Will the Higgs Boson Destroy the Universe?

By Corey S. Powell | September 12, 2014 3:36 pm
Higgs boson seen on May 18, 2012. The world did not end. (Credit: CERN)

Higgs boson, detected at the Large Hadron Collider on May 18, 2012. The world did not end. (Credit: CERN)

Improbable as it may seem, this question has been pinging around the Internet a lot this past week, because of a mix of Stephen Hawking and shameless sensationalism. Life is short (with or without the help of the Higgs), so I’ll answer it as succinctly as I can.

No.

If you want to get technical, a Higgs doomsday is possible. No device on Earth could trigger it, though, and in nature it probably wouldn’t happen for 10100  years. So basically, essentially, fundamentally: No. Now let’s move on and worry about more serious concerns.

[You can also follow me on Twitter, where I promise not to spread unnecessary doomsday rumors.]

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Bonusje

    Hello If higgs boson exists why is it it never shows in the cern detectors except when selfmade?

    • Ben

      Due to the fact that the Higgs is extremely small, unless you force it out of matter it will stay inside and be obscured by the other components of matter.

      • Bonusje

        Hmm both above. The answers do not Satisfy Me. But no one could yet concerning the higgs enigma.

        There are just to many discrepanties and unbelievable points to be made. Higgs does like the frankensteinmonster not fit in society.

        Also the higgs was raised as solution concerning the interactions of the weak force and nuclear decay but that problem We solved already without higgs.

        But anyhow Thanks for the effort.

        • Justin Tillman

          You can’t discredit something because you do not understand it. You will remain in ignorance your entire life if you do that.

          • Bonusje

            I have Learned that when derogatories make their entranche fraud came and the cybertrolls of the economical consensus aka established powers and moneydrainers.

            I am Not discrediting I Asked Mere Questions and you feel treatened.

            Solve any ignorance by simply then give the Answers about a monster that fits nowhere and at same time bypassing the info the weakforce questions radiation decay elementary states already are Solved without higgs

            This seems yet another case where not Science but budget did the job.

            See Comments for more Samples https://twitter.com/UN/status/511304692614561792

          • Bonusje

            We Realised the Weak Force and Nuclear decay do not exist together But after eachother > When a Element decays by nuclear emmision then the elemental/chemical composition and so the weak force itself changes into another state another Element with other Signature.

            So nuclear decay and weak force exist together until the isotope has reached the last and stable state where no Nuclear decay anymore wil happen and weak force will be alone and stable.

            How of a sudden it also became to be the mystery of every “restingmass” what not even exists except theoretically in a far empty space where no gravity pulls? That is just the best jesuit evil spirit of budgetghouls I am Afraid.

            Every Matter in the Universe is under influence of Gravity at any distance and so always in Fact Falling…Never rests.

            All Creation is Based on the Hydrogen Atom. Where would such monster hide in there?

            Matter contains multiple kilotons of energy a gram(Hirosjima is Guessed to had transformed 0,6 to 0,8 grams of matter 16 kilotons)) so then divide that by that billions of atoms any chosen gram contains…how much energy then is left per atom or molecule to can contain any higgs monster of 137GeV ?

            The jesuits of the many scientific and political agenda scams frauds and robberies did it again!

            And corrupted from Births on into it they supply you with existense and income… no Choice than join them?

          • Bonusje

            Seems you have an scientific importance afterall. Because without you I Would never have Spoken These Words here for what they are Worth. Awaking the sleeping Giants!

          • Bonusje

            I have Learned that when derogatories make their entranche fraud came and the cybertrolls of the economical consensus aka established powers and moneydrainers.

            I am Not discrediting I Asked Mere Questions and you feel treatened.

            Solve any ignorance by simply then give the Answers about a monster that fits nowhere and at same time bypassing the info the weakforce questions radiation decay elementary states already are Solved without higgs

            We Realised the Weak Force and Nuclear decay do not exist together But after eachother > When a Element decays by nuclear emission then the elemental/chemical composition and so the weak force itself changes into another state another Element with other Signature.

