I have a theory!

[Ganymede12]

There is an Xbox game called Mass Effect. The game is set about 300 years in the future where humanity has found alien technology from thousands of years ago and they have joined all the other aliens in the Milky Way.

At the heart of the story is Mass Effect technology where a substance called "Element Zero" (eezo) is subjected to an electrical charge creating a "Mass effect field" that alters the mass of an object. This got them to humans to Mars where they found an ancient civilisation's FTL technology which is how they came to join the grand scheme of things.

Think about this. The Higgs field gives particles mass - so could you tamper with the Higgs field - just as with the Mass effect Field - and change the mass of an object? I realise I'm missing some information here.

• Why do some particles interact strongly with the Higgs field while some particles interact weakly with it?
  
• I theorize that eezo could be just the bonds between particles that - when subjected to a charge- tampers with Higgs Bosons. Is it possible for particle bonding to exist without particles?
  

I am aware that I may be getting ahead of myself but it's a theory that I think I should share.

If anything comes out of this thread that isn't a scientific breakthrough then I would at least like an answer to question 1.

So - how much physics am I overlooking?

[JulianO]

I don't really know the answer, but it s down to coupling. Some particles feel the Higgs field, and some don't. Interestingly the Higgs itself experiences the Higgs field, which is slightly recursive. However the photon which carries the electromagnetic field doesn't respond to EM fields, which is also a little odd.

Another fact is that whilst the Higgs gives mass to electrons, it doesn't give much mass to protons. Most of that is wrapped up in the binding energy of the quarks I believe, in a way I don't really understand.

Is there a particle theorist in the house?

[Ganymede12]

No- just a 14 year old with a vague understanding of physics and a wild imagination.

[Mr Q]

Wow, Ant - Keep that kind of thinking up and you'll be heading down the path of a successful sci-fi writer - if so, can I have dibs on your first signed book? Please? Pretty please? I'll be good, I promise! (but don't take too long...my eyes are going fast)

[ollypenrice]

...to be pedantic, what you have is an hypothesis, not a theory. For it to become a theory it needs to pass a number of key tests. The hypothesis needs to accord with all current observations (literally all), it needs to be falsifiable in principle so that it can take (and then possible pass) an observational or experimental destruction test and it should, ideally, make testable and specific predictions so that appropriate tests can be carried out. When all this is done, it has passsed the tests and the tests have been positively peer reviewed, it becomes a theory.

I labour this point simply because there is a widespread misuse of the term 'theory' and sometimes the confusion arising from this is genuinely misleading.

But keep hypothesizing!!!

Olly

[SamAndrew]

I think they built the Larger Hadron Colider to answer these questions ? I don't think anyone knows the answers yet.

The ideas in Mass Effect are the same as the ones from Star Trek with inertial dampers.

[Ganymede12]

Thanks ollypenrice - that clears that up .

Mr Q, I don't think I could write a book based on this idea as this idea is based on a video game.

Despite the Sci-fi of the hypothesis I think the two questions could be answered.