CERN physicists report strong evidence of Higgs boson (w/ live video from CERN)

Jul 04, 2012
Simulated production of a Higgs event in ATLAS. Image credit: CERN.

Two independent teams at the world's biggest atom smasher say they have both "observed" a new subatomic particle — a boson — that looks just like the one believed to give all matter in the universe size and shape.

One of the two independent teams at the world's biggest atom smasher said Wednesday it has found strong evidence of a new subatomic particle that looks like the one believed to give all matter in the universe size and shape.


Related: Eureka! Physicists celebrate evidence of particle
Joe Incandela, leader of one of the teams known as CMS, told scientists at the European Center for Nuclear Research, or CERN, that his team of 2,100 scientists has "observed" a new particle that is a boson — the same type of particle as the long-sought Higgs boson, popularly referred to as the "God particle."

He described the data as consistent with the elusive Higgs boson, whose existence was predicted decades ago to help explain how the universe works, but stopped short of definitively declaring discovery of the Higgs boson.

The second team was just starting to present its evidence before a packed auditorium, where scientists broke into applause intermittently.

Fabiola Gianotti, leader of the second team of some 3,000 scientists, known as ATLAS, said it also has observed some "beautiful" events in CERN's atom smasher, the $10 billion Large Hadron Collider on the Swiss-French border.

It has been creating high-energy collisions of protons to investigate dark matter, antimatter and the creation of the universe, which many theorize occurred in a massive explosion known as the Big Bang.

Update: The head of the world's biggest atom smasher says they have discovered a new particle that is consistent with the long-sought Higgs boson known popularly as the "God particle," which is believed to give all matter in the universe size and shape

Rolf Heuer, director of the European Center for Nuclear Research, or CERN, says "we have a discovery" of a new subatomic particle, a boson, that is "consistent with a Higgs boson."

He spoke after two independent teams at CERN said they have both "observed" a new particle.

The live video from CERN is no longer available.

On 4 July, 2012, the ATLAS experiment presented a preview of its updated results on the search for the Higgs Boson. © 2012 CERN

© 2012 CERN

This video is not supported by your browser at this time.
Produced by: CERN

Official CERN Statement:

CERN experiments observe particle consistent with long-sought Higgs boson

At a seminar held at CERN today as a curtain raiser to the year’s major particle physics conference, ICHEP2012 in Melbourne, the ATLAS and CMS experiments presented their latest preliminary results in the search for the long sought Higgs particle. Both experiments observe a new particle in the mass region around 125-126 GeV.

“We observe in our data clear signs of a new particle, at the level of 5 sigma, in the mass region around 126 GeV. The outstanding performance of the LHC and ATLAS and the huge efforts of many people have brought us to this exciting stage,” said ATLAS experiment spokesperson Fabiola Gianotti, “but a little more time is needed to prepare these results for publication.”

"The results are preliminary but the 5 sigma signal at around 125 GeV we’re seeing is dramatic. This is indeed a new particle. We know it must be a boson and it’s the heaviest boson ever found,” said CMS experiment spokesperson Joe Incandela. “The implications are very significant and it is precisely for this reason that we must be extremely diligent in all of our studies and cross-checks."

“It’s hard not to get excited by these results,” said CERN Research Director Sergio Bertolucci. “ We stated last year that in 2012 we would either find a new Higgs-like particle or exclude the existence of the Standard Model Higgs. With all the necessary caution, it looks to me that we are at a branching point: the observation of this new particle indicates the path for the future towards a more detailed understanding of what we’re seeing in the data.”

The results presented today are labelled preliminary. They are based on data collected in 2011 and 2012, with the 2012 data still under analysis. Publication of the analyses shown today is expected around the end of July. A more complete picture of today’s observations will emerge later this year after the LHC provides the experiments with more data.

The next step will be to determine the precise nature of the particle and its significance for our understanding of the universe. Are its properties as expected for the long-sought Higgs boson, the final missing ingredient in the Standard Model of particle physics? Or is it something more exotic? The Standard Model describes the fundamental particles from which we, and every visible thing in the universe, are made, and the forces acting between them. All the matter that we can see, however, appears to be no more than about 4% of the total. A more exotic version of the Higgs particle could be a bridge to understanding the 96% of the universe that remains obscure.

“We have reached a milestone in our understanding of nature,” said CERN Director General Rolf Heuer. “The discovery of a particle consistent with the Higgs boson opens the way to more detailed studies, requiring larger statistics, which will pin down the new particle’s properties, and is likely to shed light on other mysteries of our universe.”

Positive identification of the new particle’s characteristics will take considerable time and data. But whatever form the Higgs particle takes, our knowledge of the fundamental structure of matter is about to take a major step forward.


Andy Parker, Professor of High Energy Physics at the Cavendish Laboratory, sheds light on today’s announcement and ‘what next’

Andy Parker is the Professor of High Energy Physics at the University of Cambridge’s Department of Physics (the Cavendish Laboratory). His current research interests involve experiments to reveal new physics such as extra space dimensions, quantum-sized black holes, and supersymmetry. He is a founder of the ATLAS experiment for the LHC, and for 6 years he was the project leader for the ATLAS Inner Detector. Below, he answers some questions surrounding the Higgs boson.

1. What is the Higgs Boson?

Most people imagine particles of matter to be like little billiard balls, which are stuck together in some way to make the solid objects which we see around us. We naturally expect the billiard balls to have some substance in their own right, making them, and everything which they form, massive. However, in modern quantum theories, matter is nothing like this. All the particles would, if left to themselves, have no mass at all, and fly around at the speed of light. There would be no atoms or people to study them.