            So nuclear decay and weak force occur together as process of transformation of weak force until the isotope has reached or transformed to the last and stable state where no Nuclear decay anymore wil happen and weak force will be alone and stable.

            How of a sudden it also became to be the mystery of every “restingmass” what not even exists except theoretically in a far empty space where no gravity pulls? That is just the best jesuit evil spirit of budgetghouls I am Afraid.

            Every Matter in the Universe is under influence of Gravity at any distance and so always in Fact Falling…Never rests.

            All Creation is Based on the Hydrogen Atom. Where would such monster hide in there?

            Matter contains multiple kilotons of energy a gram(Hirosjima is Guessed to had transformed 0,6 to 0,8 grams of matter 16 kilotons)) so then divide that by that billions of atoms any chosen gram contains…how much energy then is left per atom or molecule to can contain any higgs monster of 137GeV ?

    • coreyspowell

      Good question! Basically the Higgs lurks in the background (as the Higgs field) except when there is enough energy to bring the Higgs boson into brief physical existence. Even then the Higgs breaks down quickly, in less than one billionth of a trillionth of a second. That’s why it takes a machine the size of the Large Hadron Collider to create the Higgs, and why it took years of analysis to find it definitively.

      Note that there are many other energetic locations in the universe where the Higgs boson can emerge, and the Higgs field makes itself felt all the time, even when the Higgs boson itself is out of sight.

      • Bonusje

        Hmm ” except when there is enough energy to bring the Higgs boson into brief physical existence””

        There is regularly energy tentimes lhc or cern over like the Cosmic Radiation that comes by often enough and then must have had bull eyed any higgs particle by long now and We would have Sensed the enormous Consequenses and decayproducts or radiation.

        That Never was the Case I am afraid.

        Then there are many many extreme high energy areas in the Universe like the Suns Black Holes Jets….hawkins radiation…No higgs or indirect symptoms…?

        Moon is hit billions of times by utmost high energies….?

        • coreyspowell

          This article contains some helpful background information:

          http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/physics/2014/07/the-astronomical-particle-colliders-that-put-our-own-to-shame/

          Cosmic rays probably produce natural Higgs bosons all the time, but the events occur high in the atmosphere and the particles decay so quickly that they do not make it to the ground. Scientists can observe the cascades of secondary particles from these “air showers,” though, so in fact we *have* seen the decay products & radiation you refer to.

          It may seem strange that the Higgs boson exists–but it really is there, and physicists really have detected it. It is a constant challenge to the human intellect to expand our thinking enough to comprehend the incredible mechanisms of nature.

          • Bonusje

            I Guess that can Not be because the rays also bombard satellites for decades now and never news reached Me that stated they would be damaged by any radiation where I think decay of higgs would give massive damage aswell as other products like intens gammarays and particles and activate the materials of the satellites to become secundairy isotopes. None of such seems observed.

            Be Aware splitting to obtain higgs with 137GeV seemingly out of the deeper than nuclear core seems more energetic than usual atomsplitting.

            I reckon such would Never go unnoticed IF existed? So do LHC detectors also Say.

          • Tony Malloy

            I have to say Corey you explain things very well and have great patients in doing so, more than I would ….thank you for such an informative and interesting discussion.

  • Gabriel Larriuz

    Yes,the experts that built the Fukushima tsunami protection wall said about the same thing. Good day.

    • coreyspowell

      There is really no comparison between the two.

      Nature creates events far more powerful than anything in the Large Hadron Collider all the time. If anything is going to trigger a new vacuum state in the universe, it would be a supernova or black hole–not a puny experiment here on Earth. Iif this kind of disaster started elsewhere in the universe, there’s really nothing to be done about it. But as I say above, there is no reason to think that it has happened, and every reason to think that such a doomsday scenario is either wildly unlikely or outright impossible.

