Higgs particle and electromagnetism

[kurious]

The Higgs particle may never be found - Stephen Hawking doubts that it exists.
If mass isn't due to the Higgs, could it be caused by electromagnetism?
For example, if protons and electrons experience resistance to a change in their speeds from charged particles in the space around them,could a photon be massless because it has no net charge?

 

[marlon]

I don't see how a change in velocity can be coupled to the generation of mass. Isn't it so that in QFT high-velocity-particles are always concidered to be massless because kinetic (relativistic) energy is not equivalent to mass, only total energy is. Fotons are always massless, just as any other elemantary particle when there has not been any spontanious symmetrybreaking. If this occurs, the Higgs-system delivers the mass. yes, the Higgs-field is a big mystery, but nevertheless what other suggestions are there for massgeneration?

I don't think elektromagnetism can be accounted for that, just because of the reason that in this case the mass generation would be dependent of the way particles interact electromagnetically. What about the strongforce or the weak force. So what about the massive vector-bosons or the gluons ?

greetz
nikolaas vanderheyden

 

[kurious]

Gluons are electrically neutral and would be massless.

 

[Antonio Lao]

Higgs bosons are the mediator of a fifth fundamental force of nature. This force is a direct link between zero dimension and the 4th dimension.

 

[Antonio Lao]

The force linking zero dimension and one dimension is gravity and the mediator is the graviton. The electromagnetic force links the 1D and 2D with mediator as the photon. The weak nuclear force links the 2D and 3D with four mediators: photon, W+, W-, Z0. The strong nuclear force links 3D and 4D with mediators as the eight gluons with its permutation from three color charges (red, green, blue).

 

[marlon]

elektromagnetism generates mass ?

Gluons are electrically neutral and would be massless.

yeah, gluons do not interact elektromagnetically. But you are forgetting the fact that they have self-energy which enables them to create virtual particles that can have an influence on elektromagnetic interactions going on, somewhat like polarzation-effects.

Besides, the elektroweak force is not that strong. So, would it be able to generate the needed amount of energy that is equivalent to the mass of elementary particles?

That is what I meant with what about the strong-force,...
Gluons interact predominantly by the strong force, so elektroweak interactions are secundary compared to the energies invloved in strong-force interactions. If elektromagnetism generates gluonmass, you totally ignore the strong force. This is impossible

 

[kurious]

Marlon:
If elektromagnetism generates gluonmass, you totally ignore the strong force. This is impossible

Kurious:

I am talking about rest mass - gluons don't have rest mass.

 

[Antonio Lao]

There is one thing we need to clarify about the Higgs field. The mediator of this field is the Higgs boson. The Higgs boson is a scalar particle with spin equals zero. It is a product of a broken symmetry. The other force mediators are all vector bosons. The photon, spin 1, for EM force. The photon, W+ W-, Z0 for electroweak force. The 8 gluons for the strong force. The graviton, spin 2, for gravity.

 

[kurious]

Marlon:
Besides, the elektroweak force is not that strong. So, would it be able to generate the needed amount of energy that is equivalent to the mass of elementary particles?

Kurious:
The electric force has a strength that depends on distance and magnitude of charge.If charged mass giving particles are close enough to the charges they are giving rest mass to and there are enough of them,then the answer is yes.

 

[marlon]

Marlon:
If elektromagnetism generates gluonmass, you totally ignore the strong force. This is impossible

Kurious:

I am talking about rest mass - gluons don't have rest mass.

True, but isn't that just the essence of the Higgs-mechanism?
Gluons acquire mass through the Higgs. They do not interact elektromagnetically. So this can never generate mass because there is no energy from these interactions. Like the Goldstone-boson that is absorbed in order for carriers to become massive. What must a gluon absorb to get mass?

 

[marlon]

Marlon:
Besides, the elektroweak force is not that strong. So, would it be able to generate the needed amount of energy that is equivalent to the mass of elementary particles?

Kurious:
The electric force has a strength that depends on distance and magnitude of charge.If charged mass giving particles are close enough to the charges they are giving rest mass to and there are enough of them,then the answer is yes.

But then we get into trouble... Suppose we have positive charged mass giving particles close to one negative charge that is getting the restmass. All these positive charges could not get very close, the would repel each other.

And you should also take in consideration the polarization-effects that will occur. Positive charges further away from the negative "receiving" charge will be of much less influence to the negative charge, their effect will be screened i mean.

 

[Antonio Lao]

If charged mass giving particles are close enough to the charges

As far as theory is concerned, this 'close enough' is zero for point-particles and require renormalization. So you must have a renormalizable principle hidding in your pocket for your theory to work.

 

[marlon]

As far as theory is concerned, this 'close enough' is zero for point-particles and require renormalization. So you must have a renormalizable principle hidding in your pocket for your theory to work.

Problem is that this concept of point particles can be contested, there is the Heisenberg principle. We also need to think of the repulsions of the mass-giving-charges and the screening-effect !

 

[Antonio Lao]

Problem is that this concept of point particles can be contested

It is this problem that started the superstring revolution.

 

[Antonio Lao]

there is the Heisenberg principle

This is the one that started the quantum revolution leading to probability wave functions.

