Relation between Higgs boson and graviton

[dimsun]

The graviton (spin 2) and the Higgs boson (spin 0) are both involved in gravity. The Higgs carrying mass, and the graviton carrying the gravitational interaction. On the internet I red that a lot of people wonder if there is a connection.

In electroweak interaction the forces are carried by the photon, the Z and the W's.
In gravity the force is quantum mechanically supposed te be carried by the graviton.

In electroweak interaction the electric and weak charge is transferred by some of the bosons.
The Higgs boson is the carrier of the masscharge and gives the other particles their mass.

If a Higgs boson interacts with a particle then the strength is determined by the restmass of that particle. If a graviton interacts with a particle then the strength is determined by mass and it's momentum forming a four factor. So a Higgs boson will not interact with a photon because a photon has no rest mass. But a graviton will interact with a photon because a photon has momentum.

What is the difference between the Higgs boson and the graviton?

Can the Higgs and the graviton be both part of a bigger model in whicht they are fused into one system, just like the W/Z-bosons and the photon are fused into electroweak interactions?
For example the graviton compared to the photon and the Higgs compared to the W+ and W-.

 

[tom.stoer]

For gravity you can forget about any special role played by ther Higgs. Gravity (classically) couples to the energy-momentum tensor to which ALL fields (including massless fields) contribute; gravity does NOT only couple to mass.

The Higgs field looks special only if you split it into its vacuum expectation value plus its fluctuations (= the Higgs particles). But if you do not split the field it looks like an ordinary scalar field and its contribution to the energy-momentum tensor is by no means special.

 

[Bill_K]

The graviton (spin 2) and the Higgs boson (spin 0) are both involved in gravity. The Higgs carrying mass, and the graviton carrying the gravitational interaction. On the internet I red that a lot of people wonder if there is a connection. The Higgs boson is the carrier of the masscharge and gives the other particles their mass.

dimsum, unfortunately many of the things you read in the media may give this impression. The Higgs boson has nothing to do with gravity. It does not give other particles their mass, and does not 'carry mass', whatever that means. There have been alternative theories of gravity proposed that include both the spin 2 graviton and a spin 0 scalar particle, but they have been shown to be inconsistent with observation. Note that such a scalar must be massless if you want it to have a long range effect, which the Higgs is not. With a mass at least 115 GeV the interaction of the Higgs with the mass of other particles would only have a range of about 10^-16 cm. The purpose of the Higgs is not to 'carry mass' but to break electroweak symmetry.

 

[dimsun]

The Higgs boson has nothing to do with gravity.

Mass belongs to the gravitomagnetic system while the other charges, like electric charge, weak charge and color charge do not. Mass generates gravity, so what do you mean?

It does not give other particles their mass, and does not 'carry mass', whatever that means.

Is it better to say that the higgs boson generates the masses of the vector bosons? Or can you explain what you mean?

There have been alternative theories of gravity proposed that include both the spin 2 graviton and a spin 0 scalar particle, but they have been shown to be inconsistent with observation. Note that such a scalar must be massless if you want it to have a long range effect, which the Higgs is not.

So there are others speculating the same idea.

This is very interesting, because the quanta of the Yang Mills field must also be massless. Because a lot of particles have mass, the Higgs mechanism was invented. So turn it the other way around, if for some reason we first found the heavy Higgs particle. That is not in accordance with the theory you referred to above. So to explain why the Higgs has mass, unlike the theory you refer to, we could explain that by making a model with heavy W+ and W- and Z bosons. It is the chicken or the egg problem.

The purpose of the Higgs is not to 'carry mass' but to break electroweak symmetry.

In nature nothing has a purpose. You can't say that even when some phycisist or mathematicians invents a theory or model with a pecular mechanism to explain something, that it has a purpose. So if the Higgs will be found, then it is part of nature. And we have to model that.

 

[tom.stoer]

Mass generates gravity, ...

As I already said: it's energy-momentum that acts as a source for gravity and every field contributes to the energy-momentum tensor, not only the Higgs and not only massive particles. There is absolutely nothing special regarding the contribution of the Higgs field or other massive particles.

 

[kaksmet]

The Higgs boson has nothing to do with gravity. It does not give other particles their mass, and does not 'carry mass', whatever that means.

Almost wrong. The interaction with the Higgs field give particles their mass.

 

[tom.stoer]

I think what Bill_K wants to say is that it's the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs field that is responsible for the particle masses. But the Higgs boson is not the vacuum expectation value but a "quantized fluctuation" on top of this vacuum expectation value.

Therefore it's correct that the Higgs boson has nothing to do with the article masses; the masses are due to the coupling to the Higgs field.

 

[kaksmet]

I think what Bill_K wants to say is that it's the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs field that is responsible for the particle masses. But the Higgs boson is not the vacuum expectation value but a "quantized fluctuation" on top of this vacuum expectation value.

Therefore it's correct that the Higgs boson has nothing to do with the article masses; the masses are due to the coupling to the Higgs field.

Indeed, even though "nothing to do with particle masses" is quite a strong statement for a particle which comes from the excitation of the field which give the particles their mass.

 

[genneth]

Indeed, even though "nothing to do with particle masses" is quite a strong statement for a particle which comes from the excitation of the field which give the particles their mass.

I think you're still misunderstanding the point. The excitations of the Higgs field around the vacuum expectation value is *not* what gives particles mass! The vacuum expectation value itself (which arises from a Higgs self-interaction) and other fields' coupling to this expectation value is what gives particles in the SM inertial mass.

Furthermore, as people have repeatedly tried to make clear, none of these things have a direct relation to gravitation, in which it is the combined energy-momentum tensor which couples. In addition, there are sometimes (esp. for symmetry broken gauge fields) a selection of energy-momentum tensors which may be employed --- mathematically these correspond to addition of total derivatives onto the Lagrangian, and do not alter the dynamics.

 

[kaksmet]

I think you're still misunderstanding the point. The excitations of the Higgs field around the vacuum expectation value is *not* what gives particles mass! The vacuum expectation value itself (which arises from a Higgs self-interaction) and other fields' coupling to this expectation value is what gives particles in the SM inertial mass.

I believe that it is you who did not understand me.

True, it is not the excitation that give the particles their mass, it is the vacuum expectation value. However, I would say that the statement that the Higgs has nothing to do with gravity and not give particle masses is misleading in such a general discussion.

 

[tom.stoer]

As I said several times: massless photons, massive quarks, Higgs bosons etc. all contribute to gravity. There is nothing special about any of these particles and/or fields.