Can Theoretical Physicists Discover New Aspects of the Higgs Boson?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the role of theoretical physicists in discovering new aspects of the Higgs boson, particularly in relation to the contributions of Peter Higgs and the nature of discovery in physics. Participants explore the balance between theoretical predictions and experimental validation in the context of the Higgs boson.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether theoretical physicists can discover new aspects of the Higgs boson, suggesting that such discoveries are primarily the domain of experimentalists.
  • There is a discussion about Peter Higgs's contributions, with some participants asking what he discovered beyond the detection of the Higgs boson and why the particle is named after him.
  • One participant argues that detecting the Higgs boson constitutes a discovery, while others seek clarification on whether Higgs developed a new theory or equation related to the Higgs field.
  • Participants note that Higgs's theoretical predictions were significant in the context of existing scientific literature and ideas prior to the particle's detection.
  • There is a suggestion that the ongoing work related to the Higgs boson is a combination of theoretical and experimental efforts, with some arguing that both approaches are necessary for further understanding.
  • Some participants emphasize that scientific research often requires a fusion of theory and experimentation, and that future work on the Higgs boson will likely involve both aspects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of discovery in physics, particularly regarding the contributions of theoretical physicists versus experimentalists. There is no consensus on whether the work following the detection of the Higgs boson is predominantly theoretical or experimental.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of defining "discovery" in the context of theoretical predictions and experimental validation. The discussion reflects the ongoing nature of scientific inquiry and the interplay between theory and experimentation.

Peter25samaha
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
What can a theoretical physicist discover something new about the higgs boson . This is for experimentalist but can a theoretical physicist discover anything new about the higgs boson ?
And what peter higgs discovered other than detected it . He is a theoretical
physicist did he wrote a new equation in
the higgs field or what ? And why its called after his name "higgs" i know that 2 people discovered that particle and won the nobel prize in 2013 Peter Higgs and
François Englert so why only Peter ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Peter25samaha said:
And why its called after his name "higgs" i know that 2 people discovered that particle and won the nobel prize in 2013 Peter Higgs and
François Englert so why only Peter ?
Glen Seaborg did not discover those 10 elements on his own, but he still won the Nobel prize and got an element named after himself :smile: It's the same thing.
Peter25samaha said:
And what peter higgs discovered other than detected it .
Detecting it IS discovering it. What's your definition of discovering it?
 
ProfuselyQuarky said:
Glen Seaborg did not discover those 10 elements on his own, but he still won the Nobel prize and got an element named after himself :smile: It's the same thing.Detecting it IS discovering it. What's your definition of discovering it?

I mean did he discover a new theory or something like that ? Its the LHC this collider who detected this particle what was his work on that what did he created something new ?
 
Peter25samaha said:
I mean did he discover a new theory or something like that ?
Okay, Higgs himself did not detect the boson with his own two hands or anything of that sort, but before it was detected with the LHC, the entire idea of a Higgs boson was theory. Peter Higgs is a theoretical physicist and based on calculations, he predicted the existence of the particle. That particle (the Higgs), they thought, would back up decades worth of publications and ideas, which is why everyone believed that his theory was so significant.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ComplexVar89 and Peter25samaha
ProfuselyQuarky said:
Okay, Higgs himself did not detect the boson with his own two hands or anything of that sort, but before it was detected with the LHC, the entire idea of a Higgs boson was theory. Peter Higgs is a theoretical physicist and based on calculations, he predicted the existence of the particle. That particle (the Higgs), they thought, would back up decades worth of publications and ideas, which is why everyone believed that his theory was so significant.
Yeh that's right . But now after detecting it the rest of the work is half theoretical half experimentalist or only one of them . I think the higgs boson need more things to be observed in more experiences but theoretical physicist have to come up with a theory for that right ?
 
Peter25samaha said:
I think the higgs boson need more things to be observed in more experiences but theoretical physicist have to come up with a theory for that right ?
Well, everything is technically theory until it's proven. In even the most basic of experiments, the hypothesis is what everyone thinks will happen, but no one knows for sure until the experiment proves it.
Peter25samaha said:
But now after detecting it the rest of the work is half theoretical half experimentalist or only one of them .
Why do you want the answer to be one or another? Much of scientific research is a fusion of both experimenting and theorizing. Of course, in certain cases one might be more predominant than another. In regards to the Higgs boson, it requires so much effort to even detect it (which is already clear) that much of the future work will probably be theoretical. Yet, experimenting is still necessary. Experimenting is the only way to back up theory. Experimenting is the only way to prove something as fact. So, the short answer is that we need both. Not one or another.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Peter25samaha

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K