Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: guest45734 on 11/11/2018 10:34:23
-
do quantum fluctuations/virtual particles acquire mass from the Higgs field momentarily?
The Higgs field has a none zero value on average, as do the quantum fluctuations filling all of space time. Are the quantum fluctuations the Higgs field???
https://en.wikipedia...tum_fluctuation, and > Higgs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_state
-
If I recall correctly, virtual particles are identical in every way to "real" particles. The only difference is how long they exist. So the Higgs field should affect virtual particles.
-
If I recall correctly, virtual particles are identical in every way to "real" particles. The only difference is how long they exist. So the Higgs field should affect virtual particles.
Thanks for the response.
You may be right, My reservation though is the Higgs boson itself is a virtual particle also that arises out of the vacuum of space like any other quantum fluctuation.
Would you say the higgs field overlays the normal random quantum fluctuations (as demonstrated by the Casimir effect) that exist throughout all of space, or would you agree they are one and the same.
I was just reading this link before I noticed you had replied to my question. https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/11/07/at-last-physicists-understand-where-matters-mass-comes-from/#626afcaa5bf9
Whilst the Higgs is (maybe) responsible for the rest mass of particles it is the gluons that give the remainder of a particles mass.
-
You may be right, My reservation though is the Higgs boson itself is a virtual particle also that arises out of the vacuum of space like any other quantum fluctuation.
Would you say the higgs field overlays the normal random quantum fluctuations (as demonstrated by the Casimir effect) that exist throughout all of space, or would you agree they are one and the same.
Virtual Higgs particles would just be an added component of the quantum vacuum background. They are just one species of fish in a sea full of other fish. Higgs particles even give mass to each other.
-
You may be right, My reservation though is the Higgs boson itself is a virtual particle also that arises out of the vacuum of space like any other quantum fluctuation.
Would you say the higgs field overlays the normal random quantum fluctuations (as demonstrated by the Casimir effect) that exist throughout all of space, or would you agree they are one and the same.
Virtual Higgs particles would just be an added component of the quantum vacuum background. They are just one species of fish in a sea full of other fish. Higgs particles even give mass to each other.
Thanks again for the reply
I am not so sure Higgs bosons give mass to everything including themselves. Qouting from wiki
"Some particles interact with the Higgs field while others don’t. Those particles that feel the Higgs field act as if they have mass. Something similar happens in an electric field – charged objects are pulled around and neutral objects can sail through unaffected. So you can think of the Higgs search as an attempt to make waves in the Higgs field [create Higgs bosons] to prove it’s really there. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson
The higgs boson itself is an excitation of the Higgs field which arises from the vacuum of space a bit like dark energy but perhaps not the same thing :)
-
If I recall correctly, virtual particles are identical in every way to "real" particles. The only difference is how long they exist.
A virtual particle is not a particle at all. It refers precisely to a disturbance in a field that is not a particle.
https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/
Could it be that great minds do not always think alike?
-
https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/ Could it be that great minds do not always think alike?
Thanks for that link. Do you view the dimensions of the Higgs field, electron field, muon field, photon field etc as just mathematical simplification ie they all exist space time dimensions, but it is easier to think of them separately.
Is the Heisenburg uncertainty principle explained by the Higgs field instability. Can dark energy or the cosmological constant be the result of the Higgs field.
-
Some interesting questions. there; most of which I'm not competent to tackle. However, I'll give it some thought.
Let's start by establishing what you mean by the dimensions of the Higgs field.
-
https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/
Could it be that great minds do not always think alike?
Interesting. I thought for sure that I read somewhere in the past that they were the same...
-
Interesting. I thought for sure that I read somewhere in the past that they were the same...
No, they are just a convenient shorthand for the maths, an exchange of energy/momentum which adds up to the same value as a particle
-
There are only observations that need to be explained. Concepts have to be data driven. If you don't follow where the data leads then you are not being scientific.
It would be instructive for readers to review the history of the eightfold way.
