and I'm glad if anyone can make anything we're talking about clearer.
Mr Boyle,
Thank you for this enlightening article. Also thank you a million, million times for not calling it 'the god particle' and attracting trolls.
well, lets keep in mind that Newton, Einstein and almost every great mind that ever lived might be a bit startled that there's a generation of humans that are actually annoyed by a phrase like 'god particle' and that insofar as strict evidenciary processes allow us, it's no more possible to prove, than to disprove God. I can't prove God exists, you can't prove he doesnt, it's as close minded to say He doesnt, as it is to assert with absolute certitude that the big bang is the origin of the universe. If He exists it seems evident He's decided to not be provable. If He doesnt, even science agrees you can't prove a negative. The discussion is moot, if you want to know if He exists, and assuming He does, then He makes the rules and there are plenty of instruction manuals out there for how to make contact. Find Him or don't, but try not to be too mean spirited either way. I rather think, if He's there, that His goal and yours and mine are the same. As Rodney King once said... well, i hardly think i need to repeat it in such august company as those likely to read this lovely article. God Bless you all and I dearly hope they make some wonderful discovery that helps all mankind, divorced of any conflict over moniker. also, RIP Andy.
I don't think the issue with the name "God Particle" was whether or not God exists. That is a different discussion altogether. But calling it the "God Particle" does seem very strange. It gives a really weird association with religion that is completely unnecessary.
jm, but the term didn't come from the scientists, the term is a media invention.
I believe the term God Particle has stuck because it gently mocks religion, since the theory really has nothing to do with religion; at the same time, it's kind of an homage to God.
That's interesting, Doug. I don't even associate God with religion let alone the phrase God particle. The title has stuck, at least for me, simply because the word God encapsulates the unknown, and in our fondest hopes and the secret places of our hearts, the hope for something wonderful. When I hear God Particle I have nothing but positive associations, and so do most people I would imagine, since most people believe in God. By an enormous margine I would add. Not a tiny one, a very very very large margin. Something like eight in ten. And of the two in ten, most of them just claim not to know. I read recently that those who state in absolute terms the certainty of God's non existance is in the three percent range. So this argument isn't the old a million ants can't be wrong schtick. It's the comfort of knowing ninty seven percent of the world probably has an unconscious hope for the brilliant success of these several thousand scientists around the world. And how wonderful is that, billions of people in their hearts wishing for the success of others. There's nothing that screams God more than that. At least to me.
Awesome, Rocky. Very poignant posts.
Let me just add...."Render unto scientists what is science, and unto God what is God's..."
There. Everybody happy?
I'm sticking with my belief, as is so common in people
God exists, and is proven in the smile I receive and the one I give each and every day when my daughter says, "Good morning, daddy."
No dirp, that just proves that your daughter exists. It doesn't say anything at all one way or another about god.
Calling the Higgs the "God particle" belittles both science AND god.
Wow, as stated numerous times above, this is exciting stuff! Explaining how a particle has mass will take us a long ways toward understanding how we fit into the universe, and how forces in the universe interact with each other. I was never smart enough to pursue the sciences, but I am fascinated by it and love reading/watching anything that breaks down complex science theories and applications so even a dolt like me can understand it. I'm a science geek without the science friendly brain... lol. Look at what we knew 30 years ago... and imagine what we will know in 30 more!
It's a lower rank Navy guy on a Higg's class destroyer. That's what a Higg's Boson is. Any other thing that it is, is superfluous
Answering the big Question as to why anyone should CARE about the Higgs Boson...if we KNOW HOW IT WORKS, WE HUMANS CAM EMULATE ITS WORKINGS!
Think of Einstein's famous equation:
E=MC^2
where Energy equal mass times the speed of light squared.
Apply that equation to a one cubic centimetre cube of sugar
and see the resulting number of total watts or joules could
be output from a breakdown of the nuclear binding energies
in that hypothetical cube of sugar.
Actually it's enough energy to power a city for a WHOLE YEAR
or about 5 gigawatts x 365 days or about 1825 gigawatts or
1,825,000,000,000 watts which is a whole lotta POWER that
can be held in a simple sugar cube.
So the MORE WE KNOW, the more power we get and
to my sensibilities, spending some dough on finding out more
about how to get the ability to power my house and car forever
on a sugar cube for next to nothing sounds like a pretty
good investment to me!
Newton postulated that Weight and mass are related by a factor called gravity. F=ma. It has recently been said that the Higg's Boson is what gives us mass. Now for a limited time only, you can buy a bottle of Higg's Boson dispersal fluid that will melt away your body fat, making you weigh much less and looking much trimmer. This 8 oz. bottle of magic Higg's boson removal liquid is available by sending $29.99 to P.O. Box 987654321, Atlantic City, Old Jersey.
The only buyers would be a bunch of muons...
/sigh...Why does a photon have zero mass? Why does a photon have twice the energy of an electron? Why do photons not explain magnetic connection and reconnection at a distance. Could it be that there is no such thing as a photon and it is really just two electrons or two positrons that are moving in either the same or opposite directions? The whole idea of the photon is wrong in the first place.
Instead of Higgs particles or fields all over the universe can we not just say that there is a GROUND or ZERO spin, ZERO motion, ZERO energy state that every single piece of matter is REFERENCED to. This rest state is what every single piece of energy in the universe is seeking atm. We cannot measure a particle in this state since it has no energy, it disappears from our measurable existence (Dirac Sea). This is why our universe is expanding since the only "new" rest spots are outside the universe. The time that it takes energy to travel from where ever it is to get to a rest spot is just like "pressure" and is the mystic dark energy.
