Re: Detecting the Higgs Bosun...

On Sep 6, 6:05 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 5, 9:47 pm, Rick <rick_so...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



The Higgs field has been detected by experiments with Bose Einstein
condensate, when an atom was drained of its energy, there was a small
slap, a bit of momentum, as the skin of the nucleus, hit the Higgs
field, and then flat lined.
But thats an indirect intuitive proof, and so to detect a Higgs Boson,
(a single bubble of quantum foam) you need to recognize what it is.
And that is a bubble. So to create one, you need an explosive vacuum.

So you need to change your target, and adapt it to work in reverse.

How you might do this, is to make a diamond, as flawless as possible,
and drill a hole through it, and then drill another hole,coming in at
11 o'clock, bisecting the first hole and going into the diamond to the
right and down, towards 5 o'clock, but not through the substance.

Then plug the hole to the left of the first tube.

So now when you fire through that first hole, you will create a
vacuum, in the chamber to the right.
Then take a ruby laser, and use that as a detector shining it through
that small tube area.

As you fire through the first hole, you will first see a gap, the
laser will appear to not shine for a brief instant at all, because the
hole will be vacant and hence no medium for the laser to shine
through. Then immediately after that, you will see the creation of the
Higgs Boson.
And depending on how sensitive your detector, you will see the bubble
growing, and the laser shifting as it does.

Then immediately after that, the bubbles will interact with each
other. They will collide and create virtual particles, blue shifted
COBE type background radiation.

Then the Higgs Boson will not disappear, because it is stable.

Why it is stable is because what is inside of that tiny bubble, has no
pressure.

It is a perfect vacuum. The only pressure comes from the big suck.

Since the inflationary period of the formation of the universe, it has
all been big suck.
You can't sustain a perfect vacuum, because quantum foam will fill
that void, but once a foam bubble or Higgs Bosun is formed, it takes a
supermassive black hole supernova, to squish it.
It take a pressure that can overcome the big suck.
So its easy to make, because you are just going in the direction of
the big suck, but almost impossible to unmake, because then you are
going in the opposite direction of the big suck.
So that is what the standard model predicts should happen, if you
consider that the Higgs Field, is the quantum foam.

So what the bubbles form in, is a superfluid. And that is the skin of
the nucleus, and the skin also of the quantum foam.

So it has no resistance to uniform motion, but acceleration causes a
type of friction between the foam itself.
And it is compressible and it flows in very large rivers, large enough
for galaxies to flow in it, and also it flows in small turbulences as
well right down to the vortices you see in a rotating superfluid.

There is plenty of indirect proof of the Higgs Field, but to isolate
one bubble, when it is Plank Length in diameter, is a tall order.

So the only way to really detect it is indirectly, and you can do it
in several stages, first set up your experiment, see the results and
fine tune it, until you get enough information to be able to detect
the Higgs Field, and then the Higgs Boson in a small mass quantity.

If you want to actually try to measure the mass of a Higgs Bosun, that
would be very difficult to do with this set up.

You can do it hypothetically though, but making some simple
assumptions.

Firstly, you have to consider that thanks to the Heisenberg
Uncertainty Principle, you cannot measure anything truly exact.

So all experimental values are not exact. They are approximations.

But since a single Higgs Boson is so tiny, you need exact quantities
to be able to measure it.

So using the brute force method, you adjust e, you adjust G and you
adjust the radius of the electron shell in Hydrogen, and you adjust
the diameter of the H nucleus and you fiddle with those numbers until,
when you calculate, the weight of an atom, using Newtonian
methodology, the numbers are exact across the table of elements, the
stable elements.

No remainder, just whole numbers.

And Avagrado's number will be wrong as well and so you will come up
with a new Avagrados umber.

And you are doing this because you are assuming that there does exist
a proper exact relationship between these fundamental principles.

And there is. And it can be done. I did it myself 15 or so years ago.
And so then you could tell how many atoms were in a pure substance.

