[QUOTE=Yahnich;39894565]i'm guessing black hole
[editline]13th March 2013[/editline]
badumptish[/QUOTE]
there needs to be a boo rating for times like this
[QUOTE=Yahnich;39894600]but i don't get it, wouldn't a mass of 126GeV exclude the possibility of a graviton? unless the theory was fucked i guess
[editline]13th March 2013[/editline]
also isn't it quasi impossible to detect individual gravitons on earth, with our only option being gravitational waves
although if these waves were slower than c that would instantly bust the massless thing i guess???[/QUOTE]
I'm just going to go ahead and say "maybe"
God particle, bitches
[QUOTE=OrionChronicles;39895197]God particle, bitches[/QUOTE]
Man, I really wish the media wouldn't have started to use that moniker to refer to the Higgs boson. It's not that it overstates its importance, it's that it misleads its purpose. I've heard people mistakenly think this somehow proves the existence of God when it reality it serves as a milestone discovery as it would effectively complete the Standard Model.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;39893245]In other words, we will never win.[/QUOTE]
Who knows what revolutionary technologies that could enhance our intelligence will be discovered...
It's the future, we've been advancing since the start of time, hopefully we won't stop ourselves. Otherwise, it's inevitable we'll reach an end point in which there is no more to discover...
(unless a natural disaster kills us)
[QUOTE=lifehole;39895716]Who knows what revolutionary technologies that could enhance our intelligence will be discovered...
It's the future, we've been advancing since the start of time, hopefully we won't stop ourselves. Otherwise, it's inevitable we'll reach an end point in which there is no more to discover...[/QUOTE]
Oh, there'll be always more to discover, more to investigate, more to research, so long as there is a universe, information is essentially infinite. Hell, just think about it, quantum science has existed for around a hundred years, the Standard Model for even less, we just can't predict where science will be 200 years from now, given the current pace, and that's just the beauty of it. We'll never know anything, but we're learning more and more as a species as we exponentially grow.
[QUOTE=Bassplaya7;39893104]Did we just win science?[/QUOTE]
You can't win a Scientific Victory without building all parts of a space ship and colonizing Alpha Centauri.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39894539]Probably using c = 1
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
I certainly don't. It seems kind of hard to disentangle (heheh) quantum mechanics and philosophy.
Although I to like to poke fun at my philosophy grad friend.
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
Basically what I'm saying is you're probably taking stuff too seriously stop whining loser philosopher[/QUOTE]
But at what speed does mass... propagate? I mean I guess the 'propagation of mass' would be gravity, so there's your light speed thing, but... I dunno, I feel like the particle associated with mass itself should for some reason be massless or it seems like there should be some weird recursive feedback issue.
[QUOTE=Bassplaya7;39893104]Did we just win science?[/QUOTE]
This comes to mind
[video=youtube;kL3SGR85ymY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL3SGR85ymY[/video]
That is to say, we learn something huge about science and then a door to a seemingly new world opens.
[QUOTE=sltungle;39896565]But at what speed does mass... propagate? I mean I guess the 'propagation of mass' would be gravity, so there's your light speed thing, but... I dunno, I feel like the particle associated with mass itself should for some reason be massless or it seems like there should be some weird recursive feedback issue.[/QUOTE]
Don't think of it as propagation, think of it as a field, and everything that interacts with this field has mass, and whatever doesn't has none. The Higgs boson should effectively have mass, in fact, the energy of the Higgs boson is effectively the lowest possible mass any particle could have, similar to how the electron's charge is the "fundamental charge", the lowest possible charge of all (Note, it's not the same thing, but I'm drawing a parallel here)
I think people just need to sit down, look at any kind of monitor, whether its your phone, computer monitor, or TV, and realise just how fucking amazing what it's doing is.
Ok so, what can we do with it?
Applying it is always the fun part of science
[QUOTE=F T;39896787]Applying it is always the fun part of science[/QUOTE]
Never met a theoretical physicist, I see
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39896803]Never met a theoretical physicist, I see[/QUOTE]
Nope. :(
I'm not that great on physics either.
so does this explain dinosaur?
[editline]sds[/editline]
how dinosaur make? god particle is maybe? no not
dinosaur may not even be create.
athitis= 0
citean= 1
[QUOTE=Foxtrot200;39896661]This comes to mind
[video=youtube;kL3SGR85ymY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL3SGR85ymY[/video]
That is to say, we learn something huge about science and then a door to a seemingly new world opens.[/QUOTE]
In reality, we are even smaller than that.
[QUOTE=Bassplaya7;39893104]Did we just win science?[/QUOTE]
No, they won science while you sit on your fat lazy ass and do nothing productive all day long
[QUOTE=OrionChronicles;39895197]God particle, bitches[/QUOTE]
it was actually the god damned particle but for obvious reasons they just called it the god particle
[QUOTE=Atlascore;39893245]In other words, we will never win.[/QUOTE]
And you know what? I'm perfectly okay with that. There will always be more to discover, more ways to totally blow our own minds figuring out what makes this universe tick.
this particle explains how items get their mass,right?
[QUOTE=Bassplaya7;39893104]Did we just win science?[/QUOTE]
No but we got the highscore at least.
[quote]There's still an important distinction, though. "It is legitimate to call this beastie 'a' Higgs boson," says Raymond Volkas, of the University of Melbourne in Australia, but not "the Higgs".
