Tsuyoiko
DON'T PANIC!
- 11 Mar 2005
- 3,136
- 165
I intend this thread as a free-for-all for any discussions relating to Quantum Theory.
I decided to start it as some comments on the critical thinking thread were going too far off topic.
If anyone sees any flaws in my reasoning, or in my understanding of Quantum Theory I would be glad to hear a better explanation, preferably from experts in the field!
I agree that the statement makes no sense. However, it's not because Quantum Theory makes no sense, but because if we analyse that statement in the context of Quantum Theory, it becomes meaningless.
The particle you refer to as the 'god particle' is actually called the Higgs boson. Although the existence of the Higgs boson is predicted by the Standard Model, its existence has not yet been confirmed.
Also, its mass is not predicted by the theory; the best that can be said is that it is relatively massive, having a mass broadly similar to the W and Z bosons, i.e., around a 100 times heavier than a proton.
I'd be interested to know where you heard that statement. It seems to be based on a misunderstanding of the fact that the Higgs boson is fundamentally tied up with the concept of mass.
I really like the explanation by Roger Cashmore: http://www.phy.uct.ac.za/courses/phy400w/particle/higgs2.htm
Here is the gist:
(If you don't like this explanation there are others here: http://www.phy.uct.ac.za/courses/phy400w/particle/higgs.htm)
In other words, the Higgs boson has a field associated with it which permeates all space, and it is by interaction with this field that elementary particles acquire mass.
If I understand it correctly, this means that if the Standard Model is correct, without the Higgs boson, there would be no mass.
So let's look at your statement now we're clear about what the Higgs boson is.
Firstly, if the Standard Model is flawed and the Higgs boson doesn't exist, then the statement is trivially meaningless since it refers to something that doesn't exist.
Assuming the Higgs boson exists, then I think the statement is still meaningless. Removing the particle from Mount Fuji would mean the mountain no longer has any mass, so we wouldn't need to try lifting it with a feather as it would no longer be under the influence of gravity. I'm not even sure that the concept of removing the particle from an object makes any sense, since it is fundamental to the Higgs field, if it exists, that it permeates all space.
So, you are indeed correct that the statement "if gods particle is removed from the matter within mount fuji one could lift the entire mountain with a single feather" makes no sense. But the reason we can show this is not because Quantum Theory makes no sense, but precisely by appeal to Quantum Theory itself.
I decided to start it as some comments on the critical thinking thread were going too far off topic.
If anyone sees any flaws in my reasoning, or in my understanding of Quantum Theory I would be glad to hear a better explanation, preferably from experts in the field!
if gods particle is removed from the matter within mount fuji one could lift the entire mountain with a single feather....I don't know about you but that makes very little sense to me...
I agree that the statement makes no sense. However, it's not because Quantum Theory makes no sense, but because if we analyse that statement in the context of Quantum Theory, it becomes meaningless.
The particle you refer to as the 'god particle' is actually called the Higgs boson. Although the existence of the Higgs boson is predicted by the Standard Model, its existence has not yet been confirmed.
Also, its mass is not predicted by the theory; the best that can be said is that it is relatively massive, having a mass broadly similar to the W and Z bosons, i.e., around a 100 times heavier than a proton.
I'd be interested to know where you heard that statement. It seems to be based on a misunderstanding of the fact that the Higgs boson is fundamentally tied up with the concept of mass.
I really like the explanation by Roger Cashmore: http://www.phy.uct.ac.za/courses/phy400w/particle/higgs2.htm
Here is the gist:
Roger Cashmore said:nature has given us more than one elementary particle and they come with a wide variety of masses...
Unfortunately if you try and write down a theory of particles and their interactions then the simplest version requires all the masses of the particles to be zero. So on one hand we have a whole variety of masses and on the other a theory in which all masses should be zero...
Peter Higgs...proposed that the whole of space is permeated by a field...As particles move through space they travel through this field, and if they interact with it they acquire what appears to be mass...
fields have particles associated with them...So there must be a particle associated with the Higg's field, and this is the Higgs boson.
(If you don't like this explanation there are others here: http://www.phy.uct.ac.za/courses/phy400w/particle/higgs.htm)
In other words, the Higgs boson has a field associated with it which permeates all space, and it is by interaction with this field that elementary particles acquire mass.
If I understand it correctly, this means that if the Standard Model is correct, without the Higgs boson, there would be no mass.
So let's look at your statement now we're clear about what the Higgs boson is.
Firstly, if the Standard Model is flawed and the Higgs boson doesn't exist, then the statement is trivially meaningless since it refers to something that doesn't exist.
Assuming the Higgs boson exists, then I think the statement is still meaningless. Removing the particle from Mount Fuji would mean the mountain no longer has any mass, so we wouldn't need to try lifting it with a feather as it would no longer be under the influence of gravity. I'm not even sure that the concept of removing the particle from an object makes any sense, since it is fundamental to the Higgs field, if it exists, that it permeates all space.
So, you are indeed correct that the statement "if gods particle is removed from the matter within mount fuji one could lift the entire mountain with a single feather" makes no sense. But the reason we can show this is not because Quantum Theory makes no sense, but precisely by appeal to Quantum Theory itself.