      • Gabriel Larriuz

        The difference between the impossible and the unlikely is infinite.

        I agree that under the currently known models of the universe, the destruction of the universe by smashing particles seems unlikely, this is science. Science, specially at the level of the LHC, deals with the unknowns of the universe and that’s what worries me.

        I am most certainly not a particle physicist, but when I hear that you found x predicted particle with some probability p of being right, I cringe. That uncertainty that is so easily dismissed, means a lot to me. It means that although the model is right and works and can make predictions, the model is most certainly not complete.

        What if instead of knowing almost all there is about particles, the model is wrong. What if there is a much larger truth that current mathematics can’t even envision? What if the standard model and the Ptolemaic model of the universe share the same obsolescence?

        That’s why I worry about the LHC. I have the hope that there is much more to learn from the universe than what we can currently measure and calculate. I also believe that one very good way to find new law’s of physics is with instruments like the LHC, so even though it scares me, I think we should do it.

        Good day.

  • http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm Uncle Al

    Ending the Higgs field obtains massless but not chargeless leptons. Massless charge is smartless. A turnoffable Higgs field is theoretic piddle.

    Euclid is rigorous, voluminous, and – cartography – incomplete. Cartography was not parameterized. Euclid was repaired by Bolyai then Thurston. Theoretic plums pulled from nether cogitations are falsified by observation.

    Newton fell to relativity and quantum mechanics. The Dirac equation failed for proton magnetic moment (Otto Stern), then quarks. Particle theory was achiral, then Yang and Lee. Any physical theory in 1000+ refereed publications with zero empirical success is wrong for an undiscovered footnote.

  • John P. Tarver

    Who could be disapoibted when the photon is not real? Telemach-Rosen is a paradox in itself.

  • John P. Tarver

    Adding more mass to the universe would not do much at all, but that first mass outcome of the god particle involked General Relativity.

  • simon jackson

    Someone should let that guys tyres down! Lol

  • Steve

    Paradoxically, the instability would spread at the speed of light. We would never know it has happened, because our neurons would be gone before we would become aware of the phenomena. We would never know!

    • John P. Tarver

      The ongoing birth of our univrrse tends to demonstrate the safety of additional god particles.

  • Георги Кънев

    One of the
    mysteriously questions is asking about the “shape of the universe”.
    Interestingly curiosity by Brian! Of course the answer is following the full
    understanding of universe and how it is working? The last is already pretty
    clear as to take into account the last and very powerful theory and it is USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com Let begin with this: Brian
    interesting question: “can the universe expand faster than speed of light” and
    you answer “yes because the space itself can expand as well”. Well, I’m not
    convinced that this is the right answer…why? Let me explain: According to USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com the expansion of the universe looks like this only from our point of
    observation – radius position of our Sun in our galaxy, which means that
    because our Sun was born on the center of our galaxy (almost on the center),
    during its movement towards the periphery and aging, more and more new masses
    (from our galaxy and then beyond) comes to existence (only for us) and more and
    more masses add towards the inertia of beginning ones, which disturbs the
    equilibrium between the centripetal and centrifugal forces in any existing so
    far orbital systems and to restore the equilibrium the space begin to expand
    (see USM). That is possible because in the universe doesn’t exist absolutely
    independently space, but only as a distances between the masses, which always
    are formed through orbital systems. Whether this expansion is actually real or
    not? For us it is real, but if we lift in the over space where our galaxies are
    atoms (nuclei) there and take a look down towards our galaxy we can’t see any
    expansion, but only (if we can see so much accurately) that our sun together
    with other neighboring stars simply shifting towards the periphery of the
    galaxy and they places are taking by another coming from the center stars. So
    the expansion of the universe from our position of observation (the Sun)
    actually is the moving of the Sun towards the periphery, looking from “above” ,
    which means that the expansion of the space (or the same the universe) can’t
    reach the speed of light! Let see also these two articles and then we should
    make some conclusions:

