Physicists say they have found a Higgs boson

[Vito Corleone]

[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif]Physicists say they have found a Higgs boson
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Sans-serif] GENEVA (AP) - The search is all but over for a subatomic particle that is a crucial building block of the universe.
Physicists announced Thursday they believe they have discovered the subatomic particle predicted nearly a half-century ago, which will go a long way toward explaining what gives electrons and all matter in the universe size and shape.


The elusive particle, called a Higgs boson, was predicted in 1964 to help fill in our understanding of the creation of the universe, which many theorize occurred in a massive explosion known as the Big Bang. The particle was named for Peter Higgs, one of the physicists who proposed its existence, but it later became popularly known as the "God particle."


The discovery would be a strong contender for the Nobel Prize. Last July, scientists at the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, announced finding a particle they described as Higgs-like, but they stopped short of saying conclusively that it was the same particle or was some version of it.


Scientists have now finished going through the entire set of data.


"The preliminary results with the full 2012 data set are magnificent and to me it is clear that we are dealing with a Higgs boson, though we still have a long way to go to know what kind of Higgs boson it is," said Joe Incandela, a physicist who heads one of the two main teams at CERN, each involving several thousand scientists.


Whether or not it is a Higgs boson is demonstrated by how it interacts with other particles and its quantum properties, CERN said in the statement. After checking, scientists said the data "strongly indicates that it is a Higgs boson."
[/FONT]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130314/DA50T1382.html

So, does this mean I'll see Warp Drive sometime before I die? I certainly hope so...

 

[Crazy Eddie]

No, it means CERN will be getting another grant and somebody you've never heard of will be getting a Nobel Prize.

 

[sojourner]

I'll wait till they find The Higgs Boson.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

No, it means CERN will be getting another grant and somebody you've never heard of will be getting a Nobel Prize.

What, no warp drive and no nothing? Can't we get at least a teleportation machine, a time machine or a pony?

 

[gturner]

It should more properly say that the scientists had found a Higg's boson, because they have no idea where that one is at anymore. We pay them billions to find a particle and they don't even bother to keep track of it, or even slap an asset tag on it so they can keep it in inventory. Instead of chasing after the origin of mass, maybe they should hunt for the particle that gives objects expense.

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Well, maybe warp drive is a long way away still, but maybe one practical application of the Higgs Field might be artificial gravity and inertial dampeners.
The higgs field is responsible for making us not fly at constant lightspeed after all.

 

[larryman]

So, does this mean I'll see Warp Drive sometime before I die? I certainly hope so...

No Warp Drive from a Higgs boson. But reducing ship-mass (by blocking the action of the Higgs particle) may allow development of these shuttles, for 'near' light-speed travel...

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I am no biologist, but I have a feeling your body won't survive for a long time with almost no mass. One neutron additional in water will kill you, totally reducing your mass sounds pretty gory.

 

[larryman]

^ Perhaps... just balance the Higgs particle blocking, against the Relativity mass increasing from speed. So your body maintains a same mass - even at near light-speed.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

I am no biologist, but I have a feeling your body won't survive for a long time with almost no mass. One neutron additional in water will kill you, totally reducing your mass sounds pretty gory.

Yeah, my thoughts as well. From http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2135/is-heavy-water-dangerous:

Despite the fact the light water and heavy water are chemically identical, heavy water is mildly toxic. How can this be? Since heavy water is heavier than normal water, the speed of chemical reactions involving it is altered somewhat, as is the strength of some types of bonds it forms. This affects certain cellular processes, notably mitosis, or cell division, due to the difference in binding energy in the hydrogen bonds needed to make certain proteins. Mouse studies have shown that drinking only heavy water along with normal feed eventually causes degeneration of tissues that need to replenish themselves frequently, and leads to cumulative damage from injuries that don't heal as quickly. One study likens the effects to those suffered by chemotherapy patients. Heavy water toxicity manifests itself when about 50% of the water in the body has been replaced by D2O. Prolonged heavy water consumption can cause death.

Any force exerted on a zero rest mass particle would cause it to instantly accelerate to the speed of light. You'd probably disintegrate before you even felt sick.

 

[Edit_XYZ]

I am no biologist, but I have a feeling your body won't survive for a long time with almost no mass. One neutron additional in water will kill you, totally reducing your mass sounds pretty gory.

