View Full Version : Higgs Boson Confirmed
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 08:26
Physicists at CERN are reporting that the presence of the Higgs Boson is confirmed.
http://www.rdmag.com/news/2013/03/physicists-say-they-have-found-higgs-boson?et_cid=3140271&et_rid=54734010&linkid=http%3a%2f%2fwww.rdmag.com%2fnews%2f2013%2f 03%2fphysicists-say-they-have-found-higgs-boson
I know this is kinda nerdy, but this is fundamental to the origin and structure of the universe. The presence of the Higgs boson was postulated in the mid 60's to explain why matter has mass. That this theoretical prediction has been experimentally confirmed is perhaps the biggest discovery in physics in the last 100 years. Truly amazing or at least I think so.:lifter
Team Sergeant
03-14-2013, 10:23
The God particle...... I agree the most significant discovery in the last century.
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 10:32
The God particle...... I agree the most significant discovery in the last century.
Interesting story on how it got it's nickname the God particle. One of the physicist working on this for decades (I forget his name) gave an interview and referred to it as the goddamned particle because of the elusiveness for detection. The interviewer picked up on that and referred to it as the God particle.
Just wanted to clarify that point because it has nothing to do with God and thus avoid the rant from Dusty;)
Dozer523
03-14-2013, 11:37
The God particle...... I agree the most significant discovery in the last century.
WHAT?
Last time you said the most significant discovery was the machine gun. Before that it was scotch. Before that it was rubbers.
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 11:39
WHAT?
Last time you said the most significant discovery was the machine gun. Before that it was scotch. Before that it was rubbers.
Seems to be a logical progression to me:D
WHAT?
Last time you said the most significant discovery was the machine gun. Before that it was scotch. Before that it was rubbers.
Not necessarily in that order...
RedLegGI
03-14-2013, 11:45
Physicists at CERN are reporting that the presence of the Higgs Boson is confirmed.
http://www.rdmag.com/news/2013/03/physicists-say-they-have-found-higgs-boson?et_cid=3140271&et_rid=54734010&linkid=http%3a%2f%2fwww.rdmag.com%2fnews%2f2013%2f 03%2fphysicists-say-they-have-found-higgs-boson
I know this is kinda nerdy, but this is fundamental to the origin and structure of the universe. The presence of the Higgs boson was postulated in the mid 60's to explain why matter has mass. That this theoretical prediction has been experimentally confirmed is perhaps the biggest discovery in physics in the last 100 years. Truly amazing or at least I think so.:lifter
Very interesting news for sure. I remember last year when everyone was freaking out because they thought the world was going to explode when they turned the collider on. I'm sure the next step in the research process will be how to weaponize it :)
medic&commo
03-14-2013, 13:23
The God particle...... I agree the most significant discovery in the last century.
the most significant discovery was the machine gun. Before that it was scotch. Before that it was rubbers.
TS is right in all his statements -
The "most significant" is relative to where you are at that particular moment in time.
m&c
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 13:50
The "most significant" is relative to where you are at that particular moment in time.
m&c
Hmm, since we are in a theoretical physics thread, let me suggest that you can either know the time you are at a place or the place you are at a time, but not both:D
Hell, I haven't left my basement since the new millennium....I thought that was suppose to be the end....:eek:
ZonieDiver
03-14-2013, 15:05
Hell, I haven't left my basement since the new millennium....I thought that was suppose to be the end....:eek:
Brother, you've changed since last I saw you in March 1971! :D
Jersey Dirtbag
03-14-2013, 15:24
Hmm, since we are in a theoretical physics thread, let me suggest that you can either know the time you are at a place or the place you are at a time, but not both:D
Well...wouldn't it be more accurate to say that my measurement of the time and distance between two events is relative to my velocity; that is, for all observers at the same fixed velocity, their respective measurements of spatial/temporal displacements will be the same?