    What is the
    essence of the energy in the universe itself and from where it comes from and
    what is its value? From page 96, 97, 98 USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com follows that in the beginning of springing up of Our space the full
    energy is equal to zero for us. Then with thickening of the micro cosmos and
    expanding of macro cosmos due to the asymmetry of these coefficients, which
    depends by our position of observation in this case our living position, we
    have the illusion that the energy for us is increases, because we are close to
    the nuclei of the atoms rather than the stars and galaxy. But the macro cosmos
    expands more rapidly by the same reason, so full energy in our space is again
    equal to zero. So it is seen that the energy is “one reality in the illusion”, as
    well as the world itself! See USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com
    So by this very elegant way (haw has liking to said Einstein himself) is
    determinates one of the most mysterious physical phenomenon in the
    universe!

    If You see
    part I USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com You can see that the essence of the
    field (any field, see part II) actually explain how the orbiting object upon
    which is applies centripetal force creates its own field (centripetal
    acceleration directed at the center of this object). In fact belated contra
    action of the centripetal force of the main attracting body creates this field
    of the attracted object and there is no matter what kind of orbiting curved
    line this object describes, because in the universe there it isn’t absolutely
    space, but the space is only distance between the bodies. That is so called by
    me, belated functions and it is obviously that if the field (light) moves
    supposedly with endless velocity, on the universe shouldn’t be any fields and
    hence messes and the universe will be empty – absolute nothing. So the limited
    velocity of field (light) movement actually create all fields and therefore all
    objects in the universe and makes it full of life!

    Now let
    begin: From the first article follows that if we are part from the space which
    we observe it looks like endlessly, because together with our aging (moving of
    the Sun from the center of our galaxy towards the periphery) the visible for us
    space continuously is expands and this runs in accelerating mode. When we begin
    in the center of our galaxy, our “universe” was this very first proto particle
    which looks like that the universe is limited and its size and energy inclines
    to zero in this very first moment of very first formation of “mass” – our mass!
    As to take into account this: Very interesting question: “whether the speed of
    light is absolutely…” Of course not, but this is related only to the constant
    of light spread like a real number, not as a limited which we can’t reach! What
    I mean? Firstly see pages: 94 to 98 and pages: 198 to 202 USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com here was delivered these
    formulae: r=h/C.m where: r – is the
    resonance radius of the particle; h – is the constant of Plank; C – is the
    velocity of light; m – is the mass of particle; and this formula:
    C(i)=[m(p)/m(i)].C where: C(i) – is the constant of velocity of light (like
    a real number) about the different possible worlds (see shown pages); m(p) – is the mass of proton; m(i) – is the mass
    of current stable particle about current possible world; C – is velocity of
    light in our world where the velocity of light has this value (C). As it is seen on the shown above pages the
    resonance radius is connected with the mass of the particle which is stable
    particle in examined world and the real number of the velocity of spread of the
    field in this possible world. The important conclusion is not only possibility
    to be created “Oracul” (see the pages), but more importantly is the consequence
    that on the center of our galaxy (in fact any galaxy) where are situated and
    was born the proto particles the limited constant of spread of field (“light”)
    is different like a real number compare to this value in our space which is
    (C). That is one of the reasons that we can’t see the central zone of any
    galaxy! And according to second and third articles, we can clarify the picture
    of “our universe” its size and evolving and its end. And obviously our universe
    is one reality in the illusion. But it isn’t the truly “absolutely universe”,
    because according to the first article: “looking from above there it isn’t any
    expansion, our galaxy is the atom (nucleus) on sodium in the over space and if
    we can see our Sun…it simply is shifting towards the periphery of our galaxy –
    atom of sodium in the over space”. So what is actually the absolutely
    (mathematically) universe? That is endlessly sequence of sub spaces and over
    spaces where the atoms (nuclei) in our space are galaxies from the sub space
    and galaxies in our space are atoms (nuclei) of the over space (and so on) and
    all these is connected and it is consequence by the way of field (masses)
    creation, see part I, part II USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com That is the truly absolutely
    universe, but what is the real truly universe? The things are already
    clarified, simply we have to take into account that the connection between the
    spaces is a constant defined in part II (USM) and it is time constant which is
    (10 rising to a 31 power) folds and linearly is the same about distances
    connection. So when in our space passes 1 second in the sub space passes (10
    rising to a 31 power) seconds and when in the over space
    passes 1 second in our space passes (10 rising to a 31 power) seconds! The same are the
    proportions about the distances as well! So becomes clear that even the closest
    spaces to ours almost don’t exist such as radiation and distances! Then what
    about more distantly spaces? Their existence practically absent not for us, but
    for the absolutely universe! That is real truly universe! G.Kanev

