Particles have mass, HOW?, Higgs or ?

Such general understanding can be very simple. Try to bring up the block of soft elastic foam or jelly, forming our vacuum and the vibration at some place in it. If the deformation is low intensity, the vibration spreads across the block as gentle waves. But at the higher frequency (energy density) the fluid behavior of jelly starts became a more pronounced, so that the vortex deformation of Aether became more obvious. And as you probably know, the vortex rings in fluid behaves like massive particles, exhibiting inertia and mass. The mass of vortex-like deformation of Aether have the very same reason - as u can see, there's no principle difference between bosons and fermions at the higher energy scale with exception of spin.



As You can see, such explanation requres the existence of massive particles, forming Aether (black/red dots at the above picture), so it is a general reason, why the Higgs bosones are introduced into theory. But the Aether Wave theory supposes, such bosones are just gravitones, because each gravity wave can behave like both the bosone both the massive particle at the same time.

The whole difference is the energy density (i.e. intensity) and it's common behavior in elastic fluids. The small intensity deformations/oscillations are spreading like waves, but the high energy fluctuations are behaving like tiny vortices. The turbulence in fluids has a low range in general due to energy dissipation - the vortexes disintegrate and change to the chaotic mixture of waves. The same thing occurs in high intensity deformation in Aether, like vector bosons - they're unstable at the higher distances and breaks up to the mixture of leptons, mesons and gamma rays, carryig away the energy of gauge bosones.

Hi yquantum and Montec,

We don't usually refer to "photons" gaining mass but photons creating particles (with mass). Photons with mass "do not exist by definition". We could call them electrons. I would point you to the way in which all the fundamental particles in nature may be created (theoretically) from a photon by boosts and spins from intersecting D6 branes in "Uberspace" as indicated in the book "A First Course in String Theory" by B. Zwiebach...

This would be "micromanagement" but it may not be impossible in the longer term.
We all already realize that this does indeed occur with Circuit QED, negative refractive meta-materials and with symmetric non-linear Fourier Transformation...
Light's Clock
There are a number of startling tunneling phenomena that may be performed ... see Pendry's papers on optical anti-matter. Maybe even long range teleportation using similiar principles are possible. We are not presently able to "micromanage" most sub-atomic quantum properties of photons or anything else. I would say IMHO that the experiments that you are referring to Montec are indeed properties that I have brought to the attention of this site over many months now. Currently the CPT Conservation laws are the way particles behave in accelerators since accelerators are watch-breakers not watch-makers.
CP-violation
It is then a problem for "bean counters"... atomic actuaries (Gnomes of Zurich)... he he he! For the more formally minded I think there is a desire to formulate more "Laws" that limit what may be performed in any sub-atomic process. My understanding of all these matters we are referring to is quantum properties are not bestowed from the Planck level upwards and thus are "immutable Laws"... but are pseudo-properties of the spectrum of electromagnetic energy and represent "attributable" properties to matter providing we can harness Special and General Relativity to "work" with an extended "higher dimensional" version of electromagnetism. This is what is hinted at in that paper...
Is the electron a photon with Toroidal Topology?
It also shows that you may induce nature to break the strict symmetry of these properties and the properties of symmetry breaking is a "recent" cornerstone of the new physics that is emerging at the sub-atomic level. It is quite clear that the recent experiments with optics in many regimes lead to "relativistic" properties of matter and of field theory that can be manipulated (forms of "optical" symmetry breaking). You need only read the paper by Shen to see what is happening in these areas of action...
The resemblances in mathematical structures between the optical constants of artificial electromagnetic media and some physical phenomena in field theory - Jian Qi Shen
This paper demonstrates quite clearly that the phenomena you are speaking of (Quantum Mechanics) can indeed be "micromanaged" in various ways such as those new materials emerging from the Boeing Phantom Works and also Purdue's Birck Nanotechnology Center will probably lead to the control of gravity and other unknown properties of space-time and higher dimensions. See page 6 for an exposition of the link between Schrodinger Wave Theory and Electromagnetism that obviously led to Circuit QED without which such synthetic systems that are not in nature are possible. The direct connection between "topological electrons" in similiar systems and to the trapped quantum "photon" becomes obvious. This is also seen in real world transmitting systems where topological charges "emerge" in the near field. It is all around us and "knocking at the door".

