01 Apr 10
2 edits
any explanations on the particle accelerator and the elusive 'God particle'. I have tried to understand this in laymens terms, so far it seems to suggest that particle is untraceable because it 'jumps', dimensions, if anyone can help me get a handle on this i would be most appreciative. remember i am a dummy 🙂
i found this site which is a little helpful
http://plus.maths.org/latestnews/sep-dec08/lhc/index.html
02 Apr 10
Originally posted by KazetNagorraOne other possible reason for not finding the Higgs boson is that it might not be a Higgs boson at all.
The Higgs boson explains why particles have mass. But the effect of mass is very weak compared to other forces. So it's difficult to isolate this effect from others and consequently to find the Higgs boson among other particles.
I'm just saying...
02 Apr 10
Originally posted by KazetNagorrammm, its like an assumption, is that correct? one assumes the presence of the particle because of its effects, like gravitons, they have never been observed but it is assumed that they exist from the 'force', or the effect that they exert? Is this correct?
The Higgs boson explains why particles have mass. But the effect of mass is very weak compared to other forces. So it's difficult to isolate this effect from others and consequently to find the Higgs boson among other particles.
i am really pleading with you Kazety to forgive my ignorance, because i know practically nothing about this and it seems the more questions i ask, the less i seem to actually understand, in fact, i am scared of asking even more for i know the sea is deep and i shall be washed out and engulfed in ignorance. 🙂
02 Apr 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell, clearly something has to explain why things have mass. The Higgs boson is just an explanation that fits in nicely with the Standard Model of elementary particles (the model that explains everything except mass, relativity and gravity).
mmm, its like an assumption, is that correct? one assumes the presence of the particle because of its effects, like gravitons, they have never been observed but it is assumed that they exist from the 'force', or the effect that they exert? Is this correct?
i am really pleading with you Kazety to forgive my ignorance, because i know practically n ...[text shortened]... g even more for i know the sea is deep and i shall be washed out and engulfed in ignorance. 🙂
02 Apr 10
Originally posted by KazetNagorrahi, i found this amazing site for noobs, the particle adventure, its awesome 🙂
Well, clearly something has to explain why things have mass. The Higgs boson is just an explanation that fits in nicely with the Standard Model of elementary particles (the model that explains everything except mass, relativity and gravity).
http://www.particleadventure.org/index.html
09 Apr 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWill we be fried by cosmic rays? Sucked into LHC-produced back holes? Hoovered up by wormholes to be dumped in a parallel Universe in another time? Will the world be tipped into a state in which we can't exist? No, no, no and no. The LHC can do nothing that nature hasn't done already, and we've survived it. It isn't expected to produce any black holes, or wormholes, whatsoever, and even if it does, they'll be extremely tiny, disappear in an instant, or be completely harmless. As for vacuum bubbles in which we couldn't exist, if the LHC could create them, then so would nature, but this has never happened.
any explanations on the particle accelerator and the elusive 'God particle'. I have tried to understand this in laymens terms, so far it seems to suggest that particle is untraceable because it 'jumps', dimensions, if anyone can help me get a handle on this i would be most appreciative. remember i am a dummy 🙂
i found this site which is a little helpful
http://plus.maths.org/latestnews/sep-dec08/lhc/index.html
As for those people who are reportedly suing CERN for endangering humankind — well, maybe they'd be a lot happier in a parallel universe anyway.
i like how much effort they put into soothng these worries. totally not biased.
an interesting read otherwise.
27 Apr 10
Originally posted by jaywillNo. Omega-minus baryon definitely exists - it's a baryon comprising three 'strange' flavour quarks. Higgs is a boson which is theorized to imbue particles with mass, and it may or may not exist, the LHC should enable us to decide.
Is the Higgs boson particle the same thing as what use to be called Omega minus ?
28 Apr 10
2 edits
Originally posted by avalanchethecatThanks. Very interestng. I think the last book I looked at said that Dr. Barry Gell Mann (?) was theorizing about the existence of Omega minus and they were searching for it.
No. Omega-minus baryon definitely exists - it's a baryon comprising three 'strange' flavour quarks. Higgs is a boson which is theorized to imbue particles with mass, and it may or may not exist, the LHC should enable us to decide.
It seems that since then it has been discovered. Cool.
But wasn't omega minus suppose to have been the last and tiniest sub-atomic particle ?
28 Apr 10
Originally posted by jaywillAll of the quarks predicted by the standard model have been observed. Omega minus is not an elementary particle since it consists of three strange quarks.
Thanks. Very interestng. I think the last book I looked at said that Dr. Barry Gell Mann (?) was theorizing about the existence of Omega minus and they were searching for it.
It seems that since then it has been discovered. Cool.
But wasn't omega minus suppose to have been the last and tiniest sub-atomic particle ?
More information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_model