Re: Is the search for the Higgs Boson at LHC a fraud?



On 11/30/2011 12:22 AM, franklinhu wrote:
On Nov 29, 6:47 pm, PD<thedraperfam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 29, 6:43 pm, franklinhu<frankli...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Nov 29, 3:19 pm, PD<thedraperfam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 11/29/2011 5:13 PM, franklinhu wrote:

On Nov 29, 3:00 pm, PD<thedraperfam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 11/29/2011 4:52 PM, franklinhu wrote:

On Nov 29, 2:25 pm, PD<thedraperfam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 11/29/2011 4:10 PM, franklinhu wrote:

Well, we know that neutrons are relatively stable within atoms.

YES, and I believe it is worth your time to ask why it is that neutrinos
are much less stable outside of atoms than they are inside of atoms.
Please note that the action implied to follow the asking is some looking
up good reference material, not just dreaming up your own ideas of why
that might be. Running with knitting needles and all.

So you're saying that the Higgs particle could be stable as long as it
is within it's natural enclosed environment (like a neutron) but
massively unstable when taken out of that environment?

No, I didn't say that at all. What I said is that it is useful to find
out WHY neutrons are more stable in some circumstances than in others,
and that the reasons behind this will illuminate why interactions via
short-lived particles don't all just go in an eyeblink.

Now, notice that I also said that the recommended action is to READ UP
on it, rather than just sitting in your armchair and thinking about it
to see what you can work out in your head, because that is like running
with knitting needles. And what did you do?

Well, I suppose that is possible, but that would be a pretty big long-
shot considering that we don't know of any massive particles that
behave in a similar manner.

And what do you think the mass of the W-boson is?

And what about pion exchange in the nucleus, which is part of the
interaction that binds the nucleus together? What is the lifetime of the
pion, and what is its mass?

We're talking something with at least 114
GeV/c^2 mass - over a 100 proton masses here. So just "magically" it
is going to be stable?

You're not listening. I didn't say that the Higgs was stable. I said
that KNOWN particles that are known to be unstable nevertheless mediate
interaction fields, and I cited the W boson as a good example. I did NOT
say that the W boson is stable -- quite the reverse. What I said is that
your assumption that a particle must be stable to account for a field
which you *assume* to be constant and stable -- that's what's wrong.

OK, so then just what is this chain of events that allows the Higgs to
wink in and out of existence like the W? Nothing that I have read
about the Higgs boson has said anything remotely like this.

I have no idea what you have read. Would you like some suggestions for
reading materials that talk about the Higgs boson? I would recommend
that you ask for materials that also explain particle decays in general
and why, for example, neutrons decay differently in an out of the
nucleus, and why the universe didn't stop beta-decaying entirely after
10^-25 seconds. Most of the materials that talk about the Higgs boson
will assume you are familiar with the material that talks about the
other things. There is no shortcut, I'm afraid. Does that disappoint you?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I have read stuff like this:

http://www.hep.lu.se/atlas//thesis/egede/thesis-node1.html

This is a fairly succinct description of the Higgs boson physics, but
I see nothing like the decay chain you are using as an analogy.

You don't see the chapters on Higgs production and Higgs decay
channels?

That IS how the Higgs is created and disappears in an eyeblink, and
produces the effect that it does that way.

I see and understand those diagrams but where does it say that this
produces the Higgs field effect. It says nothing at all about where
the Higgs field plays a role in all this. How can you say this
"produces the effect that it does that way".

It doesn't. You need some of the background material that this author assumes you've read. What else have you read about the Higgs mechanism?

I suggest you back up with something like this:
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Standard-Model-Particle-Physics/dp/0521852498/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1322686416&sr=1-5
Note that this is a graduate text, which assumes that you know a number of things from undergraduate quantum mechanics.


Let's just take the example of beta decay as described in:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W_and_Z_bosons?vm=r

So, a down quark turns into a up quark and a W- particle

The Higgs field created by the Higgs boson is what gives the W- mass.
In order to be a "field" it must surround the W- particle (this is
what we mean by field - isn't it?) at the time of emission and must be
maintained during the entire 10^-25 lifetime of the W-.

No, that is not what is meant by a quantum field. (".... it must surround the W- particle...") You need to stitch together some things here.

The best way to learn about this is to learn the connection between electromagnetic fields and the photon. A photon is the interaction carrier of the electromagnetic field. But a photon does not "surround" an electron for the electron to feel the electromagnetic force. To learn about this, you're going to have to back up even further and learn something about the basics of quantum fields and electromagnetism.


So where did the surrounding field of Higgs bosons come from? If they
have short lifetimes, then they couldn't just be lying around. If they
are anything like the W- particle, then they have to come from the
decay process. So are you saying that the process of converting a down
to an up quark generates not only the W-, but it magically generates a
swarm of Higgs bosons which last only long enough to give mass to the
W- before it decays? If this is so, then why don't we see the decay of
this swarm of Higgs bosons in beta decay?

Again, you have to learn something about branching ratios and the things that limit the rates of processes. You keep asking this question, and I keep telling you to read up on why neutrons take longer to decay in the nucleus than they do on their own. The answer to this question, which you have to READ UP ON, will give you some guidance on why Higgs bosons don't just generate decay products the instant they are created.


I have never ever seen a description of the Higgs boson acting in this
manner. It always appears to be assumed that the Higgs field and the
Higgs boson are omnipresent at the release of the W- particle and
there is no mention of any decay of the Higgs boson or a transient
nature.

You haven't read enough to get the right appearance. You need to READ MORE. You're guessing too much.

It certainly makes a lot more sense if the Higgs boson are
stable and do not need to be spontaneously generated and destroyed,
but that isn't the kind of Higgs boson the LHC can find.




Granted, you do need some of the background material that the author
of the thesis ASSUMES you are familiar with.



I
think you're making up this stuff about how the Higgs particle can do
its job and only exist for a moment. You keep on bringing up the W and
Z particles, but the Higgs is NOT the W and Z particle and can only
provide a rough analogy at best. I need a scientifically based
mechanism for a short-lived Higgs, not just vauge comparisons that
have nothing to do with the Higgs. For example, show me the Feynman
diagram for a Higgs interaction. You just can't point at the W and Z
and say, see, it works like that. It doesn't!

If you are going to show that the LHC Higgs search is not a fraud,
then you will need to show exactly what mechanism that has been
proposed to allow this.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


.