Interview: CERN chief firmer on Higgs boson

Jan 27, 2013 by John Heilprin
Director General of CERN, Rolf-Dieter Heuer, gestures as he speaks during an interview with The Associated Press at the World Economic Forum, WEF, in Davos, Switzerland, Saturday, Jan. 26, 2013. (AP Photo/Michel Euler)

The world should know with certainty by the middle of this year whether a subatomic particle discovered by scientists is a long-sought Higgs boson, the head of the world's largest atom smasher said Saturday.

Rolf Heuer, director of the for , or CERN, said he is confident that "towards the middle of the year, we will be there." By then, he said reams of data from the $10 billion on the Swiss-French border near Geneva should have been assessed.

The timing could also help Scottish physicist Peter Higgs win a Noble Prize, Heuer said in an interview with The Associated Press in the Swiss resort of Davos.

CERN's helped scientists declare in July their discovery of a new subatomic particle that Heuer calls "very, very like" a Higgs boson, that promises a new realm of understanding the universe.

The machine, which has been creating high-energy collisions of protons to investigate dark matter, and the creation of the universe, is being put to rest early this year. The data from it, however, takes longer to analyze.

"Suppose the Higgs boson is a special snowflake. So you have to identify the snowflake, in a big snowstorm, in front of a background of snowfields," Heuer said by way of analogy. "That is very difficult. You need a tremendous amount of snowfall in order to identify the snowflakes and this is why it takes time."

Director General of CERN, Rolf-Dieter Heuer, gestures as he speaks during an interview with The Associated Press at the World Economic Forum, WEF, in Davos, Switzerland, Saturday, Jan. 26, 2013. (AP Photo/Michel Euler)

He said the describes only 5 percent of the universe, which many theorize occurred in a known as the Big Bang.

To explain how , such as electrons, protons and neutrons, were themselves formed, Higgs and others in the 1960s envisioned an energy field where particles interact with a key particle, the Higgs boson.

The idea was that other particles attract Higgs bosons and the more they attract, the bigger their mass will be. But a big question remains: Is this new particle a variation of the Higgs boson, or the same as the Higgs boson that was predicted?

The phrase "God particle," coined by Nobel Prize-winning physicist Leon Lederman, is used by laymen, not physicists, more as an explanation for how the subatomic universe works than how it all started.

"Now, if there is a deviation in one of the properties of this Higgs boson, that means we open a new window, for example, hopefully into the part of the dark universe, the 95 percent of the unknown universe," said Heuer.

"If you find the deviation," he added, "that means if it is not the—but a—Higgs boson, then we might find a fantastic window into the dark universe so we would make another giant leap from the visible to the dark."

Explore further: Could 'Jedi Putter' be the force golfers need?

1.7 /5 (20 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

'God particle' out of hiding places: CERN chief

Aug 25, 2011

The elusive Higgs Boson, known as the "God particle", is -- if it exists -- running out of places to hide, the head of the mammoth experiment designed to find it said on Thursday.

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.

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 ...

A closer look at the Higgs boson

Jul 04, 2012

Scientists working at the world's biggest atom smasher near Geneva have announced the discovery of a new subatomic particle that looks remarkably like the long-sought Higgs boson. Sometimes called the "God p ...

Recommended for you

Could 'Jedi Putter' be the force golfers need?

Apr 18, 2014

Putting is arguably the most important skill in golf; in fact, it's been described as a game within a game. Now a team of Rice engineering students has devised a training putter that offers golfers audio, ...

Better thermal-imaging lens from waste sulfur

Apr 17, 2014

Sulfur left over from refining fossil fuels can be transformed into cheap, lightweight, plastic lenses for infrared devices, including night-vision goggles, a University of Arizona-led international team ...

User comments : 57

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

jonnyboy
1.5 / 5 (16) Jan 27, 2013
I guess no news is big news at physorg.
Otto_Krog
1.2 / 5 (21) Jan 27, 2013
I still don't think the qualities required for The Higgs particle to explain the standard model is there, and I don't think they will be found.

Neither do I think, that supersymmetry will be recognized in futuristic science.

I know I am a pain in the butt, but I believe in a complete different approach to high energy physics in the future. My vision is that future science will engulf consciousness. The mind and the spirit will be explainable through physics.

My idea is that antimatter is the mirror of this universe, and that antimatter might be where memory is located.