The Higgs field is the proposed answer to this mismatch between our equations and what we see. The Higgs field fills all of space, and as the particles try to move through it, their interactions with it cause them to appear to have mass. This slows them down and allows them to bind together into the familiar forms of matter which we observe. This is a completely different picture of nature than the one we instinctively imagine – instead of matter having its own intrinsic properties, and moving about in empty space, many of the properties of matter are actually only due to its interactions with an invisible, all-pervasive field. The properties of “empty” space are crucial to the physicist’s understanding of the world.

The Higgs boson itself is a vibration in the Higgs field, which can be created if enough energy is put into the field, like dropping a pebble into a pond. The LHC is the world’s highest energy particle collider, and the collisions it makes create enough disturbance in the Higgs field to observe the Higgs boson, if it exists.

2. Today CERN announced an update on the research, what did they find?

In December last year, CERN announced that the two large LHC experiments, ATLAS and CMS had both seen indications of extra events at one particular energy. This is consistent with what one would expect from a Higgs boson whose mass matches that energy (energy and mass are related by E=mc^2). However, there were not enough extra events to be certain that the effect was not simply due to chance. Rolling a dice and getting three sixes in a row does not prove that the dice is loaded. You need a few more sixes to be sure. In order to confirm the observation, the experiments have been collecting more data this year.

Today, the scientists at CERN have confirmed that they have found a new particle consistent with the long-sought Higgs Boson.

3. What more needs to happen for CERN scientists to confirm that the unexplained particle is indeed a Higgs Boson?

The Standard Model Higgs Boson has very specific properties. It does not exist for very long, decaying into normal particles which we observe in the detector. We know how often it should be seen in each type of decay, but to check this requires a lot of data to analyse. Once we have checked the observations in detail, it will be possible to say with much more confidence whether they are consistent with the Standard Model Higgs predictions. The LHC will continue running until the end of this year, and is expected to deliver twice as much data as we have so far. After that, it will be upgraded, and will be able to run at higher energy, which will help with the measurements.

4. In the Standard Model (the simplest theory which describes the fundamental subatomic particles and the forces between them) it is hypothesized that there is only one Higgs Boson, but in the Supersymmetric Model (which, unlike the Standard Model, incorporates the physics of dark energy and the full theory of gravitation) there could be up to five Higgs Boson. If they are able to verify the signal is indeed a Higgs Boson, how will they know if it is one of many?

The detailed decay properties of a supersymmetric Higgs Boson are different from those of the Standard Model version. Therefore, with sufficiently precise data we will be able to tell the difference.

5. If the Higgs verifies the Standard model, does more than one Higgs undermine it in favour of Supersymmetry?

Supersymmetry is an extension of the Standard Model, rather than a replacement. The Standard Model will always remain as an excellent description of Nature at energies below those explored at the LHC. But supersymmetry may be needed to explain observations at higher energies, for example if we see extra Higgs particles, or other supersymmetric partners of normal matter. This is similar to the way in which Einstein’s General Relativity is the best description of very strong gravitational fields, but Newton’s gravity works perfectly well for almost all normal situations.

6. If the Higgs Boson particle(s) is confirmed, what are the next stages of research?

There will be several parallel strands of activity. The first would be to measure the properties of the observed particle in as much detail as possible, in order to check whether it is consistent with the Standard Model. The existence of a Higgs Boson at a mass around 126 GeV (gigaelectronvolt, a unit of energy equal to billion electron volts), if confirmed, would strongly suggest that other new particles are awaiting discovery. These might be supersymmetric for example. Therefore, a second strand, already under way, is to look for evidence of supersymmetry. This could be by detecting the emission of dark matter particles in LHC collisions. We are also searching directly for supersymmetric Higgs bosons. The Cambridge team is a world leader in supersymmetry research, both theoretical and experimental.

The third strand is to check for other hypotheses, of which extra space dimensions is particularly appealing. If the world has extra space dimensions, this could explain why the Higgs boson appears where it does. It seems odd that we cannot see these extra dimensions, but this is because they are supposed to be curled up into tiny circles. Looked at from afar, a piece of string looks one-dimensional, but close up, you can see an ant walk around it. Similarly, we cannot see the curled up dimensions unless we look at very short distances. The LHC works as an extremely powerful microscope which may reveal them. If extra space dimensions exist, then we would expect gravity to become much stronger at very short distances. This would be observable at the LHC, and would help to resolve the century-old puzzle of how to make quantum mechanics compatible with General Relativity.

At present, our picture of the sub-atomic world, ruled by quantum mechanics, is incompatible with our picture of the astronomical world, ruled by gravity. The Cambridge group is active in all of these areas. Once we are certain of the status of the Higgs hypothesis, it will become much easier to make testable predictions about the bigger picture. We can expect the programme of research at the LHC to continue well into the next decade.

(Source: University of Cambridge)

Explore further: CERN and the American Physical Society announce partnership for open access

4.8 /5 (61 votes)

Related Stories

Researchers' data are closing in on Higgs boson particle

Jun 21, 2012

Scientists at the world's largest atom smasher say they have reams of new data that will reveal with greater certainty whether they have already glimpsed a long-sought theoretical particle that could help ...

Video preludes Higgs boson announcement

Jul 04, 2012

A video from Europe's CERN physics lab, apparently posted mistakenly on the eve of an announcement on the elusive "God Particle," reveals that a new subatomic particle has been observed in the relevant range.

LHC to narrow search for Higgs boson

Dec 08, 2011

Scientists at the world's largest atom smasher have new data that shows with greater certainty where to find a long-sought theoretical particle that would help explain the origins of the universe.

Crunch time looms in quest for 'God particle'

Jul 04, 2012

A nearly 50-year bid to explain a riddle of fundamental matter faces a key moment on Wednesday when physicists unveil fresh data in their search for a particle called the Higgs boson.