Maybe you're referring to the uncertainty principle, which implies that the values of two noncommutative observables cannot both be known to arbitrary degrees of accuracy simultaneously (such as the position and momentum of a particle governed by the Schrodinger Equation).
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 16:43
Maybe you're referring to the uncertainty principle, which implies that the values of two noncommutative observables cannot both be known to arbitrary degrees of accuracy simultaneously (such as the position and momentum of a particle governed by the Schrodinger Equation).
Bingo:D Now for extra credit derive Schrodinger's equation :lifter
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 16:49
Well...wouldn't it be more accurate to say that my measurement of the time and distance between two events is relative to my velocity; that is, for all observers at the same fixed velocity, their respective measurements of spatial/temporal displacements will be the same?
And, yes, I was assuming that the observer was at a fixed point in space much like our position relative to an electron's position in an atom, hence the application of the uncertainty principle and application of Schrodinger's equation.
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 16:55
Uh... yeah Trapper, sheesh. Keep up!:rolleyes:
"Shakin' that bush Boss, shakin' that bush":D
Jersey Dirtbag
03-14-2013, 17:04
Bingo:D Now for extra credit derive Schrodinger's equation :lifter
Ha, that's way beyond my pay grade -- I'm just a fascinated layman. But my understanding is that Schrodinger didn't "derive" his equation, per se, but rather he built it around empirical data and found that it accurately described/predicted probability distributions of observations of quantum systems.
Just to be clear, when I think of someone "deriving" an equation, I think of a thought experiment such as Einstein's in which a photon is emitted from one end of a hollow tube, travels through the space within the tube, and is then absorbed by the opposite end of the tube. Thus, by assuming nothing more than momentum conservation and attributing momentum to photons via p=h_bar*k, one may derive mass-energy equivalence (E=mc^2). I'm pretty sure there's no set of axioms from which you can derive Schrodinger's equation.
...Then again, I've been wrong before. ;)
"Shakin' that bush Boss, shakin' that bush":D
Hummmm .... Should we award cross thread points for this statement ???? ;)
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41357&highlight=lesbians
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 17:34
If memory serves, I think Schrodinger's equation can be derived from the Hamiltonian operator for the total energy of either a one particle or a multi-particle system or something to that effect. I have now reached the limit of my knowledge on the subject.
Had to do the derivation in a theoretical chem class in grad school many moons ago. Couldn't do that again if my life depended upon it. :eek:
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 17:36
Hummmm .... Should we award cross thread points for this statement ???? ;)
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41357&highlight=lesbians
:eek: That's a good one :D
Jersey Dirtbag
03-14-2013, 17:42
If memory serves, I think Schrodinger's equation can be derived from the Hamiltonian operator for the total energy of either a one particle or a multi-particle system or something to that effect. I have now reached the limit of my knowledge on the subject.
Had to do the derivation in a theoretical chem class in grad school many moons ago. Couldn't do that again if my life depended upon it. :eek:
Interesting. My only formal training on this subject was in a optics/relativity/quantum physics class in engineering school, as well as an independent study that I did with a physics professor afterward. It was mostly straightforward material; just one-dimensional Schrodinger equation stuff. Very cool, though.
The chemEs did a lot more with this material than I did as as mechE. I guess it pays to understand how those electron energy levels come about...;)
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 18:00
I prefer Feynman's derivation, which uses the function G(x,y) from Huygen's Principle as as analogue in a wave environment.
http://www.drchristiansalas.org.uk/MathsandPhysics/Research/ADerivationOfSchrodingersEquation/FeynmansDerivation.pdf
Its an oldie but a goodie, especially since most of the beginning was a hypothesis. :cool:
Great find Doc:lifter A very elegant derivation, but one would expect no less from the mind of a Nobel laureate :cool: Now my head hurts.