I think that the subconscious mind and consciousness are located in multiverse dimensions in the form of antimatter.

If you would like to know more, then you can watch a full videopresentation of my theory on my blogby googling crestroy
avengers
1.2 / 5 (20) Jan 27, 2013
Oh man that's pathetic. Sounds like a cheap sales pitch for a vacuum cleaner or something.
CERN does seem at it lowest point yet.

No boson, no money. No money, no fame. No fame... no looooove lol
vacuum-mechanics
1.3 / 5 (14) Jan 27, 2013
CERN's atom smasher helped scientists declare in July their discovery of a new subatomic particle that Heuer calls "very, very like" a Higgs boson, that promises a new realm of understanding the universe.
………
"If you find the deviation," he added, "that means if it is not the—but a—Higgs boson, then we might find a fantastic window into the dark universe so we would make another giant leap from the visible to the dark."

This seems that whether we found Higgs boson or not, we will face a big challenge about the universe! Then how could we visualize the situation like that, maybe this physical view of our universe could help our understanding.
http://www.vacuum...=7〈=en
Egleton
1.3 / 5 (13) Jan 27, 2013
I still don't get it.
Particles attract Higgs particles and that gives them Mass? Sweet. But what makes Mass?
Also there is this Higgs field through which massive particles move.
And somehow this Higgs field imparts Newton's first law? Why? Every field that I know of tends to retard motion, not perpetuate it. In other words how does a field or its particle create inertia?

Perhaps inertial motion can be visualised as a wave in the Higgs field, and gravity is a permanent distortion of the field to which mass responds.
The mass of two billiard balls colliding in this case would be two waves in the Higgs field passing through each other and the balls would swap waves.
Anywhere near the truth?
rah
2.6 / 5 (20) Jan 27, 2013
I am so glad that I have never embarrassed myself on the Internet(!) by proposing my own theory of everything while correcting Einstein at the same time!
VendicarE
4 / 5 (7) Jan 27, 2013
No.

"Particles attract Higgs particles and that gives them Mass? " - Egleton

Higgs particles don't play any part in producing rest mass (the m in mv). The Higgs field does.

The field is thought to permeate space at a constant average intensity.

Particles that have no mass travel at a velocity of c, or conversely particles that travel at the speed of c have no rest mass. These particles have no interaction with the Higgs field.

Particles that interact with the Higgs field however, coherently scatter though the field delaying their transit time over meaningful distances. There effective speed is reduced to < c and therefore they appear to have rest mass.

The more frequently a particle reacts with the Higgs field, the more often it is delayed, and the more it is slowed, and the higher it's apparent rest mass.

Higgs particles are a stable quantized state of the Higgs field.
Egleton
1.3 / 5 (11) Jan 28, 2013
Thanks Valdicar. You did try.
"Particles that interact with the Higgs field" (That's me)"coherently scatter through the field. . .delaying their transit time" I am going to use that as my excuse for being late for work.

OK
Because these particles are reacting with the HF they are delayed and can not reach the speed of light. And because they cannot reach the speed of light their rest mass must be <0. So I am massive because of c.
I do not approve.
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (5) Jan 28, 2013
Coherent scattering is a process by which a particle is absorbed and re-emitted unchanged.

The time and position of the absorption are both uncertain and so too is it's re-appearance. The result is always a positive time delay in the scattering event.

The particle vanishes, then re-appears at some later time. This has the effect of reducing the speed of the particle as it travels.

Now forget the idea that there is a particle and that it "travels" and you have the right idea.

"I do not approve." - Egleton

Your approval is not required.
VendicarE
3.9 / 5 (7) Jan 28, 2013
"So I am massive because of c." - Egleton

Similarly you are also round because of pi.
Egleton
1 / 5 (8) Jan 28, 2013
Much appreciated.
Ryan1981
1 / 5 (4) Jan 28, 2013
I am so glad that I have never embarrassed myself on the Internet(!) by proposing my own theory of everything while correcting Einstein at the same time!


I think the proper way to respond is to disprove his theory, not to just point your finger and call him crazy, that is just too cliche for words. Will you people ever learn? :P
antialias_physorg
3.3 / 5 (7) Jan 28, 2013
I still don't think the qualities required for The Higgs particle to explain the standard model is there, and I don't think they will be found. Neither do I think, that supersymmetry will be recognized in futuristic science.

It's pretty unimportant what anyone thinks about this stuff - but only what people DO to find out (and measure/observe). Pure cogitation doesn't get us anywhere in science.

Particles attract Higgs particles and that gives them Mass? Sweet. But what makes Mass?

The interaction gives the mass. More interaction, more mass. And it's the Higgs field with which stuff interacts (the Higgs boson 'merely' being a manifestation of that field.)

Every field that I know of tends to retard motion, not perpetuate it.

A field is merely a descriptor of a spatially distributed (in this case scalar) value. There are no intrinsic things that fileds must conform to.
ant_oacute_nio354
1.4 / 5 (20) Jan 28, 2013
The Higgs boson doesn't exist.
The mass is an electric dipole moment.

Antonio Saraiva
avengers
1.2 / 5 (21) Jan 28, 2013

Higgs particles don't play any part in producing rest mass (the m in mv). The Higgs field does.

The field is thought to permeate space at a constant average intensity.

Particles that have no mass travel at a velocity of c, or conversely particles that travel at the speed of c have no rest mass. These particles have no interaction with the Higgs field.

Particles that interact with the Higgs field however, coherently scatter though the field delaying their transit time over meaningful distances. There effective speed is reduced to < c and therefore they appear to have rest mass.

The more frequently a particle reacts with the Higgs field, the more often it is delayed, and the more it is slowed, and the higher it's apparent rest mass.

Higgs particles are a stable quantized state of the Higgs field.

Define "thought to", "interact", "coherently", "meaningful", "effective", "appear to", "react", "stable"...

It takes a huge extra-large soda (grant) to swallow that much crap.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (6) Jan 28, 2013
Avengers became a new user just to object to well established physics.

"It takes a huge extra-large soda (grant) to swallow that much crap." - Avengers

Welcome back UbVonTard - enemy of science.
El_Nose
4.2 / 5 (5) Jan 28, 2013
@avenger

"thought to" - hypothsized to -- our best guess based on observation

"interact" -- influenced by - in this case imparting extra energy

"coherently" -- acting the same in all spaces

"meaningful" -- a distance that is larger than a femtometer

"effective" -- actual

"appear to" -- seem to, a measurable quantity of

"react" -- interacts with

"stable" -- stable

Go read a book or a wiki page, troll

his explanation was basic and gets the basic picture across to non scientific people. Go back to your bridge
SethD
1.4 / 5 (19) Jan 28, 2013
"The world should know with certainty by the middle of this year"

Didn't they say the same thing for the last summer? And year and a half ago too? Third time's the charm, as funny people say.

It all sounds soo lame. Why did he go to Davos, to beg policy makers for more free money to waste?
SethD
1.4 / 5 (21) Jan 28, 2013

Define "thought to", "interact", "coherently", "meaningful", "effective", "appear to", "react", "stable"...

It takes a huge extra-large soda (grant) to swallow that much crap.


Thumbs up.
SethD
1.4 / 5 (19) Jan 28, 2013
I am so glad that I have never embarrassed myself on the Internet(!) by proposing my own theory of everything while correcting Einstein at the same time!

Actually, you should be ashamed of yourself for never trying, for to try is to live.
typicalguy
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 28, 2013
Otto Krog, even the resident crazy people ignored your post. The reason why no one responded to you is because you lack a basic understanding.
1. Antimatter does in fact exist in the universe.
2. Why would your consciousness be any more likely to exist as antimatter in another higher level of a multiverse than regular matter right here?
3. If your consciousness exists outside the universe, how is it propagated to the actual universe? Is there some unknown "consciousness carrying particle"?
4. Everything you describe lies more in the realm of philosophy. Than even the most outrageous theories most people here suggest.
AmritSorli
1.7 / 5 (14) Jan 29, 2013
John should also tell us what is giving mass to the Higgs boson itself ?!
VendicarE
3 / 5 (4) Jan 29, 2013
The Higgs boson is an stable excitation of the Higgs field. And yes, it's mass results from scattering events in the field itself.

SethD
1.4 / 5 (18) Jan 29, 2013
The Higgs boson is an stable excitation of the Higgs field. And yes, it's mass results from scattering events in the field itself.

Oh no, the perpetual motion crap again.

