Can Einstein's theory explain the search for the Higgs Boson at LHC?

rlinsurf
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
As a layman, I'm having a problem with understanding the search at LHC for the Higgs Boson.

As I understand Einstein, all mass is nothing but energy. In that case, why are we looking for a particle which imbues mass?

For example, in Rutherford's experiment, at least in my mind's eye, when I apply Einstein, the result is because photons are neither particles or waves, but higher concentrations of energy moving in and with a field of lower concentrations of energy. I.e., light is neither a particle or wave, it is the universe waving.

That seems like a good way to understand Einstein. In that case, using a collider would naturally produce new particles never seen. If you smash two waves together you get new waves. And the harder you smash them, the mores waves you would produce. So wouldn't it then follow that we're simply seeing the potential of the universe to produce all kinds of exotic waves -- that usually don't last long -- by our producing them?

It seems like this isn't just an adjustment to Einstein, but an abandonment. So obviously, I'm missing some basic principle which allows both theories to coexist?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Special relativity describes the conversion of mass to energy. However material stuff has rest mass (which is what is usually called mass) and the Higgs particle is part of a theory which explains where this mass comes from.
 
I always thought it also described the conversion of energy to mass. Wasn't that his larger point? That all matter is simply highly cohesive energy in space-time?
 
rlinsurf said:
I always thought it also described the conversion of energy to mass. Wasn't that his larger point? That all matter is simply highly cohesive energy in space-time?
Special relativity gives the relationship between mass and energy, when either is converted to the other. This theory (Einstein) dates from 1905.

The Higgs theory (due to Higgs) is much more recent. It is part of quantum theory.
 
Ok. Thanks.
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
18
Views
4K
Replies
32
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top