Why is there not measurable Higg's wind much like the tests that were done with aether? There should be something that we could measure since everything is in motion through the soup (Higgs field), where are the vortices and eddies behind something that is moving?
A neutrino has less mass then an electron, but somehow is composed of at least one electron. It must also be paired with a positron to cancel out the electric charge. Therefore, how can a neutrino have less mass? It cannot be due to a Higgs field or particle and has more to do with the electric charge. But why does a neutron has so much mass then you ask? Because it is composed of approx. 1728 electrons and positrons, it occupies a large amount of space. Mass is actually a bad term to use, surface area to volume displacement and energy density are more accurate.
Stop looking at it from the perspective of matter and look at the picture/puzzle from zero or ground. Without a common reference point throughout the universe, we could not exist. Why else does a star begin fusion at a certain point, and why it is the same throughout the universe? Why are there limits to how much matter can occupy one place at one time then?
"/sigh...Why does a photon have zero mass? Why does a photon have twice the energy of an electron?"
You can have photons of various energies. Red-light photons have less energy than violet-light photon's for example.
Don't confuse this with the fact that electrons and positrons upon meeting will most probably form a photon at a very specific gamma-ray wavelength. Google: electron-positron annihilation
"Why do photons not explain magnetic connection and reconnection at a distance. Could it be that there is no such thing as a photon and it is really just two electrons or two positrons that are moving in either the same or opposite directions? The whole idea of the photon is wrong in the first place."
If that were true, you could deflect a beam of 'photons' with an electrical or magnetic field, just as electrons are in tube-type video monitors. Electrons and positrons are electrically charged, and would respond that way. Electrically neutral photons do not.
We would also to expect to see 'your' photons at any velocity. But in vacuum, the are observed to move only at c, the speed of, well...light. As only a zero rest-mass, electrically neutral particle possibly can.
There are assorted other problems with your assertion, but that's perhaps the simplest, most glaring one. But...
"A neutrino has less mass then an electron, but somehow is composed of at least one electron."
Composed of at least one electron? Sorry, where did you get that??
Look up the expression 'not even wrong.'
Really imo the Higgs Boson is just another rehashed Aether theory, which is amusing to me since they removed the requirement of needing particles to transport energy from point A to a point B at the turn of the century. This is when the idea of the photon came about since a vacuum magically removes all the energy and electrons from a container. Even if they could remove everything according to Q.M. an electron would have a certain probability of tunneling back in.
They then had to add back in the same particles that they removed in the first place to get mass, and maybe gravity. The whole idea of photons and bosons is just wrong.
It's nice to see so many posts from quantum mechinc scientists. What did the title mean "The Higgs boson made simple."? Morgan Freeman clearly wasn't consulted on this article. I don't understand most of what he talks about either, but at least it is entertaining. My doctor says that I have hallucinations.. I am glad to see I am in good company.
Yes, I still worry about that... Hopefully the videos help? It's always easier if something can be visualized.
I agree, thx for the videos Alan!
Wow it's really amazing what kind of opinions people have about the value of discovery. And also the whacky ideas people have about physics. Not as whacky as actual real physics, of course, because they're too stupid to be that whacky.
Thanks Alan for the free education and update of the "Higgs boson's" ongoing research ....
You've helped many grasp its theoretical concept ....
This article had some nice simple explanations also ....
It's great to see "The Cosmic Log" getting some well deserved attention ....
Thanks to Alan Boyle and those who work with him ....
Happy 4th of July to all ....
I have just learned that I have yet to write an article. I have three ideas. Pleae help me pick one. How not to train a dog or 7 dogs. How not to grow a garden. How to write the most boring article ever written by men. All opinions will be appreciated.
Why is finding the Higg's Boson such a big deal. Because most funding grants are made in October. This time last year speeds greater than the speed of light were announced. Fail. The year before a photon was stopped in mid flight. Fail. For the next three months, scientific fact will take a back seat to getting funded. We'll see if the Higg's Boson still exists in December.
Wouldn't it be easier just to rob banks? I really don't think they're doing all this just for some money.
I don't believe funding would go well if they are lying about what they are discovering...think about it for a second
i bought a car off higgs boson once...just look at it...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF8GhC-T_Mo
Physicists don't know what a Higgs Boson is, or isn't. It's all hype.
They know what a Higgs Boson logically should be. You can't know if it's so or not, if you don't look.
We await your peer-reviewed paper on an alternative, as well...
Bazinga.
Haha! that's what I was thinking!! :D
Thanks so much for the video and explanation of this......for years I've watched & loved "The Big bang Theory" and heard the terminology from Sheldon.......but this brings it all together to make more sense that it truly is substantial and worthwhile......Bazinga back at ya!!
Higgs boson is when a fag like Anderson Cooper can stay on the main page of msn website declaring his homosexuality for over a week. In other words , who cares?
Aren't you a long way from home, BeeCee? There is no place for your ilk on this forum. Run along now, back to papa Glenn Beck, and the quicker the better!
Thanks, BeeCee, for the non sequitur of the day...
I sorta knew Justin Bieber was more than a self made celebrity. I would like to be in that party room to see him as Higgs!