 

[Antonio Lao]

We also need to think of the repulsions of the mass-giving-charges and the screening-effect !

This is the start of the virtual particles revolution. Virtual bosons and virtual fermions and ways to break the balance of charge by screening through broken symmetries.

But the problem remains: how to convert the virtual particles to real particles and permanently borrow energy from the vacuum.

 

[kurious]

Marlon:
Gluons acquire mass through the Higgs

Kurious:
I think that gluons and photons and gravitons have positive and negative charges in them.When these charges are close together and cancel a particle appears massless.
When these charges are separated a particle gains mass.So in my view the origin of mass is a process in which electric charges in a massless particle are redistributed and give polarity to the particle.Each of the charged poles can interact with the sea of positive charge in the vacuum.

Marlon:
But then we get into trouble... Suppose we have positive charged mass giving particles close to one negative charge that is getting the restmass. All these positive charges could not get very close, the would repel each other.

Kurious:
I'm not sure this is a problem.It would need an accurate calculation to show it was.And what if the charges have other force creating propeties such as colour or even a interact by a new force in nature.

 

[Antonio Lao]

So in my view the origin of mass is a process in which electric charges in a massless particle are redistributed and give polarity to the particle.

A much better concept for electric charge is space charge. The groupings of space charges and accordings to the principle of directional invariance produce color charges for QCD and electric charges for QED.

FYI: Space charges are quanta of spacetime.

 

[kurious]

Injecting negative charges into the vacuum might be expected to make a particle with rest mass massless by cancelling the positive charge in the vacuum.This does not happen in practise.But then there is rather a lot of space and rather a lot of positive charges to cancel!
As the universe expands,if more positive charges are not created along with dark energy,then the mass giving charges will become lower in density,and presumably the mass of protons and electrons will go down, unless they have a size and expand.

 

[Antonio Lao]

Injecting negative charges into the vacuum might be expected to make a particle with rest mass massless by cancelling the positive charge in the vacuum.

An idea based on spacetime quantization in making a particle massless is to equalize its inherent amount of potential mass and kinetic mass and the number of each mass is an even number.

 

[kurious]

If gluons and photons gain mass by rearranging electric charges internally so that they
are no longer locally electronically neutral e.g they could turn into positron-electron pair with rest mass,then there must be a lot of small charges that can be rearranged.
The fact that the colour force exists in gluons is helpful because if it did not then
it would be difficult to explain how quarks which form from gluons get their colour.

 

[kurious]

Most of the mass of protons comes from gluons and so gluons must change into quarks to have rest mass or they must give relativistic mass to the up and down quarks of the proton by colliding with them.Relativistic mass is gained in my electromagnetic mass-giving theory by the vacuum charges becoming more concentrated around a moving proton and so a stronger electric field forming between the proton and these charges.Even protons have a magnetic field with respect to the mass-giving charges (which I postulate to carry a magnetic charge too along with the proton) and so E/B gets bigger and therefore the proton speed which is given by E/B gets bigger.Alternatively, as a proton moves faster ,B can get smaller by mass-giving charges emitting some B or by B charges simply being pushed out of the way and having their density decreased.
An electron must have a far smaller mass than a proton because its electric charge must be concentrated in a larger volume - JJ Thomson said that for an electron with radius r the energy was given by q^2 / 2r, so using E=mc^2
mass = q^2 c^2/2r

In terms of the mass-giving vacuum charges this must mean that the electron
is associated with a smaller net vacuum charge and has smaller electric field vectors in any given direction.

 

[shintashi]

I don't believe in a higgs boson and never will.

Will they find one ? probably. Why ? Because they want to. Like GW Bush wanted to win the 2000 election.

Politics asside, let it be said that the concept for me at least of the higgs boson is silly, because the concept of bosons and fermions is equally silly. For me at least, as crazy as I am, bosons and fermions are both wave functions, and since the premise of a fermion is a particle, I have to laugh.

when dealing with waves, you are dealing with harmonics, even if you think you are not dealing with sound. You still are, but the delusion of non sound gives you the equal delusion of fermion particles.

Certain sound patterns create platonic solids. Its just a fact. And if you look at these solids, they will begin to resemble other objects, like the flow of the magnetosphere, and connecting to that, what the crackheads call "ley lines". If you step back for a moment, you might see something else pop up, like a "particle" . It will look like a tangible object, it will possesses distinct dimensions, but much like the strange dome shapes created by Water fountains in Upstate NY shopping malls, when you reach out to "touch it" you realize ONE, its not solid, and TWO its moving.

The dynamics of these "fermion" wave patterns creates the "boson" field dynamics in the same way your mixer makes ripples in your cake batter.

- Shin

 

[Antonio Lao]

It will look like a tangible object, it will possesses distinct dimensions, but much like the strange dome shapes created by Water fountains in Upstate NY shopping malls, when you reach out to "touch it" you realize ONE, its not solid, and TWO its moving.

I have to agree with you if the implication is that at the deepest level, reality is one dimensional and that the motion of 1D creates 2D and motion of 2D creates 3D and motion of 3D creates 4D spacetime.