The higgs boson revealed in all its naked spelndor

[Dave]

>>here are two explanations that hopefully explain what the higgs boson is and why it is important.


http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news...ggs-boson?lite
These guys are really great and draw nice cartoons that explain the higgs in straightforward language.

Here's a bigger version of the same talk. It's like a sunday comic gone all Einstein-like and lots of fun.
http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/arch...p?comicid=1489

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=ktEpSvzPROc
This guy is from FermiLab and does a good job of explaining the higgs from a somewhat different point of view.

It's not that one explanation is right or wrong.
It's that an explanation will reveal why things have mass.

[moi621]

I choose not to believe in the Higgs Boson.
I remember a Neutrino when it had no mass.
And guess what.

BTW I was at U.C.I. when Frederick Reines was there.
http://www.ps.uci.edu/physics/reinestrib.html

[Dave]

That's the beauty of particle physics.

The Higgs Boson might not exist but the Higgs Field is there and something cases the Higgs Field.
It's a matter of what we call the "thing" that manifests the Higgs Field.

Electricity is the manifestation of the Electron.
Mass is the manifestation of the Higgs Field. It might take fifteen quarks in a complex ring to manifest mass. Then again it might be one particle. We don't know yet.

[Riverwind]

I choose not to believe in the Higgs Boson.
I remember a Neutrino when it had no mass.
And guess what.

BTW I was at U.C.I. when Frederick Reines was there.
http://www.ps.uci.edu/physics/reinestrib.html

OK, so lets start at the beginning of what you believe, is the earth round or flat? answer this and we can move to the next question.

[Slammr]

I choose not to believe in Moi. Surely, no such person could exist, one that believes in Ron Paul but does not believe in the Higgs Boson. What proof do we have that he exists other than the modification of some pixels on our computer screens? Anyone could be doing that, or maybe Moi is a computer virus infecting EA. If that's the case, does anyone have a good antivirus program that might eradicate it/him from the site?

[janekane]

OK, so lets start at the beginning of what you believe, is the earth round or flat? answer this and we can move to the next question.

Perhaps contingent upon the definitions of the words used, especially "earth," "round," and, "flat," the earth may be deemed to be only round, only flat, both round and flat, neither round nor flat, or otherwise.

[moi621]

I choose not to believe in the Higgs Boson.
I remember a Neutrino when it had no mass.
And guess what.

BTW I was at U.C.I. when Frederick Reines was there.
http://www.ps.uci.edu/physics/reinestrib.html

Typing slowly.
I was at UCI when Frederick Reines was a major name. Late sixties. The word, Neutrino was not foreign to those of us on campus. And a Neutrino was defined as having no mass. Today it does have mass. It did not live up to its' definition but we still call it a Neutrino.

The Higgs Boson may not live up to its' billing either once researched.
Maybe we should be looking for the God String and not the God Particle.

Because of my let down over Neutrino mass, I choose not to believe in the Higgs Boson and be hurt by Science again.
The late sixties was a time of disillusionment.

I do hope that make more sense now, if not provoke a little smile.

[Cainanite]

The thing I love about science, is also the thing that a lot of people hate about science.

Science cannot be taken as 100% proof. Our understandings and our learning is only the best understanding we have right now. When new evidence comes along, and it better fits the facts than our understanding of it, we can change our understanding. I love that. It is humility, that we cannot know everything.

A lot of people get angry at science when it changes its position. We were taught one thing, now something completely different is being taught.

I remember my poor out of date school in Saskatchewan. I wanted to learn about the planets, and found a textbook in the library on the subject. It told all about Venus, and its thick cloud cover. It suggested that Venus must have much more water than earth, and because it was closer to the sun, that water was constantly becoming clouds. It even went so far as to suggest that there might be great swamps and endless amounts of life, down on the surface we couldn't see. This was an inspiring assertion. It was based on the best evidence they had, at the time the book was written. (1930 or 1940)

Now we know that Venus has no water, and its surface cannot in any way we know of, support life. Yet it was once taught in schools the exact opposite.

