The Higgs Fake
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:27 pm
Re: The Higgs Fake
Can anyone help me please?
I would like to check if what I once heard is true or what.
I heard that at CERN they had several "isles of stability" where they could search for new particles. ANY new particle. They searched the Higg's in the most promising island of stability.
Is it true? And if true, isn't it like gambling? Surely new particles exist, will they endorse the most fortunate theory or the most accurate?
While, if all this is never heard of, please forgive me!
I would like to check if what I once heard is true or what.
I heard that at CERN they had several "isles of stability" where they could search for new particles. ANY new particle. They searched the Higg's in the most promising island of stability.
Is it true? And if true, isn't it like gambling? Surely new particles exist, will they endorse the most fortunate theory or the most accurate?
While, if all this is never heard of, please forgive me!
- D_Archer
- Posts: 1255
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: The Higgs Fake
They find bosons at certain energy levels ( ie 118 GeV or something), this because the atomic world is quantized. So you can only find certain bosons at certain energy levels so that is where they look.
Regards,
Daniel
Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
-
- Posts: 605
- Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2014 8:29 am
Re: The Higgs Fake
As I understand it, there are 2 unresolved issues with the results that have been obtained. The first is that the higgs decays into photons twice as much as expected. The other is that there seem to be two distinct energy energies for it, so it may not be a single particle at all. I don't know what happened to these anomalies, whether they were successfully resolved or just swept under the carpet.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/1 ... 02897.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/1 ... 02897.html
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:27 pm
Re: The Higgs Fake
Thank you Daniel.D_Archer wrote:They find bosons at certain energy levels ( ie 118 GeV or something), this because the atomic world is quantized. So you can only find certain bosons at certain energy levels so that is where they look.
Regards,
Daniel
Yes, this is agreeable, bosons exist only at certain levels of energy. But what I heard is that there were specifically 2 islands "available" at least.
And that's strange to me: if this is the case, how can they declare that the found boson was the Higgs one, when they are free to decide where to search for it (i.e. first we find something, then we tag it as an Higgs boson)?
How is it possible that the definition is free to range in different islands, yet they can determine it was the one they were searching for?
Of course, unless I got it wrong.
- D_Archer
- Posts: 1255
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: The Higgs Fake
Wiki states:SirEyes wrote:Thank you Daniel.D_Archer wrote:They find bosons at certain energy levels ( ie 118 GeV or something), this because the atomic world is quantized. So you can only find certain bosons at certain energy levels so that is where they look.
Regards,
Daniel
Yes, this is agreeable, bosons exist only at certain levels of energy. But what I heard is that there were specifically 2 islands "available" at least.
And that's strange to me: if this is the case, how can they declare that the found boson was the Higgs one, when they are free to decide where to search for it (i.e. first we find something, then we tag it as an Higgs boson)?
How is it possible that the definition is free to range in different islands, yet they can determine it was the one they were searching for?
Of course, unless I got it wrong.
ergo, they do not predict a certain energy level. They are looking at certain GeV ranges, but according to Miles Mathis* that is hardly a prediction as bosons are expected at many energy levels."The Minimal Standard Model does not predict the mass of the Higgs boson"
'island of stability', standard definition seems to be "In nuclear physics, the island of stability is a set of predicted, but as-yet undiscovered, heavier isotopes of transuranium elements which are theorized to be much more stable than some of those closer in atomic number to uranium". So i dont know what this has to do with Higgs or that there are 2 islands of stability.
Regards,
Daniel
ps. Miles Mathis:
http://milesmathis.com/higgs.pdf
http://milesmathis.com/higgs2.pdf
http://milesmathis.com/higgs3.pdf
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:27 pm
Re: The Higgs Fake
mmm right I suppose "isle of stability" is not the proper word, I'd better using your "energy level".
Anyway my doubt still holds, what I heard was that the search was confined in specific "ranges" (correct?) of energy and there were more ranges available.
So now I can reformulate in: how one can decide that in those ranges my finding is a proper Higgs, instead of just any other boson (yet unknown, presumably)?
Thanks so much for your replies.
Anyway my doubt still holds, what I heard was that the search was confined in specific "ranges" (correct?) of energy and there were more ranges available.
So now I can reformulate in: how one can decide that in those ranges my finding is a proper Higgs, instead of just any other boson (yet unknown, presumably)?
Thanks so much for your replies.
- rnboyd
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 7:57 am
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Re: The Higgs Fake
Although there are many who believe in Higgs, and his mathematical theoretical "boson" propositions, I do not. Math is a language that can be used to make lies and fairy tales, just as any other language can.
The "Higgs 'boson' " fails the common sense test, and fails all of Poppers Criteria (although I've seen worse, such as "string theory"). Mathematical fantasy does not equal reproducably observable, physical reality. The entire of the "standard model" is going to collapse into something much more sensible and easily experimentally verified.
For starters, see the book, "The Evolution of Matter" by Gustave Le Bon
http://www.rexresearch.com/lebonmat/lebonmat.htm
The SubQuantum physics solves all these sorts of "Higgs-related" problems, with an experimentally verifiable basis.
The "Higgs 'boson' " fails the common sense test, and fails all of Poppers Criteria (although I've seen worse, such as "string theory"). Mathematical fantasy does not equal reproducably observable, physical reality. The entire of the "standard model" is going to collapse into something much more sensible and easily experimentally verified.
For starters, see the book, "The Evolution of Matter" by Gustave Le Bon
http://www.rexresearch.com/lebonmat/lebonmat.htm
The SubQuantum physics solves all these sorts of "Higgs-related" problems, with an experimentally verifiable basis.
The subquantum unfies all the sciences.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest