Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_2.thumb.jpg.72789c04780d7659f5b63ea05534a956.jpg

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Another good video by some people I vaguely know.

Ok so its the non-zero values that the Higgs Potential takes ie the values corresponding to these oscillations that gives the mass...

One thing I need to understand is the two possible motions

Motion 1 - Radial Oscillations(up and down) to and from from the brim of the Mexican hat. Does this correspond to Particles with Mass?

Motion 2 - Circular Rotation around the minimum (base) of the Mexican hat. Does this correspond to Massless Particles?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The difference is magnetism works on protons and electrons - easy to see with trivial experiments. Neutrons are unaffected by magnetism, but still have mass.

Neutrons are composite particles that contain quarks of fractional colour charge and a magnetic moment. They may still be effected by relativistic high energy type magnetism to produce mass. Perhaps it is at this stage that magnetic monopoles form.

Good old Paul Dirac was such clever chap. He predicted that in extreme environments magnetic monopoles must exist, since all electrons and other fermionic particles with masses are quantised.

Good job the universe is fractal in nature because it means the same patterns in nature occur at different scales.I have only just realised that the hypothesis of particle production that I talk within the fabric of space can be readily observed on the surface of the sun with pairs of sun spots behaving as macroscopic mesons containing quarks with intense magnetic field lines between them. This realisation allows me to improve my hypothesis of particle production in the vacuum of space.

New fermionic particles are produced when magnetic field lines between the sun spots snap briefly into magnetic monopoles (neutrinos).

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_monopole

http://dipoleantigravity.blogspot.com/2010/04/tachyonic-magnetic-monopole-neutrinos.html

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?bibcode=1973JKAS....6...15Y&db_key=AST&page_ind=0&data_type=GIF&type=SCREEN_VIEW&classic=YES

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another good video by some people I vaguely know.

Thanks for this!

Ok so its the non-zero values that the Higgs Potential takes ie the values corresponding to these oscillations that gives the mass...

One thing I need to understand is the two possible motions

Motion 1 - Radial Oscillations(up and down) to and from from the brim of the Mexican hat. Does this correspond to Particles with Mass?

Motion 2 - Circular Rotation around the minimum (base) of the Mexican hat. Does this correspond to Massless Particles?

Yes, radial oscillation correspond to massive Higgs bosons, while circular oscillation around the base correspond to massless Goldstone bosons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What physicists call "particles" are quantized excitations of quantum fields.

I love this stuff. Remember Bohr: 'I feel somehow suspended in language...' : Bohr only ever mumbled, and with good reason.

Or Lewis Carroll; 'How do I know what I mean till I hear what I say?'

Olly

PS Does anyone know of a biography of Bohr? I've never found one but he's responsible for some of the best one-liners in history.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heheh. Science (still, hopefully) has a place for "mumblers"... the "vaguely dysfunctional". LOL. And they did come up with some great "one liners" too? <G> The innocent, the other-worldly, tweed-jacketed, tongue/bow-tied etc., were often rather perceptive re. the "human condition"? :)

Predating even Brian Cox.... the ULTIMATE scientist "Rave-Party":

Solvay Conference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :D

700px-Solvay_conference_1927.jpg

Edited by Macavity
Link to post
Share on other sites
What physicists call "particles" are quantized excitations of quantum fields.
I love this stuff. Remember Bohr: 'I feel somehow suspended in language...'

I have been looking into the possible Nobel Prize winners if a standard Higgs particle is found, and I think that language like tthe above might play a role. I think that The language that Higgs used in his papers guarantees that he will win a Nobel prize, while the language that others used might mean that they are left out in the cold.

PS Does anyone know of a biography of Bohr? I've never found one but he's responsible for some of the best one-liners in history.

Niels Bohr's Times: In Physics, Philosophy and Polity: Amazon.co.uk: Abraham Pais: Books

the ULTIMATE scientist "Rave-Party":

Solvay Conference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :D

700px-Solvay_conference_1927.jpg

The guy second from the right in the middle row is Max Born, who won the Nobel Prize for his probabilistic interpretation of the quantum mechanical wave function. He also was Olivia Newton-John's grandfather.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I like that answer, but quantized implies discrete does it not, is there room for smooth functions.

Waves could be continuous mathematically.

Are string vibrations, discrete or smooth?

As far as I understand it, energy is quantized which means that string vibrations (and indeed any other type of energy) is quantized. The quanta are so small, though, that at the macro-scale everything looks smooth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.