Recommended for you

Magnetic neural control with nanoparticles

3 hours ago

Magnetic nanoparticles don't have to be "one size fits all." Instead, individual magnetic nanoparticles can be tailored in an array of differing sizes and compositions to allow for heating them separately ...

The curious case of the fluctuating speed of light

3 hours ago

Suppose you were an electrician. You've trained, apprenticed, passed all your certifications, and you've worked with electric wiring for years. You've wired houses and commercial buildings for years, and ...

User comments : 73

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

wavettore
Jul 04, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
AtlasT
1.2 / 5 (24) Jul 04, 2012
..it looks to me that we are at a branching point: the observation of this new particle indicates the path for the future towards a more detailed understanding of what were seeing in the data.
In another words, nothing new happened during last half year, when the physicists announced hint of resonance at 125 GeV.
ant_oacute_nio354
1.3 / 5 (30) Jul 04, 2012
Higgs doesn't exist, the mass is the electric dipole moment.
Antonio Saraiva
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (21) Jul 04, 2012
This is so awesome. We may have just wittnessed the most profound change in our lifetimes. The moon landings pale in comparison.

Now on to checking whether supersymmetry holds (or not).

In another words, nothing new happened during last half year,

The data from half a year ago could have been a fluke.
As the guy explains in the inteview: Throwing three sixes does not mean you have found a loaded die (with enough certainty to make a claim). If that were true a lot of people would have gotten shot/arrested in casinos. LHC does a 600 million collisions per second, and there's only one Higgs expected per minute.

Now we have 5 sigma (which leaves only a 1 to 1.6 million chance that it's a fluke). Slow and steady wins the race in science. You make sure - as best you can - before making such announcements.
Lurker2358
1.9 / 5 (12) Jul 04, 2012
Well, if the Higgs is the source of the "mass" of particles, wouldn't the Dark Matter simply be "Naked" Higgs Bosons, which are not attached to anything else to give them chemical or em properties we would recognize in a telescope?
AtlasT
1.7 / 5 (24) Jul 04, 2012
..Every physicist in the world and likely thousands of interested laypeople will be watching to see what CERN scientists announce. ..

It doesn't matter - the important is, what they publish. The question is, why cold fusion and/or another important findings were criticized as suspicious, adventurous and unscientific, when they were announced at public conference, while the CERN is doing the same. BTW the former OPERA leader and speaker of OPERA team was fired for exactly the same action (i.e. the presentation of preliminary results before their publishing) - which the CERN is doing right now.
farmerpat42
1.8 / 5 (13) Jul 04, 2012
But OPERA is a fraction of the size of either the ATLAS and CMS teams. Nearly every scientist that identifies as an HE Physicist is involved with this research at CERN at some level. There are FAR more stakeholders involved with the higgs experiments, so this is more of a placation to keep them happy than any significant scientific release. This is the third (? iirc) announcement of preliminary results by CERN that they're 'getting closer!'

However, until there is a formal paper, this all means little.
AtlasT
1.8 / 5 (20) Jul 04, 2012
There are FAR more stakeholders involved with the higgs experiments
You're just demonstrating the old principle, in which amoral behaviour becomes moral, whenever its done with sufficiently wide group of people.

But this is the same principle: we will punish the preliminary fuzzy announcements of all scientific findings - or we will tolerate it for all research groups.
dzipo
4.7 / 5 (9) Jul 04, 2012
We observe in our data clear signs of a new particle, at the level of 5 sigma, in the mass region around 126 GeV.

Are its properties as expected for the long-sought Higgs boson

Looks like exemplary science. They say that they have discovered new particle (boson) and will make independent observations whether it match predictions of Higgs boson.
AtlasT
1.8 / 5 (19) Jul 04, 2012
they say that they have discovered new particle (boson) and will make independent observations whether it match predictions of Higgs boson
Then we should build another ten billion dollars LHC collider for it... But what we know already, these results don't fit the older Tevatron findings (the Tevatron demonstrates peak for 135 GeV, LHC for 125 GeV). In this sense both results are suspicious already.
Bowler_4007
2 / 5 (4) Jul 04, 2012
This is the third (? iirc) announcement of preliminary results by CERN that they're 'getting closer!'

they're just short of announcing they found a higgs.. how much closer can they get?

i personally think this is great news (if it turns out to be a false positive i'll be disappointed, but for now), i'm also very curious as to where this will take physics in the future...
AtlasT
1.8 / 5 (20) Jul 04, 2012
they're just short of announcing they found a higgs.
versus (CERN speaker from video above)
..it looks to me that we are at a branching point: the observation of this new particle indicates the path for the future towards a more detailed understanding of what were seeing in the data...
I'd say, they're completely unsure with it.
dzipo
3 / 5 (9) Jul 04, 2012
Then we should build another ten billion dollars LHC collider for it... But what we know already, these results don't fit the older Tevatron findings (the Tevatron demonstrates peak for 135 GeV, LHC for 125 GeV). In this sense both results are suspicious already.

As I understood Tevatron peak had large uncertainty. Wasn't it so?
Anyways if this verification would require another ten billion dollars LHC collider then I would say it is not worth it.
At least until it is clear that this model can significantly improve our overall understanding of physics.
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (18) Jul 04, 2012
Then we should build another ten billion dollars LHC collider for it...

When we know in what energy range to look for then we don't need to build a new ring collider for it. To get more Higgs now you need a linear collider (smashing electrons and betas - which don't play well in ring colliders)

The problem with a ring collider is that you're colliding protons - which are basically a bag of quarks. And so the number of possible interactions is huge and you get all these other resulting fragments from which you need to extract the (very weak) Higgs signal. (The advantage of ring colliders is: you can test great energies and over great energy ranges which is a problem for linear accelerators).