This is the level of "technological innovation" mankind can presently work with that lead to "products" that you can hold in your hand (almost right now - except that there are so many secrets out there and military applications for them). We already have access to these "dimensional properties" of matter (optical antimatter, EIT, negative refractive materials, "highly spun light" transferring spin quanta to matter... an experiment that you can perform in the comfort of your homes) and electromagnetism accessing those higher dimensional properties already. We have always had "some" abilities since the near-field (or evanescent field) is the interface between our "familiar three dimensional space-time" and the higher dimensional "Uberspace". This "interference" zone is where "forces" are exerted.
Near Field Forces
Our theory of electromagnetism simply needs the extensions into 10 dimensions for it to be fully functional.

I have often said that quantum physics at the level of the atom is already being manipulated in secret laboratories around the world. The work on circuit QED and natural atomic Fourier processes in higher dimensions...
This thread earlier - Good Elf
The question that yquantum is posing about the Higgs is at the next level of nature "downwards". This is a conceptual problem for me, but it should "philosophically" slot right in there. Since it is using the Standard Model and the particle paradigms (unlike those processes used in the paper above at the level of the photon indicating that Circuit QED is an electromagnetic analog of atoms constructed to perform a special task) the Standard Model must eventually have "shortcomings". This is indeed a laudable effort and must be done (since we have already spent a lot of money on this already). Just remember that the applications will necessarily be linked to the manipulation of the quanta of photons and not of the Higgs since those other higher energy particles are the playground of Governments and Defense Agencies and are quite distant (economically) from the man on the street.

The secret of mass has already revealed itself at the level of the photon as indicated by that paper about the "topological photon" being an electron... as I have already indicated through the very much older work of Louis de Broglie (1923) and the emergence of mass is wholly a relativistic phase related phenomena. The symmetry of the propagating photon is broken through relativity in curved dimensional spaces as I have been saying... and leads to the "emergent" property of mass being seen from non-inertial frames of reference as indicated by de Broglie. This is a very strong principle. The relativistic mass of a high energy "particle" is not "real" and it is certainly not "ponderable" mass as I have argued and indicated. The "mass" is really a conversion factor for the "systems" and it is most concisely expressed through the "rotation" in higher dimensions through special and general relativity concisely expressed by the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction factor (it is a rotation). They are "systemic masses". The measurement is surely real but our Universe is not a Universe of "matter" and particles in which properties are etched in stone but a Universe of waves and energy... and "mass" is an illusion of "optics" and the systems the energy is confined in. Much of what is happening in our Universe is hidden in higher dimensions. This is why CP Parity does not work and is broken... but CPT Parity works better. Symmetry will break for charge and spin but time brings them back together again. There are more symmetries and this is the story of HEP as yquantum will tell you. What I say is this IMHO all symmetry can and will be breakable but will also be recoverable when you understand how all these properties inter-relate through relativity. Gravity and Mass are two sides of the one coin and the other side is charge and spin parity and those extra dimensions. In the case of Photonic forces... this is an important point... as a "Primmer" have a look at this reference...
Near-field photonic forces

Is this symmetry breaking ultimately due to a Higgs Particle? That is the real question . It seems to me that the question then is... Is Special and General Relativity themselves a product of the Higgs (they being a form of internal symmetry)? Or is the question really.... is Special and General Theory of Relativity being mistaken for a "Higgs particle"? I lean strongly to the view that it is the latter and not the former since it appears to me IMHO that Relativity is "VERY FUNDAMENTAL" and the Higgs is "just another particle". Relativity expresses the geometry of dimensional space in time... a particle is the result of that "principle" embedded in our Universe. It just takes a little longer than average to understand this phenomena. I know it is hard for many people... no "slur" intended... but we are talking about "Life the Universe and Everything" here.

