"God particle" discovered?

[eastsideman09]

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-...ay-scientists/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model

Interesting to say the least, I think. I'd love to see what happens as a result of this discovery, provided it's not a load of crap.

[Jerry DB]

thank god particle the large hadron collide wasn't a waste haha, very interesting stuff I am very excited about what we will discover in my lifetime

[Renevatia]

Kind of skeptic about their standard model to begin with. Not even sure how they justify that this is the only last particle they needed to complete the full set of fundamental interaction.
GJ nonetheless for being able to find something within their criteria. Is there any remote guess of its viable application though?

[Reincarnate]

They've already had it found for a while -- it's just a matter of accumulating more and more data so that they can be confident of their results to the 5 sigma level. Typically, trends empirically start becoming pretty clear even way back at the 3/3.5 sigma level, but you have to really choke down the datapipe to get enough confidence that your result is very, very, very unlikely to be the result of pure chance.

[FFR4EVA_00]

Originally Posted by Renevatia

GJ nonetheless for being able to find something within their criteria. Is there any remote guess of its viable application though?

1. they don't have to build any more colliders
2. 50s-era physics finally dies (the 50s are when sub atomic particle madness really kicked off)

[Renevatia]

Originally Posted by FFR4EVA_00

1. they don't have to build any more colliders
2. 50s-era physics finally dies (the 50s are when sub atomic particle madness really kicked off)

touche,
but I thought the colliders are pretty cool though, visually.

[Spenner]

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...-leaked-video/

[A2P]

for the people that don't exactly get why this is significant (don't worry, I didnt get it until now either),

It's the particle scientists theorize to be responsible for the mass of all things. So basically, this is a bigger discovery than the theory of relativity.

[Ground_Breaker]

Begin regurgitation of what I learned from BBC Horizon over the last couple of days:

I thought the particle proved (I use that world lightly, because I'm sure that "vindicates the theory of" is a better phrase) the existence of the Higgs field. The field is theorized as the thing that gives particles their mass.

If I'm not mistaken, the Higgs field is also theorized to explain why the universe is not perfectly symmetrical in terms of matter and anti-matter. When matter and anti-matter passed through the Higgs field the instant after the big bang, it's theorized that the Higgs field gave the particles different masses, which is why you see way more matter in the universe than anti-matter.

[j-rodd123]

Originally Posted by Ground_Breaker

Begin regurgitation of what I learned from BBC Horizon over the last couple of days:

I thought the particle proved (I use that world lightly, because I'm sure that "vindicates the theory of" is a better phrase) the existence of the Higgs field. The field is theorized as the thing that gives particles their mass.

If I'm not mistaken, the Higgs field is also theorized to explain why the universe is not perfectly symmetrical in terms of matter and anti-matter. When matter and anti-matter passed through the Higgs field the instant after the big bang, it's theorized that the Higgs field gave the particles different masses, which is why you see way more matter in the universe than anti-matter.

yep, the theory is that mass is generated when particles move through/interact with the higgs field, and lose speed/gain mass because of it.

[who_cares973]

Originally Posted by j-rodd123

and lose speed/gain mass because of it.

kinda like ur mom when she passes through the kitchen h0h0

[j-rodd123]

Originally Posted by who_cares973

kinda like ur mom when she passes through the kitchen h0h0

haha exactly

[Findarian]

Originally Posted by Renevatia

Is there any remote guess of its viable application though?

If you have one, let me know so we can get rich. lol

EDIT: question..

Does that mean light doesn't intereact with the higgs field? >no mass

[Mike Weedmark]

Originally Posted by who_cares973

kinda like ur mom when she passes through the kitchen h0h0

You are fast becoming my favourite member of FFR, and I'm not ashamed to say it.

[nois-or-e]

[Choofers]

I just got back from a great 4th of July and now I'm dead.

[Ground_Breaker]

Originally Posted by Findarian

Does that mean light doesn't intereact with the higgs field? >no mass

Right. Particles with no mass do not interact with the Higgs field.

[Reincarnate]

What makes this discovery so cool is that it basically confirms that current theory is on the right track. It would have been interesting, too, if they hadn't found anything. It'd be akin to the Michelson-Morley experiment that ruled out the luminiferous aether and gave rise to a totally new realm of physics.

[u84]

Originally Posted by Ground_Breaker

Right. Particles with no mass do not interact with the Higgs field.

Well, close, but backwards. To elaborate, photons, which are basically light, are unaffected by the Higgs field and, therefore, have no mass. In short, the Higgs field is supposed to be what gives particles mass, so light, being unaffected by this field, has no mass.

[sanzath]

Originally Posted by u84

Well, close, but backwards. To elaborate, photons, which are basically light, are unaffected by the Higgs field and, therefore, have no mass. In short, the Higgs field is supposed to be what gives particles mass, so light, being unaffected by this field, has no mass.

I always figured photons were *almost* massless, which is why they were still noticeably affected by extremely large masses (read: black holes), hence why their trajectory could be curved, creating the impression of a black hole.. But if they're completely massless, being unaffected by the Higgs field, how come they're affected by gravity?