In one pound or one ton, you could tell exactly how many atoms would
be in that quantity of that element, and no matter how you tested it,
you always had one whole number, because there are no half atoms.

No matter what weight of that substance, the number of atoms was
always an exact whole number.

So that was the proof, that I had actually arrived at the GUT, and I
sent a letter to M.I.T. with those values, and basically they freaked
and out came Pons and Fleishman.and the held an emergency press
conference and massive attempts to debunk them followed because of
course what I had sent M.I.T. proved a lot of the standard model was
wrong.

So they went into damage control mode around the globe.

But those values do exist, and if you are persistent you can work them
out yourself,
by assuming that a wave with the force of G, leaves the H nucleus
radius, and travels at c, to the electron shell radius, and when that
spherical wave arrives there, it has an energy of e.

So then f=ma, e=hv, and etc and all you do is to look at those simple
equations and say, well which of those is the mass, and which is the
energy and which is the velocity or acceleration?
And then you just use those same formulas ignoring what you were
taught, using f=ma to arrive at the mass of the atom, in its rest
state.
So then ok, now you want to be able to use the area, of the nucleus,
and say well ok, so I am pretty sure i have the proper area of the
nucleus, now how many bubbles of Plank Length diameter, can I fit
inside that area. Then divide the atomic mass by that number and you
have the mass of the Higgs Bosun.

I also posted those numbers in Fidonet physics forum, in he late 80's
early nineties and made a number of threads showing the whole
enchilada.

And it was adopted immediately by the physics community because it was
so obviously correct.
But no one said much about it, because of course it would cause world
wide embarrassment to the physics community. So over the years things
were just adjusted and brought into line with reality such that now
very little remains unknown, but detecting a Higgs Bosun, as I say
requires special consideration, and creating one, would be by
explosive vacuum, not collision.
Immediately after those figures were worked out, people were writing
with atoms on the surface of a substance, because they had the proper
values to be able to do that, it was that accurate.
And then shortly after that Bose Einstein condensate was created in
the lab and cold fusion was born, and zero point energy and a host of
other wonders.

----------------
one must well rub his eyes and open hem again
in order to believe his eyes
that sane responsible people can let under their fingers
such a post as the above post !!!

the new intersting thing that LHC might find is
unexplained circular movements
of still unknown basic particles
no need for diamods and no need todrill them
at the 11 hour direction and theen the 5 o clock angle
and to see blowing ** vacum ** bubbles
that once you see them and than not see them
etc etc
i cant believe i saw it here !!!

ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------------------

I don't think they will find anything, and listening to them, they
don't think they will find anything either. In fact, their great hope
along with everyone else is that the standard model will die in a
fiery crash.

Here is a sample of the general public's opinion of high energy
physics...

I especially like this comment...
"
"The proton absorbs a photon and emits two morons, a lepton, a boson,
and a boson's mate. Why did I ever take high-energy physics?"

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/09/04/1239203
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Temperature and radiation absorption
    ... > energy, kinetic energy... ... at least a visible one never hits a nucleus. ... A nucleus is in the order of 1 fm, while an Atom is in ... atom can pick a visible photon up. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Electron Bounce Model
    ... Atom and its interactions with the electron, ... the positive charge in the nucleus. ... At all energy levels other than the ones which would ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: Electron Bounce Model
    ... Atom and its interactions with the electron, ... the positive charge in the nucleus. ... At all energy levels other than the ones which would ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: Question about quarks.
    ... Is there a 'binding' energy in hadrons, ... binding energy in the nucleus and between a nucleus and an atom that is ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Brian Greenes Higgs Ocean and its implications for Haisch, Puthoff, Rueda ZPE inertia model
    ... "The Higgs Ocean and the Origin of Mass ... Higgs Ocean = Vacuum Coherence. ... Both dark energy and dark matter emerge as ripples in the Higgs Field. ... Total Observable Random Zero Point Energy Density = (Bare Zero Point ...
    (sci.math)