Yeah, my thoughts as well. From http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2135/is-heavy-water-dangerous:

Despite the fact the light water and heavy water are chemically identical, heavy water is mildly toxic. How can this be? Since heavy water is heavier than normal water, the speed of chemical reactions involving it is altered somewhat, as is the strength of some types of bonds it forms. This affects certain cellular processes, notably mitosis, or cell division, due to the difference in binding energy in the hydrogen bonds needed to make certain proteins. Mouse studies have shown that drinking only heavy water along with normal feed eventually causes degeneration of tissues that need to replenish themselves frequently, and leads to cumulative damage from injuries that don't heal as quickly. One study likens the effects to those suffered by chemotherapy patients. Heavy water toxicity manifests itself when about 50% of the water in the body has been replaced by D2O. Prolonged heavy water consumption can cause death.

Any force exerted on a zero rest mass particle would cause it to instantly accelerate to the speed of light. You'd probably disintegrate before you even felt sick.

Not if you have no particle with mass in your body (you will jump to lightspeed in one piece). Or if your mass is small, but non-zero (admittedly, this would decrease significantly the potential of the technology).

As for the mass of chemical elements - what matters is the relative mass of the interacting particles.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Lowering the rest mass increases atomic size. The radius of an atom is inversely proportional to the electron rest mass m, so the radius of atoms (R) would tend to infinity as m -> 0. Intermolecular (London) forces are roughly proportional to the ionization energy I over R^6, and as I is inversely proportional to R, this force would also quickly go to zero as 1/R^7.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Now that they've found the Force we need to get to work on the midichlorians.

 

[gturner]

Not to mention that when you try to slap yourself in the forehead because you just realized a serious problem with being massless, your arm mass = 0 and bicep force is definitely not zero,so arm acceleration tends to infinity and something really bad is going to happen to your head.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Furthermore, as ionization potential is proportional to electron rest mass (which is where I got the 1/R from in my previous post), all the atoms in your body would soon be ionized by lower energy photons until even infra-red radiation from your own body or your surroundings turns you into a rapidly dispersing ionic plasma.

 

[Edit_XYZ]

Lowering the rest mass increases atomic size. The radius of an atom is inversely proportional to the electron rest mass m, so the radius of atoms (R) would tend to infinity as m -> 0. Intermolecular (London) forces are roughly proportional to the ionization energy I over R^6, and as I is inversely proportional to R, this force would also quickly go to zero as 1/R^7.

Except you won't have 0 mass.
A soon as you lower your mass to 0, you'll be flying at lightspeed, gaining relativistic mass.

'The radius of an atom is inversely proportional to the electron rest mass m, so the radius of atoms (R) would tend to infinity as m -> 0' - due to the uncertainty principle, not due to mass attraction.
As to your wavefunction, the uncertainty principle allows, due to your relativistic mass, for it to be 'squished up' in a region of space not much larger than the one you now occupy (photons don't occupy infinite space for the same reason).

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

The part about mass attraction is a straw-man argument that you have introduced. The rest of your argument is a mish-mash of concepts from relativistic and quantum physics.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Lowering the rest mass increases atomic size. The radius of an atom is inversely proportional to the electron rest mass m, so the radius of atoms (R) would tend to infinity as m -> 0. Intermolecular (London) forces are roughly proportional to the ionization energy I over R^6, and as I is inversely proportional to R, this force would also quickly go to zero as 1/R^7.

Furthermore, as ionization potential is proportional to electron rest mass (which is where I got the 1/R from in my previous post), all the atoms in your body would soon be ionized by lower energy photons until even infra-red radiation from your own body or your surroundings turns you into a rapidly dispersing ionic plasma.

That's a neat discussion here.

I'll chime in that, while there's no reason to doubt any of that, the idea that the Bohr radius is inversely proportional to electron mass has experimental support from the study of muonic hydrogen.

 

[Edit_XYZ]

The part about mass attraction is a straw-man argument that you have introduced. The rest of your argument is a mish-mash of concepts from relativistic and quantum physics.

If you knew that the relation between electron mass and atomic radius is due to the uncertainty principle, you sure didn't show it in your previous posts, Astro.

And the rest of my argument is correct:
Δx·Δp ≥ ħ/2
Δx=atomic radius r
Δp=Δv·m
And the electron's mass is tiny to begin with.

r ≥ (ħ/2)/(Δv·m)
In words - the electron's mass can be as small as you wish (and rest or relativistic - it doesn't matter); if it's not 0, the wavefunction of the atom will be squished in a volume of space not much larger than the one it usually occupies.