I need to read up on it. :)
the god particle
Sort:
Is interesting.
as per research higgs boson was a key indegreint in the big bang,it was recreated in 2012 in a particle accerlator
Jun 3, 2015
0
#5
It will be interesting to see if they discover anything else with twice the energy in the LHC. Particle physics is at a difficult point with the need for more particles (to explain dark matter) but no evidence of them. All the "easy" discoveries have been made, and what's left may require more energy than is feasible.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Aug 3, 2015
0
#7
Don't let Elroch see you talking about God! I don't agree with people who deny accepted facts to fit their religion but scientists cannot disprove ideas of morality or philosophy.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Aug 5, 2015
0
#9
RPaulB wrote:
Please go a little slower deathstroke2611. We are on Higgs and mass, maybe start with ; do all Fermions have 3 different mass states ?
Apparently so. (leptons, quarks with 1/3 and 2/3 charge and neutrinos have that property, and this is all the known fundamental fermions).
IF SO, do all Bosons have 3 different mass states, one being a massless state ?
No. At least there is no reason to believe this. The gluon, Higgs and (proposed) graviton don't have any such hierarchy. Moreover, the W and Z have a quite different relationship to the photon. The W is charged and is not its own antiparticle, for example.
IF SO, maybe we should find one massless Boson and 2 with properties just like the massless one but with mass states close together.
That would be very different to the fermions, where the upper mass differences are the big ones, for reasons I fail to understand but others probably do.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Aug 5, 2015
0
#11
Yes, there's no real need to consider antiparticles separately, since they are in every case just the same particles moving in the opposite direction through time, as first noticed by Dirac. It happens that for all particles that move at the speed of light and some that don't, antiparticles are the same as the particle, but for some they are not (including all charged particles, which necessarily have mass and can't move at the speed of light).
Oh, one footnote: neutrinos have spin and interact via the weak force, so they are more than just mass.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Aug 7, 2015
0
#15
RPaulB wrote:
See !!! There you go again. YOU just don't stay on the subject.
Well, let's check that.
(1) YOU mentioned the anti-particles: I stated how antiparticles fit into the picture.
(2) YOU mentioned "planets" in #12, I didn't. I presume you completely misread something.
(3) YOU said neutrinos only interact by mass: I pointed out that they interact via the weak force.
If you object to any of these subjects, you need to address your complaints to yourself, not ME.
While I am a very patient person, it is a waste of time discussing anything with someone who can't even read what is written.
If your point is you are the smartest person on earth, just say so.
No, I am not, but you are very kind to suggest that it appears so from your point of view
And big deal, there are a lot of planets.
Que???
We are tryng to find out what the FERMION table is and if it is correct. Anti particles were considered by me, because you forgot them.
If I had forgotten everything I don't write in one particular post, I would know nothing.
SO WHY DO THE TWO QUARKS HAVE DIFFERENT SIGN CHARGE IF NEITHER IS AN ANTI-PARTICLE.
All particles are anti-particles of their anti-particle: it is a duality. It is arbitrary which one you call the antiparticle. For quarks, each one with charge +2/3 has an antiparticle with charge -2/3 and each with charge -1/3 has antiparticle with charge +1/3. These are necessary due to charge conservation. If you want to call the anti-down quark (with charge +1/3) the particle and the down quark the antiparticle, this would do just as well (except it is convenient to choose the semantics so that neutrons and protons are made of quarks and their antiparticles are made of antiquarks.)
And again you are not reading because what I said was WRONG and you didn't see that, again. AS for your last comment, forces are in the BOSONS table, you will have to wait for that answer to your foot note. All particles in the Fermon table have the SAME spin,
Not quite: more complex fermions can have odd half-integral spin, eg 3/2.
so they would ALL act the same if it were do to spin. Besides , "spin " is a property of being a particle, not of being a Fermion, or just a neutrino.
[Good you can edit deleted messages]
No one believes anything you are saying, Where do you get such stupid ideas.
Aug 8, 2015
0
#19
I really like RPaulB's view that if we swapped the names of particles and antiparticles, the Universe would explode. In truth, only this forum would explode.
The Higgs boson or Higgs particle is an elementary particle in the Standard Model of particle physics. Observations of the particle allows scientists to explore the Higgs field—a fundamental field of crucial importance to particle physics theory,first suspected to exist in the 1960s, that unlike the more familiar electromagnetic field cannot be "turned off", but instead takes a non-zero constant value almost everywhere. The presence of this field, now believed to be confirmed, explains why some fundamental particles have mass even though the symmetries controlling their interactions should require them to be massless, and also answers several other long-standing puzzles in physics, such as the reason the weak force has a much shorter range than the electromagnetic force. The Higgs boson is named after Peter Higgs, one of six physicists who, in 1964, proposed the mechanism that suggested the existence of such a particle