Just when you thought it got buried somewhere deep in the history of science, filed under "Medieval alchemy"...
Egleton
1.4 / 5 (11) Jan 29, 2013
This what I was fumbling around for. Matter has two forms of mass. One causes inertia and the other gravity. How does the Higgs account for both?
http://www.newsci...sonality
Nanowill
1.2 / 5 (12) Jan 29, 2013
I guess everybody has noted the proton mass energy x the inverse fine structure constant, 938MeV x 137 is about the "Higgs" mass energy,at 129GeV.
And as for it having anything to do with mass, the issue is the lightest particle of rest mass, the electron, not anything else.

FYI, the mass issue has long been resolved but nobody seems to notice. Per Newton, mass is an observer notion for things that exhibit gravity. Per Einstein gravity comes from curved metric fields, so as particles are EM energy localized in curved metrics gravity will be evident. Mass is just a convenient observer construct similar to "color". Neither actually exist in nature.
Isn't anybody aware of the history of Physics?
VendicarE
3 / 5 (3) Jan 29, 2013
It doesn't.

"One causes inertia and the other gravity. How does the Higgs account for both?" - Egleton

The claim that the Higgs field produces mass is limited to rest mass. That is the m in mv.

Specifically it produces m from E.

The generation of the energy momentum tensor from E is what relates the M in GMm/R**2 to E.

VendicarE
3 / 5 (4) Jan 29, 2013
Quantum Numerology is probably not a good idea unless it produces results that are accurate to many decimal places.

"I guess everybody has noted the proton mass energy x the inverse fine structure constant, 938MeV x 137 is about the "Higgs" mass energy,at 129GeV." - NanoWill
full_disclosure
1.5 / 5 (16) Jan 29, 2013
The 'Coward Herr Vendicar' has childishly changed his personal login profile, slightly, to avoid people following his name back through past comments..... Anyone interested in his cowardly death threats towards posters in the past comments section, follow them through the link below.

http://phys.org/p...ndicarD/
VendicarE
3 / 5 (4) Jan 29, 2013
"Oh no, the perpetual motion crap again." - SethD

Perhaps Seth would prefer that the Higgs Boson were called a Klingon and it is a stable excited state of the Higgs field, just like Electromagneticatrons, AKA photons are the stable excited state of the electromagnetic field.

Seth doesn't like Perpetual motion, and I don't blame him. But given that the universe is accelerating it's outward expansion, I don't see how he has much of a choice but to accept it's reality.

Perhaps his objection is theologically or ideologically based.

https://www.youtu...MXWmlp9g
avengers
1.5 / 5 (16) Jan 30, 2013
The Higgs boson is an stable excitation of the Higgs field. And yes, it's mass results from scattering events in the field itself.

Oh no, the perpetual motion crap again.

Just when you thought it got buried somewhere deep in the history of science, filed under "Medieval alchemy"...

Never thought of it that way but now that you mention it...

You made a brilliant catch there.
SethD
1.5 / 5 (17) Jan 30, 2013
"Oh no, the perpetual motion crap again." - SethD

Seth doesn't like Perpetual motion, and I don't blame him. But given that the universe is accelerating it's outward expansion,

That's even stinkier crap: you've just invented a Special Higgs theory. Just as we thought it was genuinely general/universal...

I don't see how he has much of a choice but to accept it's reality.

Or else? Does your Church burn at the stake like your predecessor?

Perhaps his objection is theologically or ideologically based.

Absolutely, see in the above. You, the clergy of the new Church, must be stopped. The mankind is still coping with millennium-long bad memories of your predecessor making key scientific decision.

Any more cheap attempts to forge reality?
Egleton
1.6 / 5 (10) Jan 31, 2013
Thanks Valdicar.
But I am left dissatisfied.
Let us pretend total ignorance (Which is not to much of a stretch on my part.)
Let us pretend we dont know how a car works.
Can we can take measurements on it's rate of acceleration and offer that up as an explanation of how it accelerates?

OK so we have an explanation for the rest mass of hadrons. (The Hadrons play about in the Higgs sandpit and so on and so forth)

But gravity? We describe the rate of acceleration and explain that space time is bent by the presence of mass which is produced . . . (see above). This is a description, not an explanation.
Why does the car accelerate?
The tensor description of the gravitational constant G is a description.
Where is Einstein when you need him?
Usually we find the solution on our assumptions. But assumptions are very hard to wrinkle out. They just seem so obvious that they are not challenged.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 31, 2013
Welcome to the club.

