A particle accelerator, capable of reproducing conditions close to those that prevailed seconds after the big bang, will try to discover the existence of a certain particle that gave the other particles mass and thus made the universe possible
The father of the theoretical subatomic particle known as the "God particle" said he is almost convinced that its existence will be confirmed next year in a race between huge research centers in the US and Europe. British physicist Peter Higgs, who predicted more than 40 years ago the existence of the particle that gives matter mass, visited the new accelerator in Geneva last week. Higgs said he is encouraged by what he has seen and predicts that the same theoretical particle, known as the Higgs boson, will be seen soon.
The Large Hadron Collider, whose construction began in 2003 with a budget of about 2 billion dollars, is expected to start operating in June at the European Laboratory for Particle Physics better known as CERN. It will probably take a few more months before hundreds of scientists from all over the world can slam protons into each other to study their composition.
Higgs said this week that the particle may also be discovered at the competing laboratory, the Fermi National Accelerator outside Chicago, where the largest particle accelerator currently operates - the Tevatron. The tevatron has enough energy to crack the protons and get the bosons out of them, Higgs said. It's just a data analysis problem that prevents us from quickly knowing what's hidden inside the data.
The new accelerator at CERN is installed in a ring tunnel about 30 kilometers long under the French-Swiss border. In his ability to reproduce the rapidly changing conditions in the universe a fraction of a second after the big bang. These experiments will be the closest thing scientists can produce to the theoretical conditions that prevailed after the Big Bang. The hope is that the new equipment will allow them to study particles and forces that have so far not been observed.
Nobel laureate Leon Lederman is the one who called the Higgs boson the name of the divine particle because he believed that its discovery would help people understand the mind of God, that is, better understand how the world was created. Higgs hopes to have his theory confirmed by his eightieth birthday in May 2009.
Higgs predicted the existence of the boson when he was working at the University of Edinburgh to try to explain how atoms and objects made up of atoms have weight. "Without the particles, the basic model of physics - the standard model - is missing an important component because it fails to explain how subatomic particles such as quarks and electrons have mass."
The Higgs theory is that the boson creates a field through which other particles pass. The particles meet with difficulty penetrating through the field and they accumulate mass. Those that penetrated the field more easily are lighter. Higgs said he would be upset if these particles were not found because he could not imagine anything else that could explain how the particles got mass.
25 תגובות
Interesting article, thank you.
Ori:
There is no known law that says observing an experiment will change its results and therefore the tower you built collapses.
As a general rule - if you believe that only our observation of reality creates it, then the reality we observe is the one that should interest us (because one that we do not observe cannot affect us because "being affected" is a special case of "observing") so in any case - even if we adopt Your proposal regarding our influence on reality (a proposal that is not acceptable to the scientific community), the money was invested wisely.
a question:
Can the test under laboratory conditions and the observation of the researcher incite the results of the test?
In the simple experiment with the light we saw that it was!
If so, I really don't understand why 2 billion was wasted,
It is clear to everyone that the researchers will change the results of the experiment just by observing the experiment!!
And what is certain is that it will be effective (the bias) in small particles!!!
By the way, on the same website, "Hidan" has an article in the astrophysics section about the big discovery that claims that time was before the big bang and our universe was created from the collapse of earlier universes whose collapse created an effect that caused the big bang and the formation of our universe, so the Higgs boson particle is unnecessary. There is a source of mass - the universes before the bang. This contradicts the claim that the universe was "created" with the big bang. In my humble opinion, this means that time is infinite, meaning "eternity" in which universes rise and fall. I would like to summarize the paradox I ran into:
1. Time is "eternity" - infinite
2. The universes are a finite size that alternately expands and collapses.
3. If there were no universes, "eternity" would have no meaning, i.e. it would be "nothing".
4. Since the array of universes is of finite size in infinite space and time, this process must have a beginning.
We're back to the starting point: what caused the formation of the "universal" "is" in eternal time." If anyone can help me get out of the conceptual "loop" I've fallen into, I'd be happy to receive their help. Maybe it will also dissuade scientists from looking for Higgs boson Yoram
Out of nowhere, the particle that divides masses suddenly appeared. I'm not a religious person, but this rush of concepts will lead me to search for God who "one day wants to produce such a smart particle". It's like creating from nothing. This is a false image because either there was always "there" and the "nothing" is absurd or some "there" created the particle and it is not clear how the creator "there" emerged from some kind of "nothing". In my opinion, it is better to stop messing with this confusion, (as Gadel "proved" that it is impossible to prove with a finite number of basic assumptions - i.e.: "axioms" all the sentences in the world) and it is better to deal with acute issues directly in global warming.
