smarticle particle
no such thing
its just people trying to debunk religion
smarticle particle
no such thing
its just people trying to debunk religion
Thank you for your wonderful opinion which has no relevance at all to the thread or anything to do with the Higgs Boson in the slightest. Truely your mighty opinion will be remebered for all time over the cold hard scientific facts!
Unless you're being sarcastic, which I hope you are.
Ok then, go on, please justify giving a force mediating particle the name the God particle (For that matter, how is that less offensive than thinking it shouldn't be implied to be godlike?). Since I'm apparently trolling, there surely must be a good reason for it no? I mean, sure, the gluons (Holds the nuclei together!), photons (comes from the greek word for light) and weak bosons (Because the force is much much weaker than The strong and Electromagnetic forces) all have names that are completely logical,but hey.
And this is the last post I'm going to make in this thread about naming conventions, if we must have this argument, feel free to join me in PMs.
If anyone has an actual question about particle physics, this thread might get somewhere again.
Double posting, but the Higgs has been found to the 5 Sigma level to have a mass of 126.5 GeV.
This article says the Higgs Boson is 125.3 GeV +/- 0.6 GeV and that a different type of boson is 126.5 GeV, but it is possible that one particle gave both values.
Originally Posted by Article
this really isn't the best name to give a particle
5 standard deviations is the standard for declaring something discovered in particle physics (It's 99.99994% chance of being correct, give or take a 9), so this is offically found to within the standard that this will be accepted by the majority of physicists.
Oops on my part then. I'm sure the report I read ealier said the number I gave above. The official release doesn't have an exact number, but I'm sure that a technical paper will pop up on arxiv soon that will be more informative.
If they found a second particle, that would be quite interesting too.
I suppose it wouldn't be unprecedented for the Higgs field to have more than one Boson, since the Weak interaction already has 3 (W+, W- and Z), with slightly different masses.
Does the Standard Model / SUSY allow for an additional boson? Does the math still work out?
As far as I'm aware, the math behind the basic Standard Model does not allow for more than one Higgs boson, it should have 0 Electrical Charge, 0 Colour Charge and no Spin. I assume the next step is going to be to verify whether these Bosons have those properties or not
If there are multiple Higgs Bosons, that would actually match a model with a (or multiple) Higgs Doublets (or triplets,etc) such as supersymmetric models. I couldn't even begin to guess which one of those models would be likely to come up if there is more than one Higgs, though I would imagine the MSSM (Minimal Super Symmetric Model) which predicts supersymmetric particles while keeping as much of the standard model as possible will be where they start looking to begin with.
Thank you Mr. Lozmaster. You're truly an inspiration.
Here's a good article on why people should stop calling it the "God Particle". Frankly, I think it's a stupid title.
http://io9.com/5923170/stop-calling-it-the-god-particle
Apparently the name "Higgs" is so long that it needs to be nicknamed "the god particle."
why are so many of you hung up on the friggin name? Who cares about what the media decided to call it? It's called the Higgs Boson
Here ya go
|
Bookmarks