-
Let's start by establishing what you mean by the dimensions of the Higgs field.
In the link posted you posted, it references the photon dimension, the muon and electron dimensions, these particles move through the higgs field giving them mass.
My view is that the author maybe should have used the words Higgs field, electron field, photon field, rather than the word dimension. The author seemed to be giving the impression that the fields existed in different dimensions. I am quite happy with the concept of additional dimensions, to space time, to explain the likes of non locality, spooky action etc. I also wondered is the author driving at some aspect of string theory with 13 dimensions more or less.
I am fully aware that space time is full of quantum fluctuations, these were predicted by the HUP and proven by the Casimir effect. I find myself drawing parallels between this and the Higgs field and am wondering if the Higgs field more accurately describes a characteristic of space time, which causes the HUP effect to appear. The mexican hat analogy used to describe the higgs field might also apply to virtual particles appearing randomly. Ie is the Higgs field just another aspect of quantum foam, or is it something seperate which has nothing to do with HUP.
I suspect quantum foam appearing from space time might equally be said to appear from the Higgs field. How wrong am I??? The higgs field is a part of space time, are they one and the same.????
Edit the answers in this link may answer my question. I think the Higgs field/particle arises from the same vacuum that causes random quantum fluctuations. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/122105/what-does-the-higgs-boson-have-to-do-with-the-uncertainty-principle-and-quantum
Edit lifes a WIP wiki normally has some answers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy#The_Higgs_field
No one knows for sure there are lots of competing theories all trying to understand space
-
In the link posted you posted, it references the photon dimension, the muon and electron dimensions, these particles move through the higgs field giving them mass.
My view is that the author maybe should have used the words Higgs field, electron field, photon field, rather than the word dimension.
Where are you reading that?
As usual, Strassler’s article is very clear in talking about photon/electron fields etc. The only point he mentions dimensions is in response to a question where he talks about theories which consider extra dimensions.
-
As usual, Strassler’s article is very clear in talking about photon/electron fields etc. The only point he mentions dimensions is in response to a question where he talks about theories which consider extra dimensions.
At that point in the article is probably where my head exploded. But having had time to mull over the article and the soothing wiki link I posted, which had a little more history. I am happy say I have taken the middle view and am jumping firmly onto the fence and declaring all to be correct in their own way.
In summary and trying to balance on the fence :) :-
From the base level up space has a resonance (zero point energy > higgs field > multiple dimensions) it has a none zero value on average (explained both by the HUP and the Higgs Mexican hat) this gives rise to quantum fluctuations/virtual particles of all possible kinds (and may be temperature dependent). Which can cause all the effects mentioned in the wiki link and Straedlers link.
Extra dimensions as a minimum would be responsible for non locality and the wave part of wave particle duality. Straedler I think illuminates this aspect by mentioning the photon dimension, electron dimension etc. As we are aware through entanglement the waves of particles can be entangled ie connected even when separated by a distance. Objects as big as bucky balls can exhibit wave particle duality when fired at a double slit. So even objects with mass make a wave effect never mind photons. The spooky action requires an extra dimension to communicate its information ref individual waves spin etc, it is also easier to consider that electrons also partly exist in this extra dimension as they can also be entangled and exhibit wave particle effects in the double slit setup.
The Higgs field is an effect of the vacuum, it is none zero on average as is the HUP. Both are an effect of space time possibly linked into different none spacial dimensions.
I dont know if I managed to walk the fence without falling of there, what does anyone think.
-
If I recall correctly, virtual particles are identical in every way to "real" particles. The only difference is how long they exist.
A virtual particle is not a particle at all. It refers precisely to a disturbance in a field that is not a particle.
https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/
Could it be that great minds do not always think alike?
that's the way I think of a virtual particle too Bill. Not as something already existing but hiding from us, more as a result of change and there a 'field' is a very useful description of it. And to me, with the 'arrow of time' becoming the function allowing it to become 'real' to us
=
what I don't agree too, is calling it less real as it exist. Something that changes (or at least could change) something, locally defined, seems very much as if existing to me, even though time limited. If you think of Hawking radiation the assumption there is that a virtual pair actually becomes 'real'. Both particles do something, one diminish the mass inside the event horizon, the other act as 'energy/radiation' outside a event horizon, as far as I've gathered.