I believe that the new materials and operations in EM will answer this question possibly before the LHC can make any sense of it and we will see a "connection" between the various scales of these "quantum" properties and practical ways to manipulate them (especially at the scale of the photon and radiophysics). As GPS has become a three hundred dollar "toy" for the use of the man in the street which expresses some of the most sublime aspects of Special and General Theory... a new class of applications are soon to emerge using an extended version of "optics" and "radiophysics" that can make available phenomena at the quantum level not even vaguely suspected by iPod and Playstation users today that harness mass, gravity and higher dimensional trans-spatial physics. We are about to learn some new truth (if only we can coax it from the military) and this truth will set us "free".

Cheers

Hi Zephir,

I find that interesting,

Not sure I would go that far out on the limb or else one could fall off.

I feel that it is not wise to use 4d thinking in a multi dimensional paradox that exhibits unexplainable phenomena. Eh!

If it were that easy, then we would know what energy [GeV] to use in order to perform an re-normalization group, that tells us how to calculate to find the influence such as short distance interactions that you have described on the W's & Z or long distances particles, & the mystery field in which we have been looking for these many years that gives the mass to them.

It is much harder than one might think. But I respect you view.

I do like concrete ideas, but this might be just a little much?

ciao_
yquantum

As You can see, it can be wise if it brings up some explanation. The end justifies the means... After all, the multidimensional thinking is not so difficult, considering you're able to switch the roles of inside/outside observer in though experiments.

Moreover, the understanding is simplified significantly by the fact, the Aether isn't simply12 dimensional ("flat 12D space"), 'cause its formed by the 3D torsion "layers" (spinor fields), the behavior and mutual dependence of its is quite analogous. U can bring up it as the elastic 3D vortex field formed by 3D elastic vortices of the 3D vortex rings like particles. Such system behaves like the extremely elastic urethane foam, the pores of it are formed by the urethane foam too - so that each pressure /energy density disturbance creates a chain of toroidal deformations in mutually perpendicular directions along the Abelian gauge symmetry group. Such system can be modeled by the field of mutually coupled quantum rotators, forming the planetary system bounded by gravity (...sun-earth-moon...). The quivalence principle of inertia and gravity force makes the quantum indeterminism of such system (the analogy of the chaotic multiple body problem).



The torsion effect isn't caused by elasticity, but the SU(2)xU(1) Lorentzian transformation (i.e. rotation) with respect of the limited energy spead at each dimension level, so it depends on the energy density. The lower energies doesn't influence the higher convolution levels of space at all, so that the behavior of Aether at lower energy scales is semi-classical and it can be modeled by the elastic fluid.

The difference between gauge bosons and photons consist just in inner energy density. The energy density of gauge bosons makes the Aether field rotation more distinct with respect of photons, making the inertia/mass of bosons more pronounced (as we already know, the field vortexes are behaving like the massive particles).



But here isn't basic difference between gauge bosons and photons at energy scales of 200 GeV, because both types of particle are at the dynamic equilibrium under such conditions. At such energy scales the weak gauge bosons look massless and the full SU(2)xU(1) symmetry is restored.

Hi Good Elf, Zephir & Montec,

Here is the crux; almost any symmetry you care to name in our reality is not preserved in the world we live in.

Zephire you mentioned electroweak theory SU(2)xU(1) gauge symmetry at 200 GeV/c^2.

But the W's & Z these particles when they have energy greater than 250 GeV/c^2, then the interactions occur as if the symmetry is preserved, but at 200 GeV/c^2 it is spontaneously broken and then does the weak gauge bosons act as if they have mass. [typo, sorry!] Is this what you are saying Zephir?

