Question on Higgs analogy - any answers?

  • Thread starter Thread starter trsn500
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Analogy Higgs
trsn500
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi all

I was looking at ways to teach about the Higgs and came across the old 'well-known scientist walks across a conference hall' analogy (see link below)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18707698

My interpretation of this goes as follows:

1. massive particles strongly 'attract' the Higgs field, slowing them down - giving them inertia (mass)
2. less massive particles only weakly 'attract' the Higgs field, so they aren't slowed down very much and have lower inertia
3. massless particles like photons don't 'attract' the Higgs field at all so aren't slowed down at all, have no mass/inertia and travel at the maximum possible speed (c)

Ok. Let's imagine particles A (massive) and B (less massive).

NOW... I would like to know what it is that makes the Higgs field cluster strongly around particle A - (slowing it down, giving it more mass/inertia) - but only cluster weakly around particle B (slowing it down less, giving it less mass/inertia).

The answer can't be that "particle A has more mass" since then we'd have a circular analogy as follows
1. Particle A is massive
2. so the Higgs field strongly clusters around it
3. slowing it down and thereby giving it it's large mass

... circular see!

So; apart from mass, what is the difference between particle A (The popular scientist) and particle B (the less popular scientist), that results in particle A attracting more Higgs field?

And what could be added to the 'popular scientist' analogy to make it non-circular? (or is it, in fact, a rubbish analogy?)

Ta!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I might be wrong here, but the analogy of a popular scientist walking into a room, is only meaning that they attract MORE mass than what they had, thus gaining more mass than they originally had themselves. It's not a matter of the mass of the popular scientist attracting the students, it's a matter of how attractive the scientist is to the students. Another way to think about it, might be a cereal bowl. If you've ever eaten cereal in your life, I'm sure that you will have noticed that as you reach the end of the cereal, the pieces begin to clump together. The ones that move around most from one place to another are able to attract a larger gathering of other cereal pieces till at last they become so large that they barely move at all. There will also be a few "stragglers" left behind that only clump in a group of one or two, and these are able to move more freely due to their smaller size as a group.
 
talieseen said:
I might be wrong here, but the analogy of a popular scientist walking into a room, is only meaning that they attract MORE mass than what they had, thus gaining more mass than they originally had themselves.

I thought the Higgs field is the source of all mass (meaning there's no such thing as 'the mass the particle originally had') ... or are you saying that there are two kinds of mass, 'original-mass' and 'extra-mass-caused-by-Higgs-field'... in which case what is the source of 'original-mass'??

talieseen said:
It's not a matter of the mass of the popular scientist attracting the students, it's a matter of how attractive the scientist is to the students.

ok, so what makes the popular scientist more attractive to the students (what makes particle A more attractive to the Higgs field?) ?

sorry!
 
what makes particle A more attractive to the Higgs field?
No one knows.

The Higgs field is responsible for the mass term for the gauge bosons (W, Z), the elementary fermions (electron, etc) and the Higgs boson itself. The values are
MW = ½gv
MZ = ½v√(g2 + g'2)
Me = Gev/√2
Mh = v√2λ
where v = 246 GeV is the value of the Higgs field. In every case there's a coupling constant involved whose value is not determined by the standard model.
 
You have to accept that an analogy is just that - an analogy, not a perfect description of what's happening. That description is mathematical. Trying to capture more and more features of the mathematics in the analogy quickly comes to a point where the whole thing collapses. ("The scientist is carrying a pair of trained ferrets, one pregnant...")
 
In the Standard Model, particle masses come from the coupling strength of the Higgs to the individual particles - those are free parameters in the theory, and we have no explanation for their values.
Maybe there is some deeper theory which can explain the parameters.
 
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
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

Back
Top