Register to reply 
Is the higgs boson the mediator of the higgs field? 
Share this thread: 
#19
Dec2213, 04:26 PM

Sci Advisor
Thanks
P: 4,160

But these reflect the properties of the Higgs field. For example the fact that the mass of a fermion is determined by how strongly it interacts with the Higgs field will be reflected in a property of the Higgs boson, namely the boson must interact more strongly with the heavier fermions, proportionally to their mass. 


#20
Dec2213, 04:38 PM

PF Gold
P: 93




#21
Dec2213, 05:00 PM

PF Gold
P: 93




#22
Dec2213, 06:28 PM

Sci Advisor
Thanks
P: 4,160

The mass term for a fermion is simply proportional to the value v of the Higgs field, the constant of proportionality being different for each type of fermion. 


#23
Dec2213, 06:47 PM

PF Gold
P: 93




#24
Dec2213, 08:50 PM

P: 1,057

you should look at the mathematical derivation of the higgs mechanism an interpret it...there you see everything happening and you can know what's going on and where.



#25
Dec2213, 09:01 PM

PF Gold
P: 93




#26
Dec2313, 11:18 AM

P: 1,057

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.5672v1.pdf also was the last one I read recently, and I find it nice. But to be honest, I have never found a textbook that does the whole calculations, the most you need to do by your own... 


#29
Mar2514, 11:10 AM

P: 61




#30
Mar2514, 08:41 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 13,110

(... and physical reality is not usually a matter of opinion.) However  we can talk about how an article misrepresents a physical model from knowledge of that model. I'll have a go  Bill K will, probably, fill in the bits I miss. I suspect the objections go something like this: The quote in question is from "Livescience"  a popscience newssite not known for being scientifically accurate. To be fair on the authors, they are trying to get some subtle points of field theory across to a target audience that struggles with highschool maths. This is not easy, we can't really expect them to get everything just right. I'll break the quote up into individual points: "In physics, when particles interact with fields, the interaction must be mediated by a particle.... or, indeed, when they interact with each other, or, at all. The statement is stronger than I'd make it but it is probably fair. Interactions with the electromagnetic (EM) field, for example, are mediated by photons, or particles of light.It is the interaction that is "mediated" by the virtual particle, not the field. When a negatively charged electron is pulled by the EM field toward a positively charged proton, the electron experiences the EM field by absorbing and emitting a constant stream of "virtual photons",The picture you get here is that electrons are firing and getting hit by a constant stream of photons  this is not correct. Compare with: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...particles.html ... which gives you a better idea how virtual particles mediate forces. photons that momentarily pop in and out of existence just for the purpose of mediating the particlefield interaction.That's quite iffy  how do these virtual photons know to "pop" into existence at just the right moment to mediate the field? (Covered in previous link.) Furthermore, when the EM field is "excited," meaning its energy is flared up in a certain spot, that flareup is, itself, a photon, a real one in that case.This is so confused it is hard to know where to start: see the following  http://profmattstrassler.com/article...whatarethey/ ... and all this is before you get close to thinking about Higgs. But like I said before, the authors are trying to explain in a single chatty sentence something that actually requires many paragraphs  and, even then, it's incomplete. Of course they got it wrong! They got it cringeworthily wrong. How could they not? 


#31
Mar2614, 10:45 AM

P: 61

Thanks. I agree that we can't expect the authors to get everything exactly right. Somebody had to tell them those things. Oversimplification is highly probable, but I think they did an amazingly good job. In your first link, the authors admitted that they used gross oversimplification. In the second one they said ``virtual particle'' is a problematic term. I found the first one a little adhoc. They seemed to have a "twoworlds" theory with a "positionspace universe" and a "momentumspace universe." Still, I appreciate the links. I was, however, more interested in the Higgs mechanism.



#32
Mar2614, 09:27 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 13,110

Note: If those are "gross simplifications"  where does that leave the quoted passage, that was the context, which is even more oversimplified still? The quoted passage made no reference to the Higgs mechanism. phyinfinite quoted it. You asked about it. You got an answer. Please understand: In order to get a good idea about the Higgs mechanism, the interested student really needs a better picture of the standard model than the LiveScience article gives you. Perhaps something like: Bernstein J. Spontaneous symmetry breaking, gauge theories, the Higgs mechanism and all that (1974) Rev Mod Phys. Maybe: Organtini G. Unveiling the Higgs mechanism to students Eur. J. Phys. 33 (2012) 13971406 There are no end of lecture summaries: i.e. http://www.physics.buffalo.edu/pasi/...onLecture1.pdf Basically you'll need to pick one that is suitable to your education. Enjoy. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
What does it mean, The Higgs boson is an excitation of the higgs field  High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics  11  
How exactly does the Higgs field and boson interact with particles?  High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics  6  
Questions about the behavior of the Higgs particle and Higgs field  High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics  7  
Help in clearing up Higgs boson/field  High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics  1  
Could it be that Higgs's boson does not exist, but Higgs mechanism does?  Beyond the Standard Model  14 