We can get into the GeV/c^2’s [energy & Standard Model] if you like, I am more involved with this right now along with one other project ongoing I might add.

One would think that much symmetry that would be present in empty space, such as rotational or even say, Zephir translational invariance, to make it simple in any direction or positions all is the same. I am not up on your theory; do you have this plugged in?

Many of us as you, Good Elf and Montec know that is not the case, space is not empty and symmetry is not preserve. You bring in the weak force, we can start there if you like, but it has a very bizarre property. Unlike EM force, which travels over large distances, like your TV if you have time to watch, I really do not, cell phone, satellite signal for your computer, etc., the weak force affects only matter that is within very extreme close range. [QED]

Sorry, it took so much time to get back, but my wife & I was able to spend time with my daughter and some friends. They are so brilliant and great company. Had to type this fast so as I have said before please excuses the typos and grammar. Just wanted to respond, when I came near a computer. HA!

ciao_
yquantum

The spontaneous symmetry breaking is not formal concept, it basically says, the gauge bosons are result of condensation space-time during inflation. They exchanging the gravity between heavily convoluted loops of the spacetime, which are forming the vacuums. In brief, the energy density is so high, so the space-time deformations are collapsing by its own gravity, forming a 3D particles of space.



Despite of this, the explanation of "bizarre properties" of gauge bosons can be a quite classical, as the result of strong vorticity of Aether fluid due to high energy exchange density. The gauge bosons are exchanging energy between these space elements at the short distances in 6D space - here is the reason of the binding energy/distance relationship. It corresponds the Wan der Waals interactions between water molecules, they're all strong, but acting at the short distances only, being the interactions between convoluted space in atom orbitals..

Hi yquantum, montec, thezman and zephir,

I think I will supply a little background for me and other less astute readers. The gauge bosons are very "non-inertial" when they appear and have substantial mass. Being a source of substantial mass curves "even" space-time and acts to "distort" the inverse square relationship in free space or any "pseudo-electromagnetic interaction". The "range" of the particle (possibly carrying that charge) is restricted to an evanescent field. This is the Yukawa Formula of
R = h / 2cm
Where m is the mass of the quantum and c is the speed of light, R is the range.

They may or may not carry charge and eventually decay into more stable particles. The Higgs Particles is in there somewhere at the beginning...

This appears to be the usual HEP interaction as a Feynman Diagram from "wacking" protons together in the LHC...
This comes from Wikipedia and the caption reads...

What is evident is the emergence of quark jets as "free" particles due to the high (unification?) energy of the interaction. What is not evident is the incredibly short period of time the Higgs is in existence... 10 of a second. This will be impossible to "see" and the Higgs particle and will need to be inferred from the Jets and "debris" as well as geometry.
Here is the Wikipedia link to the experiment at Cern.
ATLAS experiment
It goes further to explain that...

I have some "stupid" questions... what happens to the "free" quarks since there is only the anti-quark in the local vicinity to "neutralize" it and they are heading in different directions? Will they produce some kind of buildup of high energy quark annihilation radiation around where you guys are working??? These things "free" in the environment have no natural predators do they?.. he he he! Will they behave like very radioactive 1/3 or 2/3 charged particles?? Will they form a "heavy quark dust" on the floor and cling electrostatically to clothing? Will they simply disintegrate as they "cool" into a photon and a charged particle?
Stupid question number two is... it still looks "possible" for me to understand the Higgs not as a particle but as a relativity symmetry "alone" confined by the curvature in the interaction zone. Any ideas on this line of thought?
Dumber question number three is where are all the other Higgs in our universe when we are not creating them? What does a Higgs without "large kinetic energy" look like? A bare Higgs? There should be HE Higgs to LE Higgs interactions as well shouldn't there? Sorry about those questions but it is quite "remote" topic from electrons and photons... he he he!

Cheers

Hi Good Elf, & Zephir,

Good Elf with your intelligence, you could not come up with a stupid question! Eh!