"But I am left dissatisfied." - Egleton

If you are looking for a working quantum theory of gravity, you won't find one that is generally accepted.

If you are looking for a way to explain the proportionality between gravitational mass and the mass of momentum as created by the Higgs mechanism, then there is even less acceptance on how it can be done.

Gravity is such a weak force, that it does not appear in the formulas of Quantum ChromoDynamics (QCD).

String theory perhaps.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (4) Jan 31, 2013
The reality I am referring to of course is the reality of perpetual motion.

"Any more cheap attempts to forge reality?" - SethD

That reality has been recognized as a physical truth since the time of Newton.

The end points are the beginning and end of time. But since time has no meaning without motion, the end points are necessarily inadequately defined to provide a grounds to say anything meaningful.

The question of what happens before the beginning or what happens after the end are much like asking what happens to a blue marble before or after it is blue, or asking why things fall up, or why -1 equals 5.

These are questions that are self contradictory and hence have no answer, simply because they are irrationally constructed.

They are non-questions or logical fallacy, posing as questions.

In the interval between, beginning and end, motion, or more precisely change is known to be perpetual by definition.

This is a fundamental reality. cont...
VendicarE
3.4 / 5 (5) Jan 31, 2013
Cont..

The rational rejection of this reality requires experimental evidence that SethD can not provide, and as a result the rejection is evidence that he uses ideologically based non-thinking in place of Science.

In doing so, he is doomed to perpetual failure since nature doesn't respect his ideology.
SethD
1.5 / 5 (17) Feb 01, 2013

The rational rejection of this reality requires experimental evidence that SethD can not provide, and as a result the rejection is evidence that he uses ideologically based non-thinking in place of Science.

Do you always use philosophy to dodge physics questions, or was this one of your good days?

Anywho, your crap stinks miles now. When faced with criticism, your gang withdraws for half a year from public eye to look for a big lie to save you from the big doom (big banks withdrawing funds.) You even use tricks to buy you more time such as "equipment malfunctioning", "unexpected maintenance" etc.

When people responded to your "Boson giving mass to everything" claim, asking you "What gave mass to boson?" you got collective amnesia, saying you never claimed it gave mass to everything. Quick hands.

The latest "news" above is that Mr. Higgs' theory is special as on condition of varying universe expansion?! WTF and we thought universality always meant unconditional.

Fraud.
FrankHerbert2
1.9 / 5 (14) Feb 01, 2013
Seth, let me know when Stockholm calls to congratulate you. Until then, kindly refrain from posting.

Say "hi" to avengers and omerbashich for me ;)
SethD
1.5 / 5 (17) Feb 01, 2013
Seth, let me know when Stockholm calls to congratulate you. Until then, kindly refrain from posting.

Say "hi" to avengers and omerbashich for me ;)

Another priest of mambo-jumbo religion. Avenger? Not at all, but if I were I'd make it known.

I never worry unlike you oh great clergy, who worry 24/7.
SethD
1.5 / 5 (16) Feb 01, 2013
The 'Coward Herr Vendicar' has childishly changed his personal login profile, slightly, to avoid people following his name back through past comments..... Anyone interested in his cowardly death threats towards posters in the past comments section, follow them through the link below.

http://phys.org/p...ndicarD/

Oh man. That's terrible.He's got many fake accounts here too: "FrankHerbert", "FrankHerbert2", "antialias_physorg" and many more.

Pure thing, he runs this failed site and obviously wants to maintain the impression that the site gets many visitors...

But the threats are horrific, to put it mildly. Darkened mind?
Pkunk_
1.3 / 5 (13) Feb 02, 2013
I know I am a pain in the butt, but I believe in a complete different approach to high energy physics in the future. My vision is that future science will engulf consciousness. The mind and the spirit will be explainable through physics.

Been reading too much of the "His Dark Materials" books have we ?
Actually , everything can be explained with Physics and Maths, so there is nothing new in your theory.
My idea is that antimatter is the mirror of this universe, and that antimatter might be where memory is located.

I think that the subconscious mind and consciousness are located in multiverse dimensions in the form of antimatter.