    • Bonusje

      Hmm the Universe got No shape because it does NOT exist

      Also you and the science bunch talk about expanding universes…ehmm in what space then it is it expands? SO NO universe is expanding can you understand?…> Because the Space WHERE IN it expands THEN Must BE that Universe!

      Also time does NOT exist. Time measurement is only a invention to “measure” speeds and durations of actions processes reactions movements changes…

      SO concepts like timespace and ALL of einstein Simply do NOT exist!

      Of course I will have to Tell this over and over again as long money is biggest equasion in science.

      Also there are NO multiple universes because nothing plus nothing is Simply stil a big nothing!

      This also makes the bigbang None existent and Space Infinite.

      • David Kidd

        Okay, You don’t want to call it a Universe. I get that. When you observe the sky at night what is it you call those things up there?

        If you have ever used a telescope to observe things on earth and have noted that the telescope did indeed make something far away from you appear closer such that you could observe it and or study it, then how is that any different than using the telescope to view the night sky?
        So what terminology would you use to describe all that stuff up there?

        • Bonusje

          Read again and now Carefully! I Never said what you state ..Talking about the emptiness is Not about the Matter the creation IN that emptiness Nor about any Stars1

        • Bonusje

          In other Words : the Universe is No container it is an Absence … where in Creation Can exist .. the stars the Galaxies!

      • Георги Кънев

        dE/dt=N, we see that the time is again converse
        proportionally to the “cycle” energy, but the “linear” energy is equal to the work
        made up in some process: E=A=F.s where
        (s) is the road which passes the force (F) and in this case it is the length of
        wave equal to: s=c/w where c=1, so we
        can see that actually the time is proportionally to the distances (inside the
        cycle) as well and that is only about relativistic presentation of the examined
        functions. That is exactly how it is written here: What is the essence of the energy in the
        universe itself and from where it comes from and what is its value? From page
        96, 97, 98 USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com follows that in the beginning of
        springing up of Our space the full energy is equal to zero for us. Then with
        thickening of the micro cosmos and expanding of macro cosmos due to the
        asymmetry of these coefficients, which depends by our position of observation
        in this case our living position, we have the illusion that the energy for us
        is increases, because we are close to the nuclei of the atoms rather than the
        stars and galaxy. But the macro cosmos expands more rapidly by the same reason,
        so full energy in our space is again equal to zero. So it is seen that the
        energy is “one reality in the illusion”, as well as the world itself! See USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com So by this very elegant way (haw
        has liking to said Einstein himself) is determinates one of the most mysterious
        physical phenomenon in the universe!

        So let
        return to the equation of time connection in the special relativity, (see page
        47 USM): t’=t/(beta); t=t’/(beta) As we can see the two times in movable and in
        immovable coordinates is fully replicable, then the time interval is equal to:
        (delta)t=(t’-t)=(t-t’) (which means that the time can’t has vector –
        representation, or some direction in the space). And the relativistic energy is
        equal to: E=1/(delta)t So what will happen if the time interval is
        equal to zero? The energy will be infinity! But such event is impossible to
        exist physically, so obviously the time interval cannot be equal to zero!? It
        means that the velocities of the two coordinates cannot be equal between and
        equal to the velocity of light, i.e. if that are two light rays. So to avoid
        this contradiction in the special relativity we need again shown above new
        definition of light velocity in accordance with the absence of absolutely
        space. From here appears new question: “whether the simultaneously is really
        existing in real, but not absolutely space”? The answer is no, exactly because
        the absolute space doesn’t exist, which means that we always have interacting
        accelerations between all existing objects in the universe. So how we can
        synchronize two clocks to begin simultaneously? The answer is that in real, not
        absolutely space it is impossible! So obviously we can see that the special
        relativity equations are always approximately, which is physically orderly if
        we can always estimate the error!