Zephir, not so simple or classical, but if you base it on your theory, I understand what you are saying.

Good Elf, you are taking me to a place I cannot go. Food for thought, VP's delta E Delta t <_ h/4pi & delta p subset (x) X's delta x >_ h/4pi [you know delta x represents the root-mean-square value of the uncertainty]. What energy that is borrowed, must be given back. QM & VP! I like your question if that is where you are heading Good Elf!

I just hope I have understood your question?

I am not sure anyone is bold to say they know, but what you have said could be, it is the dynamics & energy field (so hard to use 4d concepts to explain in words) but there is some explanation to be found. I can get back with that one. Going to play now.

Zephir, I respect your view but if one would say 'I understand QM and its behavior & can explained it in a simple way,' well, time will tell?

Much respect,
ciao_
yquantum
Carpe Diem

Hi Good Elf,

Leaving in a few, just hit me what you might be asking me, I will be careful how I answer. This is a very open forum you know.

If I understand you correctly, there are three types of every quark variety; we use names like red, green & blue. So colored quarks are always found with other quarks and antiquarks, bound together into color neutral combinations/strong force/charges, if this is what you mean they cancel each other just like if you put all colors in the rainbow together what would you get, white light.

Check into QCD if you want to go deeper into the subject. But I will check my shirt. HA!

In some places in when using the p/colliders, around 10 trillion collision events did not contain a top quark. Now something that might be of interest to you is that when these quarks and gluons move in the same direction which is up to the particles, you have what is called jets.

What I find interesting is that when it is formed, it is like a string [no pun] it will never disappear. If it is severed you just have two strings, in other words you form new jets. They will never become just an isolated quark or gluon.

The radiation, yes! That is all that can be said about that……

ciao_
yquantum

Good Elf, going to take your advice have fun with the family. Most inportant, YES!

Higgs/darkmatter/dark energy/dimensions/spatial extent it has to be in the same Mexican hat if you know what I mean. I am sure you have seen this used to explain the Higgs! Do not like it but using 4d thinking what can you do?

Hi yquantum,

I will not push any points here since you guys know what you are doing eh! Don't take any risks. It is a completely "new" ballgame.

Have some fun with the family in the snow. Here in Australia it is anything but snow... You could probably "die" in a Santa Suit here now unless you are in Air Conditioning... he he he!

Cheers

PS: We Elves are back on the job at the "Workshop" too. I commute to work at the North Pole using "next years" presents eh! We have to make them "early" so that we can supply the expected demand. We use the uncertainty principle to make limited runs and for testing purposes. The guys at Cern (Gnomes?) better come through with the answers in 2007 otherwise a lot of 'stocking stuffers" will simply disappear.

Seasons Greetings to all

Hi yquantum, Good Elf, Zephir et al.

About quarks generally, quark-antiquark 'pairs' and 'free' quarks etc. In my own theory it is logically arrived at that there is no such thing as a 'free' monopole of ANY kind. The most simplistic description of this 'view' is that the 'default' polar 'features' in my theory are PASSIVE (neutral) OMNI-poles; and that due to random 'imbalance' FROM the 'default' state, these OMNI-polar 'point-locations' are 'ACTIVATED' so as to form (transient/persistent) 'DI-polar' features.

These dipolar features, by their very nature, are 'INSEPARABLE' features associated with their respective 'current' activated-point-locations taking part in the Pseudo-bulk dynamics we call 'physical phenomena.

So, just like a dipole magnet, any 'linearly' extended 'string' of end-to-end arrangement of MULTIPLE dipole features 'spanning' across many point-locations in the physical dynamics pseudo-bulk MAY be 'divided' to produce two 'shorter 'spans' of dipole features. Just like cutting one SOLENOID 'magnetic dipole' to produce two SHORTER solenoid dipoles. At NO stage have two 'new' quarks been produced...one has merely 'disconnected a 'line' of quark 'dipoles' to EXPOSE two 'new' PRE-EXISTING 'END POLES' where they were previously JOINED in the BODY of a 'string' of such JOINTS all along the linear many-dipole strcuture.