Electrons/beats don't have subcomponents, so the resulting 'wreckage' is much more concise (read: easy to analyze).
AtlasT
1.2 / 5 (26) Jul 04, 2012
To get more Higgs now you need a linear collider..
I see. Even more expensive than the LHC was. But the physicists do need their salaries and the research of cold fusion is not good enough for them...
jdw
1.7 / 5 (11) Jul 04, 2012
I'd say, they're completely unsure with it.


Which is fine. They are climbing a rope ladder up a cliff, a ladder that's secured with precarious vines; but they've taken another step in the right direction.

What they do NOT need is another Al Gore proclaiming in a loud voice, "the bosun SCIENCE! is settled!".
Benni
1.5 / 5 (19) Jul 04, 2012
Finally, we can attach a realistic & meaningful name to "God" the creator of the Universe, it is "Boson".

Next, we need an image, but not a "golden calf", something a bit more scientifically relevant. Maybe a huge round golden orb we can bow down to? Naw, that wouldn't work either, because it too consists of "bosons". Damn it, this is tough stuff. Need fresh ideas here.

Next, all the written religious ramblings about "God" must be revised to "Boson", the U.S.Congress could pass a law requiring it, and when it is challenged by the religious right SCOTUS can over-rule them & we will be "one nation under Boson" in the hopes some dumbody never brings up the issue of what bosons are made of.

Tonight I will go to bed contemplating what Synagogues, Mosques, & Churches will be preaching this coming weekend, at least it'll be a change from the differential equations I've had to work on all this past week.

AtlasT
Jul 04, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Lurker2358
2.1 / 5 (12) Jul 04, 2012
Benni:

your post isn't really worthy of response, but for the sake of the misinformed, I respond.

If you pay attention to the interview video, the physicists explained that this discovery, even if it is "The" Higgs, does not and cannot explain everything in the universe, nor it's origins. It is only one more piece of what "reality" actually is.

Whether or not it is the Higgs, and regardless of what "type" of Higgs it might be, it does not and cannot disprove the existence of God.

In any case, you should no more worship the Higgs Boson(s) than you should a proton or a golden calf.
Benni
1.3 / 5 (14) Jul 04, 2012
Benni:

your post isn't really worthy of response, but for the sake of the misinformed, I respond.

Then why did you bother?

In any case, you should no more worship the Higgs Boson(s) than you should a proton or a golden calf.
Just my point....
Lurker2358
1.8 / 5 (9) Jul 04, 2012
Just my point....


Actually, you quite missed my point.

Re-read carefully.
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (26) Jul 04, 2012
I see. Even more expensive than the LHC was

That linear collider will probably be cheaper than the LHC.

You think such research endeavors are a waste of money. To set you straight on this:
1) Only through such institutions (which forced the development of accelerator tech) do we now have stuff like PET scans in hospitals (the radionucleids used in PET scans are short lived and have to be created on the spot - by accelerators in the basements of major hospitals)

2) Only because they developed the math do we have incredible reconstruction algorithms (used in everything from CT to MR scans. The latter we wouldn't have if they hadn't been instrumental in forcing superconductor research)

3) Only because the guys at CERN produce so much data, and one of their researchers needed to develop a way for other scientists to look at his results easily, do you have the world wide web. (Tim Berners-Lee)

The last one has changed your life profoundly. The first two may save your life.
Code_Warrior
5 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2012
I don't know much about Higgs theory other than what has been presented in laymen articles, so forgive my ignorance of the details, but does an interacting particle alter the strength of the Higgs field creating a gradient in the field? If interaction with the Higgs field gives things mass, and mass creates gravity, it seems to me that the gravitational and Higgs fields must be related. Is gravity a manifestation of a gradient in the Higgs field?
AtlasT
Jul 04, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
AtlasT
1.1 / 5 (16) Jul 04, 2012
At this extreme short scale the shielding mechanism of transverse and longitudinal waves would converge mutually, so that the Yukawa force wouldn't very different from gravity there. You may imagine it like the observation of water surface with its surface ripples at distance: the surface ripples will scatter into underwater ones and vice-versa. The very same process will appear at the short distance scale, where the surface ripples mix with brownian noise.
does an interacting particle alter the strength of the Higgs field creating a gradient in the field
Of course it does: the more massive particle is, the stronger Yukawa force and Higgs boson coupling it exerts. On this dependency the mechanism of Higgs boson detection is based. The Standard Model cannot predict the Higgs boson mass by itself, because of the fractal character of density fluctuations forming the vacuum. But we can compare the intensity of Higgs boson coupling during collisions of particles of different mass.
AtlasT
1.1 / 5 (16) Jul 04, 2012
Note that the Standard Model considers the Higgs field coupling for most massive particles only, W/Z bosons. The gluons are considered massless in Standard Model, not to say about photons. Therefore we should observe the highest frequency of Higgs boson coupling (which manifest itself with symmetric decay of particles) just for the top-quarks and decays, which are involving W/Z boson repulsion. Such decay involve the formation of mezons, muons and heavier particles. The low-energy decay channels leading into photon formation should be involved very slightly in Higgs boson detection.
This is actually just the problem of the Higgs boson characterization at LHC, where the dilepton channels are involved more, than the Standard Model predicts from known values of Yukawa force coupling. We should therefore find some explanation for it, before we fully accept the resonance at 125 GeV as a Higgs boson expected with Standard Model.
adwarakanath
5 / 5 (22) Jul 04, 2012
Goddamnit, why do you cold fusion and AWT nuts come and fuck up every discussion?
AtlasT
1 / 5 (11) Jul 04, 2012
There are at least three competitive mechanisms possible already: the self-coupling of Higgs boson with itself, the presence of superpartners of quarks (stop squarks) and another particles and the color oscillations leading to fourth generation of particles and . The problem of self-coupling is, it's of even lower probability, than the Higgs coupling, so we should detect way lower number of events. The SUSY has a problem, it move the mass of Higgs boson outside the SM scales toward lower values. For me most probable mechanism is the third one, but the SUSY probably applies weakly too, as the mass of Higgs boson is lower, than the SM expects for experimentally found mass of top quark, but still higher, than the heavy or even light SUSY extensions of SM predict. It's simply such a fuzzy bastard - in similar way, like the particles forming the dark matter, where the photinos (i.e. the neutrinos) involve only subtle part (bellow 7% or so).
AtlasT
Jul 04, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Anda
5 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2012
AtlasT? Is that u waterripples? New week new nick?

