|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,829 Year: 4,086/9,624 Month: 957/974 Week: 284/286 Day: 5/40 Hour: 1/4 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Higgs Boson | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
What is so great about 5 standard deviations?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
I didn't think statistics applied in particle physics. From what I know about this stuff, particles leave distinct path marks on metal plates after they have gone through an accelerator. I suppose this is a particle that doesn't show one of the same distinct paths that all other known particles have shown?
Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Have you heard of the Uncertainty Principle? Do you understand what an "electron cloud" is? Those might help you understand. Yes I understand both principles. But how do those principles help us know if scorings on a metal plate hit by a bunch of sub atomic particles correspond to certain theoretical particles such as quarks, or muons or bosons or the higgs?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
The statistics in particle physics experiments have a simple enough origin in this case. For instance in the case of the search for the Higgs, we see a bump in the two photon channel. This means that around 125 GeV slightly more photons were being produced than the energies around it, the hypothesis is that these extra photons come from the decay of the Higgs boson. However it is possible that extra photons were produced simply by chance without the Higgs. So you compare the results against the scenario where the photons are produced by chance. It then turns out that such a bump has only a 0.00005% chance (1 in 2 million) chance of occurring randomly. Hence it is overwhelmingly likely to be a Higgs. To me, what the statistics say is that "something" is going on to produce the extra photons that is not random or by chance. Why is it the science community all convinced this "something" is their long sought after higgs boson?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Does a boson of any flavor even have any mass? I don't subscribe to the standard model of particle physics. Bosons are part and parcel of that theoretical system. What is your definition of a particle anyway?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Ok. That is the answer I was looking for, but the next step for me would be why does a higgs boson predict all those things in your list?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
For what reason? All of reality can be described and predicted by the stochastic electro dynamic model just as well as the standard model can. The biggest difference is that the SED model incorporates the existence of zero point energy fields in its predictions and the standard theory does not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Well we know there are two forces, the electromagnetic force and the weak force. The carrier of the electromagnetic being the photon and the carriers of the weak force being the two W bosons and the Z boson. There is no such thing as a photon. Particles don't carry forces.
Since the W bosons carry electric charge we know that the two forces are related in some way. The idea arrived in the 70s was that this was because they were originally one force, the electroweak force. Prove that the phenomena that people call W and Z bosons are indeed particles. If they are particles, they possess the phenomena of charge; they don't "carry" anything. Yes, the weak force and the electromagnetic force are related, and it is because they both result from the interaction of matter waves.
Unfortunately if you write down the equations for the electroweak force, relativity and quantum mechanics demand everything should be massless. Which they obviously aren't. The first mistake is assuming that quantum mechanics describes reality in any meaningful way.
The only possible way around this is to have something which breaks the symmetry associated with the electroweak force. Symmetry associated???? That sounds like mathematical games to me.
According to the theory certain interactions even though they involve different numbers and species of particles have the same probability of occurring. This is the symmetry I'm speaking of. How would they know if they have the same probability of occurring?
Any mechanism which reduces the symmetry to a smaller set of symmetries will natural cause the force to split in two and give the W bosons and the Z boson their mass. How would they know this?
RTE news/special reports writes: But the universe is a big place and the Standard Model only explains a small part of it. Scientists have spotted a gap between what we can see and what must be out there. That gap must be filled by something we don't fully understand, which they have dubbed 'dark matter'. Galaxies are also hurtling away from each other faster than the forces we know about suggest they should. This gap is filled by 'dark energy'. This poorly understood pair are believed to make up a whopping 96 percent of the mass and energy of the cosmos. There is something obviously wrong with the standard model and/or quantum mechanics for there to that much matter and energy to be unaccounted for. Just because a theory has nice mathematics and makes good predictions, doesn't mean it accurately represents reality. The higgs boson is nothing more than the all pervasive zero point energy field that I have mentioned here before. The standard model of physics just makes it fit into neat little imaginary particles with imagined force carrying capabilities. Now, for my detractors, I read his whole post. I understand what he is saying. I just don't think it reflects reality. I suppose the usually suspects will be here shortly to jeer me to death because I upset their apple cart. Edited by foreveryoung, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
electro magnetic waves of a certain frequency
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
What are you talking about?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
foreveryoung Member (Idle past 610 days) Posts: 921 Joined: |
Why do detectors pick up isolated objects with spin-1 when they analyse a beam of light? They pick up a pulse in an electromagnetic wave. The spin comes from what phase the wave is in.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024