To my people:
Thanks for the explanation - albeit a bit late.
I just hope the physicists there know what they're doing, otherwise it could be unpleasant.
The lectures you are talking about sound interesting but I will postpone it after my first degree...
Yehuda, I refrain from expressing my opinion on particles such as Groyton and Higgs, but on the other subject I have a suggestion for you: surpass the level you remember from school (it's not a level, it was exposure to matter), do a little research on the concept of time dilation/length contraction. I promise you that you will be able to understand the construction of the equations for the above phenomena (not formulas, it reminds me of the concept of "miracle formula" and there is no such thing, not in physics), it is not long and does not require special knowledge (if you studied physics in high school it is more than enough) .
These two phenomena of time extension and length contraction completely contradict our common sense. Everyday logic. And in everyday life there are no things that move at speeds close to the speed of light. The so-called, phenomena that were previously "outside our measurement range"...
In any case, here you have something that contradicts the logic we know, and also feels screwed up, if we don't know where it came from. But in the end, his explanation fits well with logic, and the consequences that can currently be measured are not disappointing.
To Eyal and Michael
Lest you have any doubt, in school I knew how to act according to the formulas of the theory of relativity and get the most points in the tests.
It doesn't change at all the fact that something seems messed up to me.
I will continue to look for a logical explanation for natural phenomena, and I will stop looking only if I find proof that a logical explanation for a certain phenomenon is not possible.
Particles that I don't see any logic in are the Higgs and Groyton. Therefore unlike my predecessors, I don't think they will be found in the meaning given to them. A waste of money.
But other than that... good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
My guess is the particle will turn out as Higgs predicted.
Yehuda:
The claim that you are still looking for the logic implies that you are special about it, and even if you are currently saying that this is not what you meant, I have no doubt that at the time of writing the things, that is what you wanted to say. Maybe you didn't think about the consequences but that's the meaning of things.
If you had paid attention to response number 10, you would have saved the section on Wikipedia because, as mentioned, I found the quote (by the way, I tried Google before I wrote the things and it didn't find it on Wikipedia, but I did find it elsewhere. I found it on Wikipedia later when I was looking for something else).
I invite you to look for material on the Higgs particle and read it, but in my opinion you need to read a lot more material first to understand what is written. I don't write this out of disdain - it's just that everyone needs to learn a lot before they can handle this material.
Shalom Yehuda.
As a regular "customer" of the website, I watch the comments and occasionally comment. From your comments and as you wrote here ("I am looking for a logical explanation for things...a logic that is familiar to us") I understand that you are looking for explanations for "physical" phenomena, which "common sense" is ready to accept.
I did not come across your views regarding Einstein's famous and accepted theory of relativity. So I wonder, do you also disapprove of his teachings? Because logic, as we as humans know, does not exist there. (And here it might be appropriate to introduce a new word... intuition.. When you say an explanation according to "logic that is familiar to us" you mean to say that an explanation for some phenomenon is intuitive. But that does not mean that a different and non-intuitive explanation does not make sense at all..)
From the fundamental problems of the elementary particle:
He will never be found where he is looked for, among other things due to human flaws, which are fixed, and from time to time are misleading; Like the size of the universe for example, which is claimed according to the big bang theory, as of our time it is 13,7 (or 14,7 billion light years, that is not what is important for this matter), without calculating and taking into account the aforementioned duration, that the first parts of the matter that was emitted from the time of the explosion, passed in the above time, a distance more than double (due to the acceleration of expansion, which is characteristic of this theory).
Michael, Michael, dear Michael
Where did you see me pretending to be the only one?
Where, God forbid, did you see a slur in you, or in the scientists?
I don't understand how you searched for the quote on Wikipedia. How about searching for the quote as it appears in my response, on Google. They will already refer you to Wikipedia. I tried and it works.
Dear Michael, sometimes it's hard for you.
But apart from that, in our eyes:
Glad the sentence I quoted makes sense. And equally happy that you are also a devotee of logic, and looking for it.