You clearly need some real help. Been overdosing on the Valium recently ?
Tuxford
1.5 / 5 (15) Feb 02, 2013
A field is merely a descriptor of a spatially distributed (in this case scalar) value. There are no intrinsic things that fileds must conform to.


So what is the physical mechanism that results in what we call a field? Or is the universe simply math at the most fundamental level?
VendicarE
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 02, 2013
There is the mass (m) that gives rise to momentum, and the mass (M) that gives rise to graviation.

SethD doesn't understand the difference.

The Higgs mechanism theoretically generates (m) but not (M).

M we know to be E/c**2.

We also know that (m) is proportional to (M).

Most assume that there is a reason for this proportionality, but since M = hf it is unclear to me at least how the Higgs mechanism can produce frequency.

Also there is still no explanation for the magnitude of the coupling constants that produce (m).

"asking you "What gave mass to boson?" you got collective amnesia, saying you never claimed it gave mass to everything. Quick hands." - SethD
VendicarE
3 / 5 (4) Feb 02, 2013
Remember, fields are not uniform or continuous in QED or QCD or any of the others.

Fields in these theories are explained as a particle/particle interactions that constitute the "field".

"So what is the physical mechanism that results in what we call a field?" - Tuxford

The electric force in these theories for example, consists of an infinite collection of charged particle/antiparticle pairs that spontaneously appear from the vacuum and then vanish through annihilation with their opposite (generated by another spontaneous creation). "Real" particles "couple" to this underlying sea of, on average, neutral charge, altering it's particle distribution altering the charge distribution of the vacuum.

In turn this charge distribution alters other charges at large distances from a charge that altered the field.

The failure of this model is of course that there is no final resolution as to what action at a distance is. The resolution comes from the property of the non-locality of quanta.
VendicarE
2.3 / 5 (3) Feb 02, 2013
Correction:

In turn, this charge distribution alters, or replaces, other charges at large distances from a charge that altered the field distribution in the first place.

The field is an infinitely fine mesh of particle/particle interactions that occur in, and constitute, the vacuum.
Tuxford
1.3 / 5 (15) Feb 02, 2013
Correction:

In turn, this charge distribution alters, or replaces, other charges at large distances from a charge that altered the field distribution in the first place.

The field is an infinitely fine mesh of particle/particle interactions that occur in, and constitute, the vacuum.


Thanks. This sounds a lot like LaViolette's SubQuantum Kinectics, where the particles diffuse and interact. The field then is reflected in changing distribution concentrations of the underlying SubQuantum-sized particles. The differing distributions then cause actions that we interpret as force, etc.
avengers
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 02, 2013

The rational rejection of this reality requires experimental evidence that SethD can not provide...

Do you always use philosophy to dodge physics questions, or was this one of your good days?

Anywho, your crap stinks miles now. When faced with criticism, your gang withdraws for half a year from public eye to look for a big lie to save you from the big doom (big banks withdrawing funds.) You even use tricks to buy you more time such as "equipment malfunctioning", "unexpected maintenance" etc.

When people responded to your "Boson giving mass to everything" claim, asking you "What gave mass to boson?" you got collective amnesia, saying you never claimed it gave mass to everything. Quick hands.

The latest "news" above is that Mr. Higgs' theory is special as on condition of varying universe expansion?! WTF and we thought universality always meant unconditional.

Fraud.

That pretty much summarizes it, Seth! Kudos.

They coined "God particle" and forgot it. LOL
VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Feb 02, 2013
Pointless idiocy.

"They coined "God particle" and forgot it." - avengerz
VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Feb 02, 2013
"This sounds a lot like LaViolette's SubQuantum Kinectics, where the particles diffuse and interact." - Tuxford

NonLocality is the key problem. How does one particle as defined by one wave function with potentially arbitrary shape, and separated by large distances, manage to act instantly through it's entirety as a single connected object and do so in all observing reference frames?

Such rules are artificially pinned in an ad-hock manner to QED, QCD, and their offshoots.

jwillis84
1 / 5 (8) Feb 03, 2013
I'm wondering now that we know the energetic mass precisely of the Higgs. Could a meta material be constructed to manipulate it?

Perhaps focus it like a lens?

It seems at the subatomic level Higgs could be thought of like the old Pioneer 10 space probe flying through a solar system, attracted by a star, planet or moon. After that interaction it moves on. Depending on a preferential interaction in a particular plane. It might amplify or dampen its next interaction.