Jersey Dirtbag
03-14-2013, 18:03
I prefer Feynman's derivation, which uses the function G(x,y) from Huygen's Principle as as analogue in a wave environment.
http://www.drchristiansalas.org.uk/MathsandPhysics/Research/ADerivationOfSchrodingersEquation/FeynmansDerivation.pdf
Its an oldie but a goodie, especially since most of the beginning was a hypothesis. :cool:
I like it. One of these days I'll sit down with a pot of coffee and an abundance of scrap paper and try to wrap my head around it.
Trapper John
03-14-2013, 19:13
Me personally, I am very interested in them finding actual dark matter. Either the majority of the (known) universe is made up of dark matter (matter that we can neither see nor detect). Or our theory of gravity is wrong.
Yup. That's the next big question IMO. Dark matter/dark energy description could define the fate of the universe. Is the universe going to expand infinitely until it reaches absolute zero or will it reach a limit and then begin the Big Contraction until compressed to another Big Bang and everything starts all over again? I like the latter. Stephen Hawkings likes the former, but what does he know? :D
Yup. That's the next big question IMO. Dark matter/dark energy description could define the fate of the universe. Is the universe going to expand infinitely until it reaches absolute zero or will it reach a limit and then begin the Big Contraction until compressed to another Big Bang and everything starts all over again? I like the latter. Stephen Hawkings likes the former, but what does he know? :D
I was thinking about this recently in one of my college math classes. I just may not be advanced enough yet in mathematics to have a strong enough understanding of the applications. However, I do wonder why there is not more multidimensional math for descriptions mathematically of an object in a infinite space. Maybe if one of you quantum mechanics majors could elaborate further on how that is done, I would be curious to know.
twistedsquid
03-14-2013, 20:01
Math proves " God" lives in free space.
GratefulCitizen
03-14-2013, 20:14
Bingo:D Now for extra credit derive Schrodinger's equation :lifter
Why?
God made CRC handbooks so we wouldn't have to do that.
:D
UWOA (RIP)
03-14-2013, 22:00
Physicists at CERN are reporting that the presence of the Higgs Boson is confirmed.
http://www.rdmag.com/news/2013/03/physicists-say-they-have-found-higgs-boson?et_cid=3140271&et_rid=54734010&linkid=http%3a%2f%2fwww.rdmag.com%2fnews%2f2013%2f 03%2fphysicists-say-they-have-found-higgs-boson
I know this is kinda nerdy, but this is fundamental to the origin and structure of the universe. The presence of the Higgs boson was postulated in the mid 60's to explain why matter has mass. That this theoretical prediction has been experimentally confirmed is perhaps the biggest discovery in physics in the last 100 years. Truly amazing or at least I think so.:lifter
Without having seen the data, I'm not sure I buy into the confirmation just yet. After all, the good folks at CERN have to justify the billions of dollars spent on the particle accelerator/collider. According to string theory there is still the possibility that quantum foam and the movement of particles in and out of extra dimensions as defined by the Calabi-Yau (manifold) shape of the string might account for the observations they made .... just ruminating with that .....
UWOA (RIP)
03-14-2013, 22:06
Yup. That's the next big question IMO. Dark matter/dark energy description could define the fate of the universe. Is the universe going to expand infinitely until it reaches absolute zero or will it reach a limit and then begin the Big Contraction until compressed to another Big Bang and everything starts all over again? I like the latter. Stephen Hawkings likes the former, but what does he know? :D
Yeah, and the cosmologists are saying that the universe is still expanding -- using the POV that all objects are receding ... but that doesn't account for the fact that 12 billion years after the Big Bang we still have galaxies colliding (our own Milky Way and Andromeda immediately come to mind). Based on the Doppler effect promoted by the "expanders" that shouldn't be happening ....
As to Hawking ... I think he's gone over to the 'brane' side .... LOL!
UWOA (RIP)
03-14-2013, 22:08
TS is right in all his statements -
The "most significant" is relative to where you are at that particular moment in time.
m&c
Not if you're in a black hole ... relativity breaks down and time stops ... except for quantum fluctuations ..... heh heh
UWOA (RIP)
03-14-2013, 22:15
And, yes, I was assuming that the observer was at a fixed point in space much like our position relative to an electron's position in an atom, hence the application of the uncertainty principle and application of Schrodinger's equation.
Doesn't make any difference if you apply the conclusion of the Copenhagen experiment ... the diffusion of the particles even though fired singly indicate that the movement (and phantom interaction) of the particles was pre-ordained.
Makes life interesting ... don't ya think ....
Divemaster
03-15-2013, 00:04
A Higgs Boson was the guy in charge of one of those plywood landing craft in Dubya Dubya Eye Eye. Ain't none of you brainiacs figger'd that out?
As for the last three pages of posts, well y'all must be on some of that Absinthe stuff. Not the "safe" U.S. version, but that real European shit.
I swear.
UWOA (RIP)
03-15-2013, 00:10
A Higgs Boson was the guy in charge of one of those plywood landing craft in Dubya Dubya Eye Eye. Ain't none of you brainiacs figger'd that out?
As for the last three pages of posts, well y'all must be on some of that Absinthe stuff. Not the "safe" U.S. version, but that real European shit.
I swear.
Sure nuf! You gotta be right ... musta been the O2 or the Nitrogen ... can't tell which ... LOL!!!!
Trapper John
03-15-2013, 06:15
A Higgs Boson was the guy in charge of one of those plywood landing craft in Dubya Dubya Eye Eye. Ain't none of you brainiacs figger'd that out?
As for the last three pages of posts, well y'all must be on some of that Absinthe stuff. Not the "safe" U.S. version, but that real European shit.
I swear.
Love the Boson comment :D Spoken like a true Squid:p
As to Absinthe - I wish. Just the inner Sheldon - Bazinga:D
Trapper John
03-15-2013, 06:17
As to Hawking ... I think he's gone over to the 'brane' side .... LOL!
Good one! :D
But... But... Nobody mentioned Heisenberg :(
Trapper John
03-15-2013, 06:39
Doesn't make any difference if you apply the conclusion of the Copenhagen experiment ... the diffusion of the particles even though fired singly indicate that the movement (and phantom interaction) of the particles was pre-ordained.
Makes life interesting ... don't ya think ....
Pre-ordained? Naah, nothing is pre-ordained. All the Copenhagen experiment did was try to discount the quantum mechanic view of subatomic particles (wave-particle duality) and invoked a collapse of the wave function. A special condition invoked to account for the observation, IMO. Schrodinger's mental experiment (Schrodinger's cat) illustrated the problem nicely. The observer dependence argument was poppy-cock too, IMO. If I look at a tree and then turnaround so I don't see the tree, does it cease to exist? Turn your back on someone shooting at you and find out :D I think Heisenberg, summarized the problem correctly. The act of measuring (observing) altered the system and therefore the outcome such that probability could be applied. This is a fundamental truism in scientific experimentation and a question I always keep uppermost in my mind when interpreting an experimental result with a living cell.
Trapper John
03-15-2013, 08:23
Well, ok, since you mentioned, and since Trapper's got me the in the mood for this fancy derivation stuff...
http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0610121.pdf
Cool:cool: Much simpler than the derivations we came up with in grad school. I think I still have mine. I need to look for it. I am absolutely certain it was not in 28 steps though. Probably more like 50-75 steps. I do recall spending the better part of a week on the derivation too.
For what it's worth, and as an interesting side note, Niels Bohr, often considered the father of modern chemistry, and a principle in these debates of that era, is my chemistry great grandfather. He trained Henry Rappaport, who trained Jon Bordner, who trained me. It amazes me sometimes just how young this discipline really is.
Trapper John
03-15-2013, 08:24
But... But... Nobody mentioned Heisenberg :(
See post #39 ;)
Trapper John
03-15-2013, 09:18
If it pans out, will this finally resolve Feynman's contention with String Theory about not providing consistent predictions at accessable energy scales?:confused:
JMO, I always like to look for the simplest explanation (Ockham's Razor). String theory and membranes are way too complicated for cosmological explanations. Nature, IMO, always conserves energy and finds the simplest path that is governed by fundamental laws. Us humans just have not understood these laws in their entirety yet and we tend to apply exceptions and special conditions to make our explanations fit the available data.
Feynman has an SF mentality, IMO. At one point he is reported to have said to his colleagues during a particularly contentious debate, "Shut up and get back to calculating!":D I like that!:lifter
longrange1947
03-15-2013, 09:45
You guys are making my brain hurt. I have not been into this stuff this deep since the 60s and then it was considered radical theory. :munchin :D
UWOA (RIP)
03-15-2013, 10:27
Pre-ordained? Naah, nothing is pre-ordained. All the Copenhagen experiment did was try to discount the quantum mechanic view of subatomic particles (wave-particle duality) and invoked a collapse of the wave function. A special condition invoked to account for the observation, IMO. Schrodinger's mental experiment (Schrodinger's cat) illustrated the problem nicely. The observer dependence argument was poppy-cock too, IMO. If I look at a tree and then turnaround so I don't see the tree, does it cease to exist? Turn your back on someone shooting at you and find out :D I think Heisenberg, summarized the problem correctly. The act of measuring (observing) altered the system and therefore the outcome such that probability could be applied. This is a fundamental truism in scientific experimentation and a question I always keep uppermost in my mind when interpreting an experimental result with a living cell.
I'll keep that in mind concerning the experiment we're living .... it's a fundamental truism I'm wont to overlook sometimes ... thanks!
You guys are making my brain hurt. I have not been into this stuff this deep since the 60s and then it was considered radical theory. :munchin :D
At least it's just your brain hurting.
This is me reading this thread .....
At least it's just your brain hurting.
This is me reading this thread .....
Haha! That's exactly how I felt when I first met Schrodinger's cat.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2000/jul/05/schrodingers-cat-comes-into-view
Guymullins
04-04-2013, 05:00
I was presented with the opportunity of a lifetime at the funeral service of the 13 South African Paratroopers who lost their lives in the CAR. A few of us were standing around, waiting for kickoff, when a bearded fellow in a very smart white uniform walked up to us and introduced himself. I am at sea with high rank insignia at the best of times, but the Navy is a closed book to me. This quietly spoken gentleman had enough gold braid on him to pay off the national debt, so it was clear he was someone quite important. As I shook his hand, I noticed his nameplate on his chest which said Higgs. I couldnt help myself, and just had to ask,"Are you the famous Higgs Bosun everyone is looking for?" I got a somewhat puzzled smile and denial as he walked off. I have just consulted Google and Wiki tells me he is Chief of Naval Staff , Robert Higgs and he is not a Bosun but a Rear Admiral.
Trapper John
04-04-2013, 05:06
I was presented with the opportunity of a lifetime at the funeral service of the 13 South African Paratroopers who lost their lives in the CAR. A few of us were standing around, waiting for kickoff, when a bearded fellow in a very smart white uniform walked up to us and introduced himself. I am at sea with high rank insignia at the best of times, but the Navy is a closed book to me. This quietly spoken gentleman had enough gold braid on him to pay off the national debt, so it was clear he was someone quite important. As I shook his hand, I noticed his nameplate on his chest which said Higgs. I couldnt help myself, and just had to ask,"Are you the famous Higgs Bosun everyone is looking for?" I got a somewhat puzzled smile and denial as he walked off. I have just consulted Google and Wiki tells me he is Chief of Naval Staff , Robert Higgs and he is not a Bosun but a Rear Admiral.
LMAO, Bro :D Good one - a chance of a lifetime. Well played. :lifter