rodsika
- 278
- 2
scalar particle means it is not vectorial.. meaning no directions... does it mean it's non-local? is a higgs value say in a pluto identical to the one on earth?
The Higgs boson particle has been confirmed with a mass of approximately 125 GeV, with a significance level of 4.9 sigma reported by the CMS collaboration at CERN. Leading physicists, including Joe Incandela, have stated that there is strong evidence for the particle's existence, which is crucial for validating the Standard Model of particle physics. The discovery indicates that the Higgs boson may play a fundamental role in giving mass to elementary particles, marking a significant milestone in modern physics.
PREREQUISITESPhysicists, researchers in high-energy physics, students studying particle physics, and anyone interested in the implications of the Higgs boson discovery for our understanding of the universe.
Dickfore said:I don't mean to derail, but what exactly does it mean to have significance level 5 sigma?
Dickfore said:I don't mean to derail, but what exactly does it mean to have significance level 5 sigma?
jtbell said:In other words, it looks like a duck, and it's where we would expect to find a duck (according to the predictions of QAD = quantum aviodynamics), but we have to do further study to verify that it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.
Scalar particle means it has spin 0.rodsika said:scalar particle means it is not vectorial.. meaning no directions... does it mean it's non-local? is a higgs value say in a pluto identical to the one on earth?
rodsika said:scalar particle means it is not vectorial.. meaning no directions... does it mean it's non-local? is a higgs value say in a pluto identical to the one on earth?
Dadface said:From what little I know about this at present there is a Higgs field which is instrumental in giving particles mass and a Higgs boson which is instrumental in setting up the Higgs field.If this is right then what is instrumental in giving the Higgs boson its mass?![]()
Any signal in any experiment could, in principle, be only a statistical fluctuation, an error. Nothing is absolutely certain. The number 99.99994% measures how certain they are that it is NOT an error.Dickfore said:Sure, but standard deviations of what?
Demystifier said:Any signal in any experiment could, in principle, be only a statistical fluctuation, an error. Nothing is absolutely certain. The number 99.99994% measures how certain they are that it is NOT an error.
CMS observes an excess of events at a mass of approximately 125 GeV[2] with a statistical significance of five standard deviations (5 sigma)[3] above background expectations. The probability of the background alone fluctuating up by this amount or more is about one in three million.
[2] The electron volt (eV) is a unit of energy. A GeV is 1,000,000,000 eV. In particle physics, where mass and energy are often interchanged, it is common to use eV/c2 as a unit of mass (from E = mc2, where c is the speed of light in vacuum). Even more common is to use a system of natural units with c set to 1 (hence, E = m), and use eV and GeV as units of mass.
[3] The standard deviation describes the spread of a set of measurements around the mean value. It can be used to quantify the level of disagreement of a set of data from a given hypothesis. Physicists express standard deviations in units called “sigma”. The higher the number of sigma, the more incompatible the data are with the hypothesis. Typically, the more unexpected a discovery is, the greater the number of sigma physicists will require to be convinced.
Dickfore said:But, how did you come up with the number 99.99994% in relation to 5 sigma?! Also, how did the BBC come up with their numbers of 8 heads in a row for 3 sigma, and 20 heads in a row for a 5 sigma?
Dickfore said:But, how did you come up with the number 99.99994% in relation to 5 sigma?!
Raekwon said:
viraltux said:That would be the probability from -5 to 5 in a standard normal distribution. N(0,1)
As different situations have different distributions, "5 standard deviations" is a bit sloppy. The real meaning is "with background only [no higgs], observing so many events is equally unlikely than getting a value >=5 standard deviations away from the mean in a gaussian distribution".Dickfore said:But, isn't the number of background events following a Poisson distribution?
Also, the probability of getting k heads in a row follows the distribution:
<br /> P_k = \frac{1}{2^k}, \ k = 1, 2, \ldots<br />
No, and this contains a very fundamental error.Vorde said:ATLAS and CMS have a 99.9999% certainty that there they have found a new boson with a mass of 125 GeV- consistent with the Higgs.
Particle properties are assumed to be the same everywhere (and up to now, no variation was found). This is independent of the spin.rodsika said:scalar particle means it is not vectorial.. meaning no directions... does it mean it's non-local? is a higgs value say in a pluto identical to the one on earth?
Particle properties are assumed to be the same everywhere (and up to now, no variation was found). This is independent of the spin.
A scalar field can depend on spacetime. As a simple example: Temperature is scalar, and it is different on pluto.
rodsika said:Okie. For a while there. I thought the higgs boson is the carrier of quantum non-locality or connected to it. But then, what's proof it is not connected...
This is wrong. 4.9 sigma for "there is something". And measurements indicate that this "something" looks like a Higgs boson.atyy said:For example, Cosmic Variance at one point says 4.9 for a SM Higgs.
Dadface said:From what little I know about this at present there is a Higgs field which is instrumental in giving particles mass and a Higgs boson which is instrumental in setting up the Higgs field.If this is right then what is instrumental in giving the Higgs boson its mass?![]()
viraltux said:That might be why they call it "The God's particle"![]()
mfb said:This is wrong. 4.9 sigma for "there is something". And measurements indicate that this "something" looks like a Higgs boson.
Concerning the meaning of the number, see the previous page (at 16 post per page*)
*interesting, the option to change this seems to be disabled in this board
atyy said:So why does it go up above 5 sigma for some combination of channels and then down to 4.9 for some other combination?
I would assume this is because of the decays into γγ or ZZ - these are spin 1 particles so I think the total spin can be either 0 or 2.kloptok said:In the press conference they talk about determining whether the particle is spin 0 or spin 2, does anyone know why these two particular values for the spin are the discussed candidates? A spin 0 particle would give an isotropic decay guess, how would a spin 2 decay look like, will there be angular dependence (I guess it will) and in that case, how does it look like in detail?
Kevin_Axion said:Maybe because of look-elsewhere effects, is the parameter space of the data different?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Look-elsewhere_effect