That also explains why trying to 'stretch apart' these 'quark' solenoids is like trying to stretch apart a macroscopic solenoid...the more one tries to 'separate' of their opposite 'poles', the more they will resist because they want to 'concertina' back to as closely-packed 'loops' as possible so that their ends are as close together as possible. If the forces 'separating these two 'ends' overcome these 'concertina' tendency, then naturally the 'solenoid will snap somewhere-in-between these pole ends...thus producing two shorter 'dipolar' features (solenoids).

You will note that my theory at NO stage identifies any 'MONO-polar' feature. These don't exist...the only 'polar' features range from OMNI to DI polar...with many in-between VARIOUSLY-MULTI-polar features being randomly/dynamically produced under various pseudo-bulk conditions/circumstances.

So your 'quark-antiquark' connundrum (of 'attraction' increasing with separation distance of their two opposite-sign quark-ends) merely describes the readily observable features/behaviour of MAGNETIC DIPOLES...and as such, may actually be describing a 'more fundamental' (but not necessarily THE MOST fundamental) 'magnetic dipole' feature upon which ALL 'macro' Magnetic Dipoles are based.

That's all the time I have right now, guys. I hope I haven't intruded too much. Ciao.

RealityCheck.
.

Hi RealityCheck, Good Elf, Zephir and Montec.

RC, you will never intrude, never, glad to hear that your theory is coming along. I am afraid my time is limited must go very soon, but we are talking oranges to apples here. But thank you!

I do see where you would extrapolated the quarks, gluons scenario in what you said, but really when all is said we are talking about the Higgs Mechanism. We all hope with everyone's theory and there seems to be plenty, HA! When the LHC begins to produce data, we will have the E to find I hope what we seek.

I wanted to ask a question on your thread, but someone felt like I was intruding so I backed off. Cannot remember it all, sure it was of no importance.

You must say that finding the ? field that brings mass to particles, is one hot debate and anticipation. Eh! I am sure many have something to say on that, and that would be great, because that is what an OPEN forum is for.......

What I like most is that the questions being ask have substance and for that I am so very grateful, this Forum has so much to offer because of you, Good Elf, Zephir, well I will leave someone out so I will stop.

You and I go back a few, and we all believe in good physics and I see a great turn around just in the last few days. And I want this to be the place where many stop by and read what you & others have been able to accomplish with your great minds.

I truly hope you and the others the very best of luck in the passion that has driven you to this point.

Take care my friend!
ciao_
yquantum

Hi Good Elf,

No, that was not the problem, we were talking about going as far back as the beginning of the Universe, it is so theoretical and I did not want to go to far off the path, but this is why we have the Physorg, it is for sharing thoughts. Right?

We think in the beginning of time in the history of the Universe we could use the example of the e-, every quark had its antiparticle which as you know became antiprotons & antineutrons.

But that was when things were really HOT, like billion degrees or so, plenty of them and as ordinary as nucleons.

Then the change, as the cosmologist describe, it cooled down and the antiparticles were very few and very far between to the point of disappearing. Back to the VP pool.

So, now we have your common garden variety of protons and neutrons to make or form the nuclei of our atom.

ciao_
yquantum


Good Elf, all this time I was thinking you were transmitting from the North Pole. Ho, Ho, Ho!

I think all I will get is a piece of coal! But you know how that goes carbon is not all that bad if we can get the right amount of pressure. Eh!

Yquantum

I agree with you, it is like saying what is inside a black hole. Who can go there but you cannot come back to tell us! {so much for time travel}.

Getting back to what Good Elf said, a while back, this is something you are very involved with, do you really think they/you, (what/ever) will find this field they call the Higgs Mechanism. If so why is it so important. Your thread, so what is your view? Please?

Best,
darkmatters73