===
Bill, you might find this of interest
" On the History of Unified Field Theories " https://link.springer.com/article/10.12942/lrr-2004-2
-
Bill, you might find this of interest
" On the History of Unified Field Theories " https://link.springer.com/article/10.12942/lrr-2004-2
The thread is based around the higgs field/boson confirmed to exist in 2011,12 in the large Hadron collider. Your link is dated 2004 and does not mentions the Higgs boson or has anything to do with it. Why make the post on this thread, your comments seem unrelated, what point are you trying to make ????
-
Hmm, responding to Bills comment there. Those threads have a way to expand 'organically' GG :) don't take it personally.
-
As usual, Strassler’s article is very clear in talking about photon/electron fields etc. The only point he mentions dimensions is in response to a question where he talks about theories which consider extra dimensions.
At that point in the article is probably where my head exploded. But having had time to mull over the article and the soothing wiki link I posted, which had a little more history. I am happy say I have taken the middle view and am jumping firmly onto the fence and declaring all to be correct in their own way.
Matt Strassler’s site is one of my favourites for clarity; over the yrs Bill & I have discussed a number of topics from his articles. It is great to be able to read info without the pop science press misinterpreting it.
I agree that all are correct in their own way, but some points on dimensions. Strassler talks about the theories (pl) with extra dimensions, these are all ‘new theories’ with no real consensus. Also, there is no suggestion that there are separate dimensions for eg photons and electrons, the two fields could use the same dimension perhaps. The main argument for additional dimensions tends to be the local restrictions on interactions between particles/waves, which is also why they are often considered to be extremely small. Whether they are a mathematical abstraction or real is not yet clear, but lots of people looking.
However, the answer to your OP question is still no.
-
Matt Strassler’s site is one of my favourites for clarity; over the yrs Bill & I have discussed a number of topics from his articles. It is great to be able to read info without the pop science press misinterpreting it.
I agree that all are correct in their own way, but some points on dimensions. Strassler talks about the theories (pl) with extra dimensions, these are all ‘new theories’ with no real consensus. Also, there is no suggestion that there are separate dimensions for eg photons and electrons, the two fields could use the same dimension perhaps. The main argument for additional dimensions tends to be the local restrictions on interactions between particles/waves, which is also why they are often considered to be extremely small. Whether they are a mathematical abstraction or real is not yet clear, but lots of people looking.
However, the answer to your OP question is still no.
I have come to the same conclusion, thankyou for the input. The answer to the original OP is a big NO.
The thread drifted, a little but remained interesting I have answers to my current questions/musingsl.
Wave/particle duality (double slit experiment) local and non local interractions (entanglement) are very powerful arguments for at least one extra dimension that has the ability to transfer quantum information in the form of Qubits and or waves.
-
Hmm, responding to Bills comment there. Those threads have a way to expand 'organically' GG :) don't take it personally.
No worries, I have the answers I wanted, take the thread where you like, but to make it easier for simpletons like me, can you give a clue as to which direction you are going ;)
-
However, the answer to your OP question is still no.
OH SOD :( I forgot there are, two questions in the original OP, is this a NO to the first, second or both questions????
-
S/T field it is the perfect medium as it conserves kinetic energy w/o loss. Being the 1st fundamental force, preceeding the others it's origins were conceived in a warping which dictates its nature. This warping instilled a negative low energy of 10^-39th which are quantum fluctuations. These fluctuation constantly arise and fall along the entire fabric of S/T. Being a remanent of the Big Bang's separation of the four fundamental forces, the S/T fabric, Gravity, has within it's fabric sub elemantary particles that were present in the recombination period. As the S/T fabric rises and falls in quantum fluctuation, these primodal sub elementary particles are push up with the fluctuations and they recede with the fluctuations. In some instances, two fluctuation arise simultaneously with two sub elementary particles riding on top. At this point a spontaneous process possibility exist. As the two fluctuations recede, a symmetry breaking process occurs, both sub-elementary garner an angular momentum that have them drawn in a close enough proximity for them to bond. The resulting bond could have an infinite number of results, a virtual particle is one such result.
