Is the Higgs Boson Necessary if Lorentz-Fitzgerald Accounts for Mass Increase?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the necessity of the Higgs boson in relation to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction and its implications for mass. Participants explore the relationship between spacetime, mass, and the Higgs mechanism, questioning whether the Higgs boson is essential if mass can be explained through relativistic effects.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction can account for an increase in inertial mass without invoking the Higgs field, questioning the need for the Higgs boson.
  • Others argue that if the Higgs mechanism is valid, the Higgs boson is crucial for understanding mass and gravity, suggesting that alternative theories would arise if the Higgs particle is not found.
  • One participant expresses that their understanding of relativity suggests an incompatibility between spacetime structure and the Higgs mechanism, indicating a need for a theory of quantum gravity.
  • Another participant challenges the notion of relativistic mass, stating that it is observer-dependent and not related to the Higgs boson, which is posited to give mass to gauge bosons in the early universe.
  • Some participants note that the Higgs boson addresses the incompatibility of symmetries in fundamental forces, rather than being directly related to gravity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the necessity of the Higgs boson, with no consensus reached on its role in relation to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction and mass. The discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the understanding of how the Higgs mechanism and relativistic effects interact, and the discussion reflects differing interpretations of mass and its origins in the context of quantum mechanics and relativity.

Boeley
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
sqrt(1-v2/c2)

About matter and mass... I've been thinking that if the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction equation can accurately calculate an increase in inertial mass (without anything representing the Higgs Field), is there any need for the Higgs Boson?

Doesn't the LF equation imply that mass (inertial mass in this case) is a result of the occupation of spacetime (v) divided by the potential max (c)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Boeley said:
sqrt(1-v2/c2)

About matter and mass... I've been thinking that if the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction equation can accurately calculate an increase in inertial mass (without anything representing the Higgs Field), is there any need for the Higgs Boson?

Doesn't the LF equation imply that mass (inertial mass in this case) is a result of the occupation of spacetime (v) divided by the potential max (c)?

That would be a difference between calculating a sum, and deriving the scalar itself. Your last question is actually a REALLY good one you know; in fact, NO! There is no need for a Higgs boson, if the Higgs MECHANISM is real. The predicted particle is important, the mechanism of Spontaneous Gague symmetry breaking is CRITICAL to the current understanding of gravity in SQM.

IF no Higgs particle is found, and the mechanism is disproven then other theories of mass and gravity which do NOT rely on the Higgs Mechanism will come to the fore. That's science for yah! :smile:
 
This is all so far beyond me...

My understanding of Relativity is based on the structure of spacetime causing mass / gravity. So, at least from my perspective the two are incompatible. Admittedly, my knowledge of Higgs/QM is lacking, so I can't say for certain.

If the LF equation calculates an increase in mass when increasing the amount of spacetime matter occupies when it's accelerated, it implies that matter simply occupying spacetime in the first place gives it its mass.
 
Boeley said:
This is all so far beyond me...

My understanding of Relativity is based on the structure of spacetime causing mass / gravity. So, at least from my perspective the two are incompatible. Admittedly, my knowledge of Higgs/QM is lacking, so I can't say for certain.

If the LF equation calculates an increase in mass when increasing the amount of spacetime matter occupies when it's accelerated, it implies that matter simply occupying spacetime in the first place gives it its mass.

You're being too hard on yourself; they ARE incompatible in their current form. The two different proposed mechanisms, the 'trouble' with gravity, is why a theory of quantum gravity is so critical to giving you an answer to your question that is reflected in nature.
 
Boeley said:
sqrt(1-v2/c2)

About matter and mass... I've been thinking that if the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction equation can accurately calculate an increase in inertial mass (without anything representing the Higgs Field), is there any need for the Higgs Boson?

Doesn't the LF equation imply that mass (inertial mass in this case) is a result of the occupation of spacetime (v) divided by the potential max (c)?

I have to say, that this is not even wrong. The Higgs boson is conjectured to be the mechanism that gives mass to gauge bosons in the early universe. It occurs in quantum theory and has no relation to the 'relativistic' mass, a concept of doubtful usefulness. There is no increase in inertial rest mass, it is an observer dependent effect.
 
Mentz114 said:
I have to say, that this is not even wrong. The Higgs boson is conjectured to be the mechanism that gives mass to gauge bosons in the early universe. It occurs in quantum theory and has no relation to the 'relativistic' mass, a concept of doubtful usefulness. There is no increase in inertial rest mass, it is an observer dependent effect.

Hmmm... so much for this being over his head. :wink: . I think confidence is all that's lacking.
 
removed
 
Last edited:
The Higgs boson has nothing to do with gravity. It's introduced to solve the problem that the symmetries underlying the electromagnetic and weak forces are incompatible with any known fundamental particle having mass. The Higgs field (of which the Higgs boson is 1 of 4 components) is introduced to break those symmetries, giving the other particles mass in the process.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad How powerful would a collider have to be to observe a sphaleron?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Graduate Lorentz ether frame, Relativistic Mass, and Inertia
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Undergrad Some thoughts about Bell's string paradox alternatives
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K
Undergrad Progress In Calculating The HLbL Contribution To Muon g-2
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
Graduate Does Mass of an Object Truly Change with Velocity?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
11K
Graduate I have lots of questions on physics
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K