        Of course again follows that the so called “big
        bang” conception is impossible to occur, because the time cannot be equal to
        zero in real space and therefore the time cannot begin in this phantasmagoria
        “big bang” point!

        Finally several words about the well known
        formula of full energy: E=m.C.C which again is exact only in
        absolutely space (where we haven’t accelerations), but not in real space, where
        the exact formula is: E(m)=0,98024.m.C.C (see page 50, 51 formula 17, fig.13) USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com where appears the energy of connection in any orbital
        system, which is: 9,38 [Mev] related to the mass of proton and without the
        inertia of the revolving mass, which is compare well with the fig.12 page 51.
        The exact proof of this energy you can see in nuclear spectrum analysis: pages:
        151 to 174 USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com G.Kanev

    • Jack Thurlow

      hello I am really scared And worried about the Higgs boson and am having sleepless nights can you put my mind at rest and also is their definitely a Higgs boson

  • Георги Кънев

    About CERN
    experimental data, which are claim for Higgs boson proving.

    First of
    all let me say several words about the experimental technology table and
    possibilities which give us such experimental building. It is seen that there
    are detected only high energy particles or photons, which are supposed to be
    the result of known previously nuclear reaction. Nice, but we cannot see the
    definite entire cannel of nuclear reaction, for example, which leads to full
    picture of the observed event, obviously because the detector room must to
    contain another methods of particles tracks and will become much larges and
    much complicated for analysis. But only from such detail picture of event we
    can predict with enough certainty for the new particles existence for example
    and its detail properties. Shown detector room cannot give us such confidence.
    By the shown experimental data we cannot predict in any way that this
    eventually existing particle called Higgs boson has something to do with the so
    called standard model. How it is said in this paper “the experiment may has
    some connection with the standard model”(but obviously may hasn’t!). But this
    it isn’t proving ground of discussed hypothetical Higgs particle. So obviously
    You cannot prove any of Your assertions which was grounded about the Nobel
    praise for physics – 2013.

  • sebastiandunbar

    I have looked at the math and it seems that the HB isn’t really there, I don’t know if this is all mere grand standing or (Cern) isn’t saying much else.

  • drgsrinivas

    Higg’s field is itself a scientific superstition, why bother about the Higg’s doomsday! It is actually the Ether which is responsible for the physicists’ delusion of Higg’s field.
    http://debunkingrelativity.com/2013/12/08/explaining-the-double-slit-experiment/

  • Георги Кънев

    About Nobel
    lecture of Englert and Higgs: I like somewhat the lecture of Higgs, because he
    pretty honestly realizes weak points of the so called BEH mechanism, which of
    course is totally wrong…. Why? let me explain:

    The
    polarization of the space it isn’t valid only about the electromagnetic
    interaction but also about the gravity… in fact the gravity polarization is the
    essentially explanation of the electromagnetic polarization, see the following,
    which was posted about Jupiter’s belts but fully applicable here: On pages 55,
    56, 57 USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com is shown the essence of
    polarization of the space and the equation of that, which is universally about
    the all stable fields: gravitational, electromagnetic and nuclear and explain
    in very simple and convincing way behavior of strong and weak interactions. In
    particular it is explains the belts of Jupiter and Saturn and their
    approximately sizes. Most important conclusion is that these belts have
    relativistic velocity of birth, which leads to the conclusion that these two
    planets are the most dangerous place on the solar system. So the polarization
    of the space is creates by the field generally and the quantity difference
    between the gravity and electrostatic is consequence by the expansion of the
    universe (in fact our galaxy) see part I USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com .And respectively the magnetism is rotation mass inertial moment but
    with the new quantity, because of the same reason. Moreover the quantum
    mechanics can’t be useful about the essentially conclusion about the nature of
    the fields, because this theory is crated upon the wave representation of the
    world and observation of the energy rule of preservation only, why?… see part
    I USM where is given the essential equation of the universal field. So the
    electromagnetism is consequence of the gravity (because they are in fact the
    same field but with differently quantity sizes). So obviously it is impossible
    to exists scalar field without mass, even upon the rules of the
    electromagnetism. This was the first delusion of BEH, there must to add only
    the following: The problem of photon comes from this: The empty or absolute
    space doesn’t exist according to USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com because of the essence of creating the fields (all gravitation,
    electrostatic-magnetic and nuclear) and their interconnection regarding their
    quality essence and quantity sizes. So in the general relativity any where the
    velocity of light in vacuum must to replace with the velocity of light in empty
    space and because such empty space doesn’t exist, that is the main reason that
    such velocity can’t be reached. So obviously the photon can has mass in repose
    equal to zero only in empty space, which doesn’t exist in reality, then all
    real photons in fact are virtual photons (relativistic photons) which in low
    velocities, their masses inclined to zero, but they have some masses through
    interaction with the surrounding matter (the surrounding matter carry partially
    light ray – experiment of Fizau). This interaction is realizes by the
    electromagnetic field in accordance with the equations of Maxwell Lorentz and
    in accordance with the essence of the light ray shown in USM. So there spring
    up again the problem with the so called Higgs boson, namely: If this Higgs
    scalar field is indeed purely energy, then from what this energy is
    contains?…. from photons? But how we already see the photons have inertial
    interactions with the surrounding matter, therefore they have interaction
    masses in low velocities and significant masses (relativistic masses) in relativistic
    velocities (virtual photons). But the Higgs scalar field is purely energy
    (there it isn’t any masses), then from what is contain this purely energy, or
    simply such event cannot exist?!
    Velocity of light is different in different mediums but that difference
    is relatively small and generally the light ray is travels with the speed close
    to the speed of light but a little less than the speed of light in empty space.
    Relativistic case about the speed of light is appears when the surrounding
    matter interacting with the light ray is in relativistic state.

    Now let
    continue with most insolvent part of BEH and that is so called “condensation”
    of the scalar field into mass boson. There is suggests the analogy with the
    symmetry and disturb the symmetry in one another incorrect theory about
    superconductivity. I don’t stop to the problem that suggested by Higgs about
    quality and quantity difference with the relativistic nature of the BEH,
    because the superconductivity it isn’t result of electrons pairs like some kind
    of condensation, but another far more convince reasons (see superconductivity
    USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com ) . So explanation how the scalar
    field passes into mass dynamical vector particle is stupid and indeed is a full
    fog in the mind of the lecturer. Let pass into the experimental table of the
    CERN regarding BEH. First of all obtained there new particle which I call 126
    boson has nothing to do with the so called Higgs scalar non mass field, because
    such field cannot exist as well as the big bang never happen…. Why? see Q&A
    USM http://www.kanevuniverse.com and many more…. G.Kanev

  • http://newwphysics.blogspot.com/ Gunn Quznetsov
NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Out There

Notes from the far edge of space, astronomy, and physics.

About Corey S. Powell

Corey S. Powell is DISCOVER's Editor at Large and former Editor in Chief. Previously he has sat on the board of editors of Scientific American, taught science journalism at NYU, and been fired from NASA. Corey is the author of "20 Ways the World Could End," one of the first doomsday manuals, and "God in the Equation," an examination of the spiritual impulse in modern cosmology. He lives in Brooklyn, under nearly starless skies.

ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

Collapse bottom bar
+