Science is not married to any one opinion, or idea, only to the facts. When a new idea is created, and it better fits the facts, then that is the newly accepted idea.

When there is a persistent theory like the Higgs Boson particle, we cannot just accept it as fact. We have to experiment, and see what the facts are. We have to improve our methods and keep trying until we can put that theory into the "facts column" or the "Not true column". If it turns out there is no Higgs Boson, that is just as exciting as if we prove it exists. It is the facts we learn along the way that makes the process exciting.

It was once thought the Neutrino had no mass, because we couldn't detect its mass. We had to invent newer and more sophisticated technology for that to happen.

Learning something new shouldn't make people feel hurt, or wronged. It should inspire people to know there will always be something new to learn.

[moi621]

Cainanite

I just think they should have renamed the Neutrino with mass to differentiate it from the massless particle.
Like Neutrino Plus, because Neutrino+ , might be confused with a positively charged Neutrino.
Leave the door open to the massless particle, or Neutrino.

Moi
Is and Are and Will Be and Has Been Before. Therefore, Is.

[Riverwind]

And here I thought you decided not to believe when Pluto was no longer a planet.


River

[Dave]

There might be no such thing as a Higgs Boson...
However, there is a Higgs Field and something propagates that field the same sort of way that electricity is propagated as a current in a wire or lightning.
It might not be a single particle. I might be a new particle or combination of particles or new set of particles with new properties.
In that case, particle physics will go back to the drawing board and start with a new theory.
But if there is a Higgs Boson, then the current models of particle physics will be confirmed.

Either possibility is exciting. Either is of course possible.
It's a little like Schrodinger's Cat, until we find the particle, we cannot determine what it is.

[Cainanite]

Cainanite

I just think they should have renamed the Neutrino with mass to differentiate it from the massless particle.
Like Neutrino Plus, because Neutrino+ , might be confused with a positively charged Neutrino.
Leave the door open to the massless particle, or Neutrino.

Moi
Is and Are and Will Be and Has Been Before. Therefore, Is.

The Neutrino did not change. Our instruments changed. The Neutrino is the Neutrino. The only thing that changed was our ability to measure it. Venus didn't change when we learned those clouds weren't made of water vapor. Only our understanding of it changed.

We once thought Mars had man-made canals on the surface. Should we change the name, now that we know it doesn't?

We don't change the name of something just because we were wrong about our opinions of it. There are a lot of people I've been wrong about too. Should they change their name, every time I get it wrong? It would make things bloody confusing.

[moi621]

And what of the massless, chargeless particle.
My Neutrino? When they find it will the name, Neutrino have been usurped by a more massive bully?

Yes, similar to planet and that asteroid and the Binary Planet system Pluto/Charon?
Okay, I accept it is a Binary Planet System with a small moon. But, too small to be like
Earth/Moon or Pluto/Charon.

They never get it right. They just get the publications.

Moi

[Cainanite]

And what of the massless, chargeless particle.
My Neutrino? When they find it will the name, Neutrino have been usurped by a more massive bully?

Yes, similar to planet and that asteroid and the Binary Planet system Pluto/Charon?
Okay, I accept it is a Binary Planet System with a small moon. But, too small to be like
Earth/Moon or Pluto/Charon.

They never get it right. They just get the publications.

Moi

I think you need to get a job at the LHC and propose they start looking for a massless and chargeless particle. Particles can (at least so far observed) be either massless or chargeless, but not both. Every particle is at least some kind of force carrier.

You are right of course. They never get it right. The publications only tell us where we currently are in our understanding. They are landmarks on the path, never the destination.

[Riverwind]

True, good research always takes you in a direction that you did not expect, That is the beauty of it, and Pluto is back to being Micky's pet, no longer a heavenly body to be worshiped. Eight is enough, we did not need that tiny asteroid in our planet system, to many other like sized asteroids in the same area.

Science, don't you just love it, its self correcting when needed, like the death of a planet, but who needed Pluto anyway?


River