Higgs field at near light speed

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the Higgs field and its relationship to mass, particularly in the context of objects moving at near light speeds. Participants explore concepts related to rest mass, relativistic mass, and the implications of these ideas in the framework of relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the Higgs field behaves at near light speeds and its effect on mass, indicating a lack of understanding of the topic.
  • Another participant asserts that the mass of an object does not increase with speed, but rather its kinetic energy increases, challenging the notion of "relativistic mass" as a misleading concept.
  • A third participant clarifies that the Higgs field provides rest mass, which is invariant and does not change with speed, emphasizing that what changes is energy, not mass.
  • One participant expresses concern that the concept of relativistic mass could mislead individuals into misunderstanding relativity as merely an extension of Newtonian mechanics, rather than a distinct theory.
  • Another participant reflects on the historical use of mathematical tricks in relativity, expressing a dislike for such approaches as they may obscure the physical meaning of the concepts involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the interpretation and implications of relativistic mass and the use of mathematical tricks in relativity. There is no consensus on the best way to approach these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the relationship between the Higgs field and mass, as well as the potential confusion surrounding the concept of relativistic mass versus kinetic energy.

Devguy101
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm a high school student and I don't know much about this stuff e.g. the Higgs Field but i know that the Higgs field gives mass to some particles. I also learned that the mass of an object is relative to its speed. So my question is, what happens to the Higgs field at those near light speeds to cause the mass to increase?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The mass of an object does not increase relative to its speed, its kinetic energy increases. The "relativistic mass" that one sometimes hears about (which increases as speed increases) is basically simply a mathematical trick to keep some equations looking Newtonian (e.g. to keep the relation ##p=mv##, which in relativistic theory is really ##p=\gamma mv## we may define ##m_R\equiv\gamma m## so that ##p=m_R v##). This should not be thought of as an actual mass increase, but simply an increase in kinetic energy.
 
Devguy101 said:
the Higgs field gives mass to some particles

More precisely, it gives rest mass (or "invariant mass") to some particles, which is (as the second name for it implies) an invariant and doesn't change with speed. As Matterwave says, what changes with speed is "relativistic mass", more properly called simply "energy", and that has nothing to do with the Higgs field.
 
Matterwave said:
The mass of an object does not increase relative to its speed, its kinetic energy increases. The "relativistic mass" that one sometimes hears about (which increases as speed increases) is basically simply a mathematical trick to keep some equations looking Newtonian (e.g. to keep the relation ##p=mv##, which in relativistic theory is really ##p=\gamma mv## we may define ##m_R\equiv\gamma m## so that ##p=m_R v##). This should not be thought of as an actual mass increase, but simply an increase in kinetic energy.

Couldn't that be a dirty, nasty trick that could easily lead someone astray? In particular, it might lead one to try and think that Relativity is just "Newtonian mechanics with some wonky effects added in", as opposed to treating it as a new theory on its own terms which reproduces Newtonian mechanics on everyday scales.
 
Such an approach to relativity was popular in the past, and has gone out of fashion. I certainly do not like the use of such tricks since I think they obscure the physical meaning in the processes involved. But looking at the past, many "tricks" such as these pop up. A particularly annoying one for me is the trick to use ##ict## as the time coordinate, so that your position four vector would be ##(ict, x, y, z)## in order that when you take the dot product you get the correct result of having an opposite sign between the time coordinate and the space coordinates. I really don't like this approach, and indeed this approach has also gone out of fashion.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
639
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K