Something was found, we'll see what it is and keep on learning.
We are still far away from the end of this trip.
Sorry truth holders.
ZachAdams
4.4 / 5 (9) Jul 04, 2012
"Goddamnit, why do you cold fusion and AWT nuts come and fuck up every discussion?"

I totally agree. This site needs comment moderation.

IMHO. Finding evidence of the Higgs boson is the greatest physics discovery since Einstein's theory of relativity. Supersymmetry here we come...
AtlasT
Jul 04, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
mrtea
5 / 5 (2) Jul 04, 2012
Unfortunately there are some regular trolls and abusive types that frequent this site. I do agree that it's a great discovery.

antialias_physorg
4.3 / 5 (11) Jul 04, 2012
For anyone interested here's a link to the full talk given at CERN in which the 4.9 sigma significance was announced.

(Warning: over 2 hours long and pretty heavy on the physics)

http://www.youtub...gX4FNiyM
ZachAdams
5 / 5 (4) Jul 04, 2012
AtlasT, your ignorance is so appalling I am surprised you flaunt it in public.

For openers, without the Theory of Relativity, you wouldn't exist, at least not in my electronic world. How I wish that was true.
ECOnservative
3.2 / 5 (9) Jul 04, 2012
I was trying to simplify the Higgs search for one of my kids and told them "it's like shooting 2 Swiss watches at each other and trying to tell the time by examining the wreckage." The got it, but asked me why we didn't just look at a wall clock..
AtlasT
1 / 5 (16) Jul 04, 2012
We are repeatedly facing the situation, when some limited community of people adjusted their rhetoric and propaganda in such a way, it makes it more significant, than it really is. When someone reads all these bold headlines about preliminary (and actually very gradualist) results of physical research, like the Higgs boson over whole web, then it's not difficult to realize, the contemporary community of laymans is heavily manipulated on behalf of very limited group of people, who are motivated into additional continuation of this research. I'd tolerate such a hype without problem - but the very same community censors every information which could be useful for the rest of people, not for the community of physicists only. If the Higgs boson finding is significant by something, then just with immense effort, money and resources (rare helium, for example) invested into its realization. But its return value is zero and it will remain so long time.
AtlasT
1 / 5 (14) Jul 04, 2012
For openers, without the Theory of Relativity, you wouldn't exist, at least not in my electronic world. How I wish that was true
This is complete utter nonsense (actually part of immanent mainstream physics propaganda, which is serving for trolling of laymans). It's as significant, as the celebration of Sunday by another widespread propaganda. We don't need the relativity for nothing useful with exception of GPS (where its routinely replaced with empirical corrections heavily - the relativistic correction pose only minor fraction of all satellite corrections with respect to irregularities of geomagnetic field anomalies, etc..).
Peter Hent
5 / 5 (19) Jul 04, 2012
AtlasT

I never post to this site, but you, and your ilk on this here have motivated me to write this post.

I am a layperson when it comes to Physics, but I love reading about the frontiers of new discovery.

The bullshit whining of your pseudoscientific posts that thousands of us have to wade through armpit-deep are *RUINING* this once great website.

I used to enjoy the comments section. Now I actively dread them with your hollow, exclusionary diatribe of what is - even to the layperson - COMPLETE AND TOTAL FANTASY.

Moderators. I beg you. Have some proper house rules and actively enforce them so wonderful news days like today are not utterly ruined by the uninformed and uninvited.

I'm all for freedom of speech, and freedom of ideas. I'm not for allowing the village idiot to repeatedly play his god dammed penny whistle tune while I'm trying to enjoy Mozart's Requiem.

Sort this out or I'm going back to the comment-free Science Daily.

And no, TwAtlas, I'm not part of a conspiracy
Job001
1 / 5 (4) Jul 04, 2012
Congratulations on results long, costly, and difficult to achieve(theoretical particle prediction, 50 years to 5 sigma acceptance)! That's a triple home run!
A2G
3.5 / 5 (13) Jul 04, 2012
As for you complaining about all the money spent on this research. Do you not realize that the money is not just thrown into a pile and burned? The money does not disappear. It goes to all those involved who then in turn buy products, pay rent or mortgages, food, etc. The money does not get destroyed. It is just put back into the system that even some of you reading this benefit from. The only problem with a lot of money is when it is hoarded and not spent. Keeping money moving is a good thing, especially when it can lead to breakthroughs that may benefit all mankind dramatically.

Even if they did not find the Higgs, many other technologies have been advanced by just building the LHC and projects like it. You never know when one of these unforeseen technologies could change the world.

