A Inertial mass, the Higgs field, and Mach's Principle

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Iskandarani
  • Start date Start date
Iskandarani
Messages
15
Reaction score
7
I'm trying to understand the relationship between the Higgs mechanism and the concept of inertia. The Higgs field gives fundamental particles their rest mass, but it doesn't seem to directly explain why a massive object resists acceleration (inertia).

My question is: How does the Standard Model account for inertia? Is it simply taken as a given property of mass, or is there a deeper connection to the vacuum structure? Furthermore, how does the Higgs mechanism relate to broader concepts like Mach's Principle, which suggests that inertia arises from a particle's interaction with the rest of the matter in the universe? Does a particle's Higgs-derived mass depend on the large-scale distribution of matter, or are they considered completely independent concepts?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Inertia is just another word for mass. That said Newton's laws don't apply to elementary particle physics.
 
Iskandarani said:
How does the Standard Model account for inertia? Is it simply taken as a given property of mass
Yes.

Iskandarani said:
is there a deeper connection to the vacuum structure?
Only in the sense that "the vacuum structure" has the fact that spacetime is locally Minkowskian built into it, and that embodies the connection between mass and proper acceleration.

Iskandarani said:
how does the Higgs mechanism relate to broader concepts like Mach's Principle
It doesn't. Mach's Principle is embodied in General Relativity (at least to some extent--the opinions of physicists vary on this), but it has nothing to do with the particular structure of matter.

Iskandarani said:
Does a particle's Higgs-derived mass depend on the large-scale distribution of matter
No.

Iskandarani said:
are they considered completely independent concepts?
Yes.
 
  • Like
Likes ohwilleke and PeroK
Thank you, @PeroK and @PeterDonis, for the very clear answers.

That perfectly clarifies the scope of the Standard Model on this topic: the Higgs mechanism accounts for rest mass, but inertia itself is an inherent property within the geometric structure of spacetime. I appreciate you taking the time to confirm this distinction.
 
How would one build mathematically an infinite number of spatial dimensions theory? I can concieve mathematically an n-th vector or ##\mathbb{R}^{\infty}##, I had done so in my Topology course back then. But obviously it's not empirically possible to test. But is a theory of everything ought to be "finite" and empirical? I mean obviously if there are only 4 interactions (currently known); but then again there could be more interactions around the corner. So to encompass it all seems to me...
I came across the following paper by Mir Faizal, Lawrence M Krauss, Arshid Shabir, and Francesco Marino from BC. Consequences of Undecidability in Physics on the Theory of Everything Abstract General relativity treats spacetime as dynamical and exhibits its breakdown at singularities‎. ‎This failure is interpreted as evidence that quantum gravity is not a theory formulated {within} spacetime; instead‎, ‎it must explain the very {emergence} of spacetime from deeper quantum degrees of...