The norm being an average of noise. The preferential being a lensing effect, like a gravitational assist or thwarting of the next interaction.

I would guess a crystal of some sort would offer the best rarefied environment to preserve a clean "vacuum" or landscape and order the experimental playing field. That is in this case something predictable analogous to a vacuum to prove the effect.

And perhaps the less thermal vibration the better, although on average it might not matter.

ValeriaT
1 / 5 (10) Feb 03, 2013
How does one particle as defined by one wave function with potentially arbitrary shape, and separated by large distances, manage to act instantly through it's entirety as a single connected object and do so in all observing reference frames?
How these two particles are connected at the water surface? The water surface is apparently free void and empty between them.
Tuxford
1 / 5 (12) Feb 03, 2013
"This sounds a lot like LaViolette's SubQuantum Kinectics, where the particles diffuse and interact." - Tuxford

NonLocality is the key problem. How does one particle as defined by one wave function with potentially arbitrary shape, and separated by large distances, manage to act instantly through it's entirety as a single connected object and do so in all observing reference frames?

Such rules are artificially pinned in an ad-hock manner to QED, QCD, and their offshoots.


LaViolette claims to have solved this problem in his latest SQK ebook edition. I have not had time to read the details, but it has to do with the diffusion waveforms surrounding a subatomic particle interacting with an adjacent particle, and then the particles are separated. The waveforms extend great distances at reduced amplitude (I think), and propagate like sound waves propagating in metal. The density of the underlying sub-quantum matrix is extreme, resulting in extreme propagation speeds.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Feb 03, 2013
"Electro gravitics & UFO propulsion" - PAUL A. LaVIOLETTE

https://www.youtu...sz3iXgGk
SethD
1 / 5 (11) Feb 04, 2013

Do you always use philosophy to dodge physics questions, or was this one of your good days?

Anywho, your crap stinks miles now. When faced with criticism, your gang withdraws for half a year from public eye to look for a big lie to save you from the big doom (big banks withdrawing funds.) You even use tricks to buy you more time such as "equipment malfunctioning", "unexpected maintenance" etc.

When people responded to your "Boson giving mass to everything" claim, asking you "What gave mass to boson?" you got collective amnesia, saying you never claimed it gave mass to everything. Quick hands.

The latest "news" above is that Mr. Higgs' theory is special as on condition of varying universe expansion?! WTF and we thought universality always meant unconditional.

Fraud.

That pretty much summarizes it, Seth! Kudos.

They coined "God particle" and forgot it. LOL


Thanks.

True, they coined "Gos particle" and then suffered amnesia. Then "amnesia" became natural to them
kevinbyrnes22
1 / 5 (9) Feb 13, 2013
I'm thoroughly entertained by people who refute what they don't care to learn about first. It's blatantly obvious when a person doesn't know what he or she is talking about. Furthermore, when corrected by someone who in fact does have knowledge on a particular subject, show a little humility. If someone has a formal education and a degree, and all I've done is watch a few videos on youtube, I'm not going to dismiss what he or she has to say simply because it challenges my feeble perspective. It's pretty good for a laugh, though.
mohammadshafiq_khan_1
1 / 5 (9) Mar 07, 2013
There could be no Higg's field or Higg's Boson because the very paradigm of physics under which Higg's field or Higg's Boson are theorised has been shown to be fundamentally incorrect & baseless. The paradigm shift of physics which Einstein proposed stands openly challenged and the open challenge could be seen on websites of World Science Database & General Science Journal in my profile. He is deceiving himself & ignorant people & wasting trillions of dollars for research which could lead them nowhere. If they think they are correct they should accept the open challenge; it is their moral responsibility.

mohammadshafiq_khan_1
1 / 5 (9) Mar 07, 2013
There could be no Higg's field or Higg's Boson because the very paradigm of physics under which Higg's field or Higg's Boson are theorised has been shown to be fundamentally incorrect & baseless. The paradigm shift of physics which Einstein proposed stands openly challenged and the open challenge could be seen on websites of World Science Database & General Science Journal in my profile.

More news stories

Making graphene in your kitchen

Graphene has been touted as a wonder material—the world's thinnest substance, but super-strong. Now scientists say it is so easy to make you could produce some in your kitchen.