The LHC is money well spent in my book.
AtlasT
1.1 / 5 (15) Jul 04, 2012
The money does not get destroyed
The salaries represent only tiny portion of the whole expenses. The rest is simply evaporated in particle collisions.
..keeping money moving is a good thing..
You needn't to learn me, how the financial crisis work..;-) When such motion doesn't lead into new technologies, it's always dissipative. We burned many tons of oil in cosmic flights - but did we get some new raw or energy sources from it? If not, then such trips were pure waste of resources for entertainment of masses. The macro-economical perspective is seriously missing here.
Bookbinder
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 04, 2012
Sorry. But ten billion dollars is a drop in the bucket. It's just hard to wheedle it out of a public that just doesn't understand the potential value of high energy physics. But it's nothing really. Jamie Dimon just lost that much at Morgan. It has to be better dramatized and popularized.
NMvoiceofreason
5 / 5 (2) Jul 04, 2012
Well, if the Higgs is the source of the "mass" of particles, wouldn't the Dark Matter simply be "Naked" Higgs Bosons, which are not attached to anything else to give them chemical or em properties we would recognize in a telescope?


The particle, being too massive, does not have a lifetime consistent with observations of dark matter.

We need something, small, cold, and electrically neutral - like a neutron. But neutrons only live about 15 minutes outside a nucleus. So no good explanation of dark matter yet.
Amadillo
1 / 5 (10) Jul 04, 2012
But ten billion dollars is a drop in the bucket.
This doesn't explain, why this "drop in the bucket" is so difficult to release each year under contemporary economical situation. What's worse, the financing of useless research drains the intellectual resources from the objectively more useful areas of research - so it serves as a signal for physicists, they can ignore them safely. Why the cold fusion research is maintained mostly with physicists, which are more than sixty years old? Is it because, we just have enough of oil and money for interesting but useless research? The mainstream physics is apparently not able to drive its priorities. Because the money attract another money, most grants goes into gigantic adventurous projects no matter, how these projects are actually useful.
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (12) Jul 04, 2012
But ten billion dollars is a drop in the bucket. It's just hard to wheedle it out of a public that just doesn't understand the potential value of high energy physics.
This doesn't explain, why this "drop in the bucket" is so difficult to release each year under contemporary economical situation.

You can't kill anyone with it. If you could they'd have ten (or a hundred) times the budget - easy.

Why the cold fusion research is maintained mostly with physicists, which are more than sixty years old?

Remember, sockpuppet28776, that cold fusion got more than it's fair share of research dollars and had nothing to show for it.
Gawad
4.9 / 5 (12) Jul 04, 2012
Peter,

I never post to this site, but you, and your ilk


The worst part of it is: there is no "ilk". It's pretty much all the same super-wanker with over two dozen sockpuppets. And its Physorgasm no longer even cares.
baudrunner
1.2 / 5 (5) Jul 04, 2012
Let's stop calling it the God particle. Today's announcement is merely a vindication of the Standard Model, and of quantum physics. It is called the Higgs boson after a particularly clever physicist, who did the maths that predicted its occurrence in a specific energy band. The same maths can be used to predict the next release of energy from the photon background (the "Higgs" field?) at the next quantum threshold. Therefore, the Higgs boson is probably not the "god" (last - not latest, and root) particle after all. Possibly, at some point, these experiments can no longer be done. Instead of a new particle, a rending of the space-time fabric might very well occur instead. Or, we can just keep creating new energy/mass bundles that decay into recognizable particles ad infinitum, like the sub-harmonic bands of a resonant frequency bell curve. We might need to define a new generation(s) of matter, which precedes the third generation.
Astoria
1 / 5 (4) Jul 04, 2012
What the above graph shows is not single particle bump. It's the whole line of bumps, which I do personally consider more interesting. IMO we are observing quantum foam similar to dark matter foam with some fuzzy peaks at the energy spectrum, which correspond the power spectrum of CMBR, just at quantum scale. The spacing of these bumps correspond the dodecahedral geometry of that foam. And the "Standard Model Higgs" is actually hidden at the separate window inside of top-quark dilepton decays at the 173 GeV/c2. So that these results could be quite useful for future, although it would be quite difficult to interpret them as a single unique particle.
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (9) Jul 04, 2012
Let's stop calling it the God particle

No one who is working in the field (or who is even remotely interested in physics) is calling it that. There's really no problem, here.

What the above graph shows is not single particle bump. It's the whole line of bumps, which I do personally consider more interesting.

Then you didn't understand the graphs (or didn't bother to go to the CERN website for explanations, or have no idea what "statistical significance" means, or ... )
baudrunner
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 04, 2012
CMB radiation assumed to be the evidence of earliest time at creation is bogus. We are detecting the generation of virtual particles. Without these quintessential building blocks of matter, the Universe would be at absolute zero. Their foaminess is the result of a tendency for anything that exists in our space to organize into communities. Dark matter is also bogus, since its inference is entirely the result of assumptions based on the shape of galaxies, which don't need gravity to organize into disk shapes, and the redshift values of receding super novas at extreme distances. Light slows down over extreme distances, and expected values can be superseded by larger ones if the energy that evicts matter during SN explosions are great enough, which would result in matter thrown in our direction appearing to be receding slower, judging from their redshift, which contraindicates expectations. Both CMB and Dark Matter can be explained simply, but that's boring. Higgs is also boring.
Astoria
1 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2012
For mainstream physics would be unacceptable to consider such an interpretation by now, but IMO what we can see is the whole line of bumps, the periodicity of which is quite apparent. IMO it's not experimental noise, but a real artifact, corresponding this graph.
Cornelius2008
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 04, 2012
So after this discovery, is there an engineer or applied science application to this discovery, will this lead to exotic technologies?
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (7) Jul 04, 2012
So after this discovery, is there an engineer or applied science application to this discovery, will this lead to exotic technologies?

It's a bit early for that. But if history serves as an indication then most anything that has ever been discovered about the nature of things sooner or later winds up being used in technological products.