You say that the Higgs particle should give a rest mass and when we talk about effective mass we don't talk about mass but about energy that effectively has the same effect as mass.
What is meant?, that every mass will only be mass if it contains the Higgs particle?
And energy that is equivalent to mass should also contain the Higgs particle?
I hope you won't be angry if I still don't understand what the case is with this particle.
And to think that billions are invested in the search for the aforementioned particle?
I think I'll try to see what Google has to say about it.
Have a good weekend to you and all commenters.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda - one more thing:
You are asking if you should understand that the photon is only a particle when it is moving.
Why are you asking this?
Anyone claimed this?
You ask this for one reason and that is what you said in your first response and that for you a particle is always associated with mass. The whole discussion here developed because this link you are making is not correct and to rely on it in this debate is simply assuming the desired.
I already found the quote on Wikipedia
Yehuda:
Don't pretend to be the only one looking for reason.
I suppose you know that I am looking for him just as much as you and the disdain implied by your words towards and towards all scientists is not in place.
The sentence you quoted makes sense. You just have to understand it (by the way, I didn't find it on Wikipedia).
The Higgs particle is supposed to give rest mass and when we talk about effective mass we don't talk about mass but about energy that effectively has the same effect as mass.
Lauren,
I am not a physicist and I am far from understanding the field
But I once heard a lecture about particle accelerators and there it was said that in them a situation can definitely arise that the intensity of the collision of two particles, they will come so close to each other in the same second particle that their mass, in relation to the volume, will correspond to the conditions of a black hole. Thus, according to what I understood, it can be argued that in particle accelerators small black holes are occasionally created that, in a way that is not clear to me, do not continue to grow and swallow our entire sphere. I also recommend the series of lectures that are given to anyone who wants them on the website of the University of Haifa, which provides a number of enlightening data for those interested in physics and astrophysics, who are not physicists.
Shabbat Shalom,
Ami Bachar
Yehuda
As we know, energy and mass are transformed according to relativity. There are many situations in the subatomic realm in which these transformations take place all the time. As you mentioned, light contains mass by virtue of being an energy carrier. The problem with precise definitions of particles and their location is related to the law of uncertainty concerning all energies or energy-carrying particles at a level The above uncertainty does not allow you to grab a particle in your hand and put it in a box.
And so basically the whole particle concept is more a mathematical theory of virtual particles than something tangible. You are right that today's physics is completely abstract and still the power of success of this overall concept cannot be denied.
To Michael
According to Wikipedia:
"Although a photon has no rest mass at all, a cloud of photons moving in space has an effective mass M." End quote.
That is, a photon has no rest mass, but at the speed of light it behaves like something that has mass.
I also have a problem with this explanation. I must understand that the photon is a particle only when it is moving?, so how does this happen?
Listen, my problem is that I'm looking for a logical explanation for things. I know that today logic in science has become "assigned", something that should be qualified when talking about it.
I never tire of looking for the logic in things. It must be remembered that, at least according to Occam's razor, a logical solution will be better than an illogical one. And I am talking here about the logic we are familiar with. That's why I love Pushing Gravity despite all the shortcomings
Apparently I'm too naive and my logical demand doesn't make sense.
Have a quiet weekend.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Does anyone know/understand what exactly is the talk about the chances of a black hole forming in an accelerator. Is this even possible or just idle talk?
I would also appreciate a physical explanation.
This is the type of particle that is formed under very extreme conditions. Those who try to restore the initial state of creation. When the enormous compression of energy is transformed into all those virtual particles. The Higgs boson is the force carrier of the Higgs field. According to the theory, the particle will appear under the experimental conditions if a Higgs field exists. If it does not appear in the range of these energies, it is possible that the physicists will get off the current model and look for another. It is also possible that they will find that more energy is needed, which means an error in the calculation. In this case, they will have to build a larger accelerator, perhaps one that will orbit the earth along the equator.
It seems that they give the particles properties... for example there is probably a particle that gives the electromagnetic force, there is a particle that gives the strong force and another that gives the weak force... They believe that there is a particle called a graviton that creates gravity, and supposedly a particle that gives mass...
A photon has no mass
Excuse my ignorance, but what does this mean:-
"...will try to discover the existence of a certain particle that gave the other particles mass". End quote.
For me, a particle is always linked with the concept of mass.
Have a good weekend.
Sabdarmish Yehuda