The above is not the same process employed by a higgs field in particle creation. A higgs field is a quantum field, it to is intrinsic to S/T and it to employs spontaneous symmetry breaking but the mechanism employed is different than quantum fluctuations. In creating a Higgs Boson, one must define a Boson as a massless, zero spin, energy/force, they are not a fermion particles. The Higgs field also carries no mass or spin. The Higgs Boson is created by concussion collision, in other words it forces energy into the Higgs field, so both share the same S/T location. The Hadron collider and particle - anti particle annihilation both have the ability to accomplish this.
In conclusion, a quantum fluctuation is a passive means of virtual particle creation, while the Hadron collider approach is an aggressive means to accomplish the similar results. What distinquishes a virtual particle from a real particle? The length of it's existence and a measure of it's inherent velocity acceleration. Does it immediate annihilate itself or does it accelerate. lol
-
Having read your post a couple of times, I suspect you are saying yes to the second question.
But you are definitely not taking the standard view on physics.
S/T field it is the perfect medium as it conserves kinetic energy w/o loss. Being the 1st fundamental force, preceeding the others it's origins were conceived in a warping which dictates its nature.
The standard response here is to state there are 4 fundamental forces of nature, gravity, electromagnetism, the strong and the weak nuclear forces. Space time is full of full of virtual particles and is not considered to be fundamental force of nature, but does transmit forces without loss.
HOWEVER gravity is not according to some theoretical physicists a fundamental force of nature and may be emergent as is time.
Would you happen to have a citation supporting the sentence I quoted, would you be referring to dark energy :)
In conclusion, a quantum fluctuation is a passive means of virtual particle creation
WIKI has a better description of quantum fluctuations and virtual particles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation .
The following is what I summarized a few post earlier, which Colin2B responded to, perhaps you neve read it
In summary and trying to balance on the fence :-
From the base level up space has a resonance (zero point energy > higgs field > multiple dimensions) it has a none zero value on average (explained both by the HUP and the Higgs Mexican hat) this gives rise to quantum fluctuations/virtual particles of all possible kinds (and may be temperature dependent). Which can cause all the effects mentioned in the wiki link and Straedlers link.
Extra dimensions as a minimum would be responsible for non locality and the wave part of wave particle duality. Straedler I think illuminates this aspect by mentioning the photon dimension, electron dimension etc. As we are aware through entanglement the waves of particles can be entangled ie connected even when separated by a distance. Objects as big as bucky balls can exhibit wave particle duality when fired at a double slit. So even objects with mass make a wave effect never mind photons. The spooky action requires an extra dimension to communicate its information ref individual waves spin etc, it is also easier to consider that electrons also partly exist in this extra dimension as they can also be entangled and exhibit wave particle effects in the double slit setup.
The Higgs field is an effect of the vacuum, it is none zero on average as is the HUP. Both are an effect of space time possibly linked into different none spatial dimensions.
I dont know if I managed to walk the fence without falling of there, what does anyone think.
Note I spelt spatial correctly in the above post
-
Bill has a inquisitive mind, well, as I found :) and when you want to cover a subject it's always good to take a look at the history of it., that's what I usually do when wondering about things, and I think it's the same for most of us. We need to know
=
and I never think of the guys here as simpletons GG
-
Would you happen to have a citation supporting the sentence I quoted, would you be referring to dark energy Quote from: Pesqueira on Yesterday at 14:05:04
I allow people to believe what they wish, their miscalculation are their own. Do your own research! lol
-
Note I spelt spatial correctly in the above post
Congratulations, to your third grade teacher! lol