I think the science fiction writers will be the first ones to have an application. Watch out for "metamaterials that cloak objects from the Higgs field to create inertia-less drives" and similar.
rikvanriel
1 / 5 (1) Jul 04, 2012
What is the difference between the Higgs field, and the old "aether", the existence of which was disproved by Einstein's relativity theory?

In other words, what does "moving through the higgs field" mean, when every piece of matter has its own reference frame under relativity?
sanita
1.1 / 5 (12) Jul 04, 2012
The Einstein's relativity theory didn't disprove the aether, because it's based on Lorentz invariance derived from Maxwell's aether theory of light. After all, you cannot disprove one theory with another one, only with experiments. The aether model allows spreading of both transverse, both longitudinal waves. Maxwell considered transverse waves in his derivation, but the opponents of aether model considered light as a longitudinal waves (which is apparent nonsense). Higgs field is concept of quite different theory, i.e. the Standard model and its very schematic - we couldn't observe single particle in the role of Higgs boson in aether model.
..does "moving through the higgs field" mean, when every piece of matter has its own reference frame under relativity..
It would correspond the Everetts many world model of quantum mechanics, but the things aren't so simple here: this localness is violated with deBroglie wave, nothing is very ultimate here.
sanita
1 / 5 (11) Jul 04, 2012
If you're interested about these questions, you can visit the slides from the recent workshop organized at Nordita institute and dedicated just to concept of relative locality, which has become popular quite recently.
Satene
1 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2012
ViXra unofficial Higgs boson combination, i.e. the averaged results of all decay channels from both LHC detectors. Frankly, it looks rather like random walk for me - at least in this logarithmic scale...
Maat
2.6 / 5 (10) Jul 04, 2012
A great discovery indeed, looking forward to all the new theories and discoveries that this leads to.

...and to all the idiots that have hounded every discussion of this with their asinine comments that it doesn't exist... get fucked.
Pressure2
1 / 5 (7) Jul 04, 2012
A great discovery indeed, looking forward to all the new theories and discoveries that this leads to.

...and to all the idiots that have hounded every discussion of this with their asinine comments that it doesn't exist... get fucked.

I always said they would find the Higgs particle. But, I also said it would have nothing to do with the origin of mass.
Look at it this way, if the Higgs field gives particle their mass how would an object in motion stay in motion? The Higgs field should slow an object down just like aether would.
Satene
1 / 5 (4) Jul 04, 2012
The Higgs field should slow an object down just like aether would.
It actually does slow down the W/Z bosons and makes them massive in this way. The massless W/Z bosons would otherwise propagate with speed of light at infinite distance in similar way like the photons. But in reality they cannot mediate weak nuclear force at the distance larger than 1/10e18 meters.
yogurtforthesoul
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 05, 2012
The cold fusion and AWT crowd must also be the idiots that don't rate this story as a 5, besides the obvious trolls that vote as their voice inside them tells them to do...
Gerrit 2
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 05, 2012
The discussion could be greatly improved if phys.org would publish a well researched article about cold fusion like "Chemical & Engineering News" did in their May 14, 2012 issue, titled "Reviving Cold Fusion".

As long as phys.org is not able to do that, most of the regulars here will have absolutely no clue what the topic really is about and will keep responding to comments from what they perceive as "nuts" and "idiots".

What is true about "cold fusion" is that it is maybe nothing like "fusion" after all, but that the phenomenon of anomalous heat is a reality. Credible scientists at ENEA, NASA, NRL and many other institutions come to that conclusion.

According to a recently released report the european commission will likely provide funding for LENR research in the near future.

Let's hope that in a couple of years we'll have a different perception of the issue. It might be as fascinating as chasing down the Higgs.

Cheers
Benni
1 / 5 (5) Jul 05, 2012
For anyone interested here's a link to the full talk given at CERN in which the 4.9 sigma significance was announced.

One in one thousand chance of error.......

http://www.youtub...gX4FNiyM

vidyunmaya
1 / 5 (10) Jul 05, 2012
Sub: Mislead through big bang and more to confuse through God-Particle ?
Where does this psychology end up?
Aham Karam , Balam darpam, Sah-Muudhah !
Ego blocks Vision.Money and Power over-rules descrimination. Where is Wisdom ?
Knowledge Base can be manipulated through pseudo-terminology.
Where is Cosmos Quest here !!
Scientists are doing more harm detrimental to the spirit of Science advancement. The origins cosmology Vedas need best of brains trust
Vidyardhi Nanduri
Benni
1.5 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2012
Let's stop calling it the God particle. Today's announcement ......... We might need to define a new generation(s) of matter, which precedes the third generation.


The "God-particle" nonsense was started by Lederman the Nobel prize winning physicist, it's been the bane of a generation of physicists ever since. Just as Einstein once lamented about the single biggest mistake of his career, I'm sure Lederman is these days doing the same & for this has created a stain on the best endeavors of those seeking to keep this scientific knowledge out of the realm of those who seek to to impune it as if it should be treated as a form of "mysticism", which is what adding "God" to this does.

Just look at the followup articles even on this website, replete with the "God particle" nonsense. We had a physicist in our design dept who repeatedly used this term, until we got sick of it, after a major screw-up on his part of a differential equation causing a major equipment failure, he stopped
ZachAdams
5 / 5 (3) Jul 05, 2012
Cold frisson, it's right up there with martian canals
http://en.wikiped..._science
frajo
5 / 5 (7) Jul 05, 2012
Peter,
I never post to this site, but you, and your ilk

The worst part of it is: there is no "ilk". It's pretty much all the same super-wanker with over two dozen sockpuppets.

In this thread appearing as Amadillo, Astoria, AtlasT, and sanita.
He can't get rid of his proprietary use of the English language.
Stat_Newbie
not rated yet Jul 06, 2012
A small aside: Setting the filter to '4' makes the comments section much more bearable, cutting out 80% of all posts that have hence been voted as trash. Trolls only have a voice (and an effect on you) if you let them.

As to the article/discovery: I hope the story of the path that led to this great achievement will help invigorate the public/governments to get behind funding for ambitious scientific projects in the future. My hat is off to all of these physicists for their decades of hard work.
Billy_Madison
not rated yet Jul 06, 2012
My name is AtlasT. You needn't to learn me, how the financial crisis work..;-) When such motion doesn't lead into new technologies, it's always dissipative. We burned many tons of oil in cosmic flights - but did we get some new raw or energy sources from it? If not, then such trips were pure waste of blah blah blah I'm a kid...


Every flight flown either took up a satellite, giving us a glorious network of GPS, internet information highways, television broad casts and etc... These 'cosmic flights' also drastically added to our understanding of the entire spectrum of sciences. This advancement in our knowledge, in my opinion, is priceless, and more rewarding than any cartridge of harvested stellar dust fuel.
Lex Talonis
1 / 5 (6) Jul 09, 2012

If the Boson Higgs Boson only exists for >.< long...

The Boson Higgs Boson, only exists for a millionth, of a millionth, of a millionth, of a millionth of a millionth, of a millionth, of a millionth, of a second - or even lessera....

And all matter has mass because of it...

According to my wall clock, this means that several billion, trillion, zillion, gwillion, pillion, quillion light year parsec cubits ago - we and all eternity all flashed into existance for a mere spec of instantanity, and then it has ceased to exist.

I'd like someone to explain how something that lasts for nothing and basically doesn't exist.....

Means we exist for far longer than that.

Spinning a bit smartera than that - does the Bosun Higgs Bosun only exist as a particle, in an independent form, for almost almost nothing in time, when it is actually split out of an atom or a fraction of the nucleus?

When in what it came from, ought it to exist almost forever?
Lex Talonis
1 / 5 (6) Jul 09, 2012
The guy who put god and particle together in the form of "The god dammit particle" - because it was such a difficult issue to deal with / find.

Tho it should be "The Cock of God - Master Race Partical" after all most of it is a wank.
rocha
1 / 5 (4) Jul 09, 2012
as Billy explained I didnt know that a stay at home mom able to get paid $7613 in a few weeks on the computer. have you read this webpage NuttyRich.com
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (7) Jul 11, 2012
It is obvious that the people who are talking here about cold fusion have no idea what they are talking about. You guys are still celebrating "A Wake for Cold Fusion" -- which, technically speaking, started the day *before* MIT's hot fusion group did the experiments. Eugene Mallove's nomination for a Pulitzer was apparently insufficient to convince pseudo-skeptics to read his book.

The desire to feel right and defend the effort put into memorizing the textbooks is apparently so strong that people will gladly ignore the potential opportunity to not only develop a much-needed cheap, oil-less source for energy, but also forfeit to others an ability to manufacture precious metals.

We can't see anything happening from 10^-19 meters down to 10^-35. The greatest threat to science today comes from those people who fail to understand the role of uncertainty in science, and who refuse to broaden their educations beyond problem-solving. They are the enemies of critical thought.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (7) Jul 11, 2012
To provide some perspective for those who are still trying to maintain an open mind on these things:

1. "The experiments could not simply identify a Higgs signal. Instead, they looked for an excess of possible signals, amounting to a fraction of a percent over what would have been expected were the Higgs not real."

2. "Higgs bosons are so unstable that they can never be observed directly. Rather, ATLAS and CMS [Two different detectors at CERN] are designed to detect patterns of observable particles that theory suggests the Higgs should break down into. Unfortunately, such patterns are not specific to the Higgs; other subatomic processes produce similar traces."

3. "One problem is that, as it stands, the model requires its 20 or so constants to be exactly what they are to an uncomfortable 32 decimal places. Insert different values and the upshot is nonsensical predictions, like phenomena occurring with a likelihood of more than 100%."

[cont'd]
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (6) Jul 11, 2012
4. "The problem with these and other proposals has been a conspicuous lack of evidence regarding which, if any of them, is a good description of reality."

If this was 1930, Irving Langmuir would have called it "pathological science". His criteria included:

1. The maximum effect that is observed is produced by a causative agent of barely detectable intensity, and the magnitude of the effect is substantially independent of the intensity of the cause.

2. The effect is of a magnitude that remains close to the limit of detectability, or many measurements are necessary because of the very low statistical significance of the results.

3. Theories outside the field's paradigm are suggested.

4. Criticisms are met by ad hoc excuses thought up on the spur of the moment.

5. The ratio of supporters to critics rises and then falls gradually to oblivion.

--

This is simply the doubling down on what has become a very unhealthy bet by now. It would be VERY wise to start hedging bets right NOW.
HannesAlfven
1 / 5 (6) Jul 11, 2012
Re: "A small aside: Setting the filter to '4' makes the comments section much more bearable, cutting out 80% of all posts that have hence been voted as trash. Trolls only have a voice (and an effect on you) if you let them."

By the way, this is pathetic.
higgs_boson
1 / 5 (5) Sep 02, 2012
Higgs Boson / "God Particle" -2012 Science validates a 150+ year old discovery ……............Infinite Intelligence….Steve Meyer / New Thought Movement / HolisticDNA

The Sixth Sense Activation Sequence – GROUNDBREAKING New Book in 2012!

"New Thought promotes the ideas that "Infinite Intelligence" or "God" is ubiquitous, spirit is the totality of real things, true human selfhood is divine, divine thought is a force for good, sickness originates in the mind, and "right thinking" has a healing effect..." Wikipedia