The discussion revolves around the nature of the Higgs field and its relationship to gravity. Participants explore theoretical concepts related to the Higgs field as a quantum fluid and its implications for gravitational interactions, including the mechanisms of mass and the nature of gravity itself.
Participants express differing views on the relationship between the Higgs field and gravity, with no consensus reached on whether the Higgs field creates gravity or merely influences mass. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the fundamental nature of gravity and its mediation.
Participants acknowledge uncertainties in the quantum-mechanical underpinnings of gravity and the nature of the forces involved. Questions about the strength and symmetry of gravitational fields remain open and applicable to all fundamental forces.
This discussion may be of interest to those exploring theoretical physics, particularly in the fields of particle physics and general relativity, as well as individuals curious about the interplay between fundamental forces and particle mass.
In particle language, the constant Higgs field is a superfluid of charged particles, and a charged superfluid is a superconductor. Inside a superconductor, the gauge electric and magnetic fields both become short-ranged, or massive.
This means that all of space is filled with the background Higgs field, the so-called Higgs condensate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_mechanismThe Higgs mechanism can be considered as the superconductivity in the vacuum. It occurs when all of space is filled with a sea of particles which are charged, or in field language, when a charged field has a nonzero vacuum expectation value. Interaction with the quantum fluid filling the space prevents certain forces from propagating over long distances.
Chalnoth said:Nope, it's something different altogether. Now, the Higgs field has an effect on the behavior gravity, in that interactions with the Higgs field are what give particles their masses. But gravity isn't "created" by the Higgs field: it would be around regardless.
Gravity, so far as we know, is the way that matter warps space-time, combined with how matter moves through warped space-time. The quantum-mechanical underpinnings of precisely how this operates are as yet uncertain, but some things are clear: gravity must be mediated by a massless spin-2 field. It must be massless (or nearly so) because gravity is a long-range force. It must be even-integer-spin because it is always attractive. A force based upon a spin-0 field would cause a different deflection of photons, so that's out. A force based upon a spin-2 massless field, however, replicates Einstein's equations (in some appropriate classical limit).Rymer said:Chalnoth, just exactly what is your conceptual model of gravity and how it works?
Chalnoth said:Gravity, so far as we know, is the way that matter warps space-time, combined with how matter moves through warped space-time. The quantum-mechanical underpinnings of precisely how this operates are as yet uncertain, but some things are clear: gravity must be mediated by a massless spin-2 field. It must be massless (or nearly so) because gravity is a long-range force. It must be even-integer-spin because it is always attractive. A force based upon a spin-0 field would cause a different deflection of photons, so that's out. A force based upon a spin-2 massless field, however, replicates Einstein's equations (in some appropriate classical limit).
That would be through gravity.Rymer said:Why a space-time warp? How is that produced?
Well, we don't know. But then, why are you singling out gravity here? This question can be asked of any of the four forces we know.Rymer said:What determines the strength and symmetry of the field?
It seems so. We have found no deviation so far.Rymer said:Is gravitational mass always equal to inertial?
The boson which is the quantum of the field is a spin-2 particle. If you don't know what that means, read up a bit on quantum-mechanical spin. Wikipedia is, as usual, a decent place to start (link here).Rymer said:What do you mean by a 'spin-2 field'?