While "a" Higgs must at least give mass to the W and Z bosons, the leading standard model of particle physics assumes the boson gives mass to other elementary particles too, called fermions. This "standard model Higgs" is "the" Higgs: testing for this involves measuring its rate of decay into fermions.[/quote]
What does this mean precisely? Does the Higgs boson (aka one particle) have different states, or are there different types (aka many particles)?
[QUOTE=demoguy08;39900279]What does this mean precisely? Does the Higgs boson (aka one particle) have different states, or are there different types (aka many particles)?[/QUOTE]
I think they only measured it giving mass to the W and Z bosons, but to confirm it as "the" Higgs of the standard model, they need to test whether or not it gives mass to fermions
Does that mean any particle with energy less than that of Higgs does not "actually have mass" and thus should not be affected by gravity?
i'm guessing we will win science once we successful make ourselves extinct due to pushing science as far as it can
I still really don't understand what this means for the non-physicist person, like me. Every attempt to understand what this'll mean for someone like me always seems to go over my head. Is there any super elementary "square peg into square hole" explanation for this sort of thing? I want to be excited for this, but I feel I should understand just what I'm getting excited about.
[QUOTE=Vaught;39902188]I still really don't understand what this means for the non-physicist person, like me. Every attempt to understand what this'll mean for someone like me always seems to go over my head. Is there any super elementary "square peg into square hole" explanation for this sort of thing? I want to be excited for this, but I feel I should understand just what I'm getting excited about.[/QUOTE]
Why do particles have mass?
Because there is an all permeating Higgs field over the universe
By interacting with this field, they get mass
The field needs a particle to carry it- i.e., the Higgs Boson (Bosons are force carrying particles)
Because of the discovery of the Higgs, the standard model is complete
[editline]13th March 2013[/editline]
now the only thing left to find out is why gravity is a thing which exisits
[QUOTE=Yahnich;39902454]imagine a non-newtonian liquid, like starch, if you slap that shit silly it'll become very rigid, if you wade through it slowly it'll be pretty soft and liquidish, this will be the basis for my next analogy
now, the higgs field kinda behaves this way, any object with mass gets affected, 'slowed down' by this field. the more mass it has, the harder you're slapping the higgs field's shit, meaning it'll become more rigid for more massive fields
i guess this kinda explains how the higgs field/higgs boson works, but like every analogy it doesn't really completely explain it[/QUOTE]
I think I've seen examples of the starch bit. Involving bass speakers. But I don't quite understand: What field are you referring to? And how do they get slowed down? Are we talking on a large scale or still quantum?
[editline]13th March 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Eltro102;39902462]Why do particles have mass?
Because there is an all permeating Higgs field over the universe
By interacting with this field, they get mass
The field needs a particle to carry it- i.e., the Higgs Boson (Bosons are force carrying particles)
Because of the discovery of the Higgs, the standard model is complete
[/QUOTE]
So there's this super Higgs field that encompasses the entire universe and it governs the mass particles have? And the Boson is like the very core or the parts that keep this field up and running? Is that correct?
[QUOTE=Nikita;39902097]Does that mean any particle with energy less than that of Higgs does not "actually have mass" and thus should not be affected by gravity?[/QUOTE]
Not necessarily. The existence of the Higgs boson serves to prove that the Higgs field is real, therefore proves that something called the Higgs mechanism exists, which primarily serves to give an explanation as to why some particles have mass while others do not. But gravity itself is not explained by the Standard model, and in fact, general relativity is incompatible with the Standard Model. The mass of the Higgs boson doesn't necessarily mean that the mass of said particle is related to the mass of the Higgs boson.
[QUOTE=Vaught;39902188]I still really don't understand what this means for the non-physicist person, like me. Every attempt to understand what this'll mean for someone like me always seems to go over my head. Is there any super elementary "square peg into square hole" explanation for this sort of thing? I want to be excited for this, but I feel I should understand just what I'm getting excited about.[/QUOTE]
That's kind of the thing about quantum physics. It's hard to really get a grasp of their "real world" impact, applications for these discoveries often come many, many years afterwards. Radio waves were once considered a "useless" discovery (They are now used for essentially all forms of communication), quantum mechanics made transistors possible. The reasons to be excited for this is more about what this discovery now allows instead of the direct applications to your daily life.
If you want everything explained in layman terms, here's three pretty great videos by MinutePhysics.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Uh5mTxRQcg[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASRpIym_jFM[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6guXMfg88Z8[/media]
[QUOTE=Yahnich;39902623]the higgs field is everywhere, so imagine that this weird starchy liquid is everywhere and the faster you move through it the more it'll resist your movement, now replace the speed bit (faster) with a mass bit (more massive) and this is more or less what the higgs field is
particles don't actually get slowed down, it's just an analogy i'm using to represent the higgs field, although having mass (aka getting slowed down by the higgs field) means it'll take more energy to accelerate and it makes it impossible to reach the speed of light and the scale is the quantum scale, it's particles that get mass, unless you mean the higgs field itself which is EVERYWHERE
[/quote]
So the Higgs field is harder to move through the more mass something has? I suppose that makes sense. What about things on a larger scale, like people size?
[QUOTE=Yahnich;39902623]
[editline]13th March 2013[/editline]
not quite, for this analogy imagine that the higgs field is water vapour, invisible and it doesn't do shit
however, when there is a particle around, this 'vapour' will condensate (the higgs field also condensates) and leave a drop of water behind, this drop of water is analogous to the higgs boson that condensates out of the higgs field[/QUOTE]
So the Higgs Boson is basically a 'piece' of the omnipresent Higgs field? What would happen if you gathered enough of these Bosons? Or does that not matter?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.